INTRO

Should you spend the $40 on a pair of CCA Duo, that is why we are here. CCA seems to draw parallels to some unknown competitor (Truthears X Crinacle Red seems to be the rumor) of another dual drive and claims to do it better. I found myself a little duped based on their graphs showing the second driver was for bass coverage. Instead what I find is an unusual tuning for CCA, with a very lean bottom and a bright top much like you might find at a Taylor Swift concert.

SOUND

Since this is a second round review of the CCA Duo after my fellow founder of Audioreviews, no point in rehashing the similarities and instead will focus on differences. The sub-bass is hardly detectable on mine, and actually when I measure them I wonder if the second bass driver is even connected. Not sure this sidekick driver is actually needed. There is a 3db rise from 1khz reference, but given the 10db pinna gain rise at 3khz It gets left behind.

Midrange is forward and has sufficient capabilities to render a spaciousness and is the major redeeming quality of this $30 earphone. The tuning seemed promising towards the upper end except that cymbals sound like two pieces of paper rubbing together, slight exaggeration. I can appreciate the quantity, but not the quality. Overall it does not seem in balance with the bottom end so consider the CCA DUO a neutral bright tonality. Neutrality does not guarantee absence of coloration however.

Specifications CCA Duo

PACKAGE CONTENTS

The shell design is actually 3D printed utilizing individual sound channels, however not to be confused with sound tubes that have some absorption properties given they appear to be part of the plastic 3D printing. CCA boosts about not up-charging for this technological achievement and maybe there is only a slight increase in pricing compared to the shells used from a few years ago where driver output is loosey goosey in the shell cavities.

The design of the CCA Duo shell adopts a 45degree angle to fit snuggly into the ear. Its actually a different design than their normal universal. It most likely follows what is required with two dynamic drivers as apposed to a more compact solution of dynamic balanced armature setups. The crossover can be seen through the shell and looks rather complex for such a simple 2 way. Still somehow I feel there is some smearing occurring that muddles up the treble, unless that is the result of the driver handling treble duties.

OUTRO

We used to get better sounding earphones for less than $20 a few years back, even with the quirks in the case design of the Moondrop Space Travel, your money is better spent on a pair of doorbuster wireless earphones with average ANC than these rather bland dual dynamics. I would also contend the BLON BL-03 with aftermarket tips is still a better buy, or their older CCA Lyra with a tighter fitting shell, a single dynamic for a cheaper price.

The CCA CRA+ follows a similar tuning trajectory with better cohesion, warmer and a simple single driver. The CCA DUO is the more spacious sounding setup so if you want a wide and emphasized soundstage this is probably the standout feature if that is your thing. I am not really sold on the CCA DUO even though the target curve appeases me, the Lyra is more appealing or the CRA+ for those that want the extra treble.

FREQUENCY RESPONSE GRAPH

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

Sent to us by KZ for our evaluation. Get it from KZ Store and other retailers like Amazon, Aliexpress, etc.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

About my measurements.

The post CCA DUO Review (2) – Sidekicks Need Not Apply appeared first on Music For The Masses.

The $217 Shanling M1s was proved by Aohsida Audio for my review – and I thank them for that. You can get it from Aoshida Audio.

Shanling’s new $217 M1s packs a lot of functionality and tech into its smallish (70mm x 70mm) package, including MQA/DSD decoding, Bluetooth receiving and transmission, gapless playback, Wifi connectivity, standalone DAC capability and 14h battery life. Beautifully machined metal casing is a bit heftier than anticipated, but conveys a sense of solidity, and the 2.8” screen has good visibility (I would pop the extra $10 for the optional leather case). 

UI (which combines a physical volume wheel and responsive touch controls) is logical and well-conceived. Onboard EQ and digital filter options are catnip for technogeeks. The user manual is extremely minimalist and doesn’t provide guidance beyond basic operation of the controls—I was able to muddle through Bluetooth connection, file downloading etc., but Luddites beware.

Note further that the DAP utilizes Shanling’s simplistic OS, which has a built-in Tidal app but (at least for now) doesn’t allow other Android apps. In practical terms, this means if I want to listen to a Steve Bannon podcast on Spotify, I need to remain tethered to my mobile, which undermines the utility of having a separate DAP.  

Shanling maintains that other apps aren’t viable because of the MS1’s screen size (and some maintain Android-based systems are sonically inferior), but a more inclusive OS would have been ideal.

I first tested the M1s as DAC/amp, playing Coltrane and Radiohead in lossless, Tidal MQA and 320kb OGG through my Kindle Fire and a Dell laptop (note that a driver is required for Windows). Because the MS1 uses the same ESS ES9038Q2M chips as Shanling’s UA5 and UA2 dongles (albeit with a more powerful amp), I expected the M1s to sound more-or-less the same—warmish, smooth and balanced across the different frequencies.

Instead, the M1s has quite a different signature—tonally a bit bright, with lean, crisp notes and a conspicuously forward midrange which highlights horns/male voices. Bass is tight and controlled but not especially deep or visceral; high end is very well-extended and presents a lot of microdetail.

Perhaps because of the midrange emphasis, I hear the soundstage as fairly narrow and low-ceilinged, although performers remain well-separated and imaging is accurate if somewhat two-dimensional.

The M1s immediately scores in two respects. First, it has a ton of driving power, especially through the 4.4mm output–it can drive the 300 ohm Senn HD600 effortlessly and really gets a grip on the wobbly bass of my 60 ohm Koss KSC74. It can, however, be a bit much for very sensitive IEMs, even in low gain setting—something like the KZ ZS10P or TRN-VX show more high-end glare and metallic timbre than with lower-powered sources.

OTOH, synergy with the more power-hungry Blon BL-03 was great, with the Blon sounding fuller-bodied and bassier than typical. The M1s are not without coloration—horns in particular sound amped-up and slightly billowy—but this an extremely revealing, live-sounding piece. 

Second, and most pronouncedly, the M1s is as unforgiving and revealing of source as you’ll hear—poorly-recorded or low-rez files sound crappy, while well-recorded, hi-rez files are richly detailed and impeccably clear. Nothing is smoothed over; the sonic difference between say, a Tidal master-quality track and the same track on Spotify is massive.

Especially since I inevitably listen to a lot of sub-par recordings, this is a mixed-bag—the M1s can sound over-analytical without careful matching of file and headphone. Optimally paired, however—say a 24bit/192Hz take of “A Love Supreme” through the aforesaid HD-600—the M1s sounds very transparent and lifelike, with considerable energy and top-to-bottom coherence. 

I did test the M1s as a Bluetooth streamer to my Sony WH-1000XM4  and it was fine—easy connectivity, good range—while the LDAC codec very clearly presents more sonic information than generic AAC. However, other than playing louder I can’t honestly state that even after tweaking the EQ on the MS1 to augment low end tracks on the M1s sounded much better or different than the same tracks played through my Pixel mobile.

Plainly, the highest and best use for the M1s is as a portable player through wired phones, where its power and transparency are on full display. I loaded a ton of FLAC and WMA (as well a couple of DSD tracks) onto a microSD card (not included; there is also no onboard storage, which is a curious omission). Again, my big takeaway was just how much better than Bluetooth this wired setup sounded—gutsier, punchier, with much more high-end definition.  

Not having other DAPs on hand, I borrowed a ($200ish) Sony NW-A55 from a gym mate to compare. The Sony is a nice-sounding piece with more intuitive ergonomics and better battery, but trails the M1s sonically in most respects. Most notably, the Sony has much lower output power and isn’t suitable for higher impedance loads.

This is manifest mostly at the low end, which sounds softer and less impactful than the Shanling’s. The Sony has a warmer, smoother tonality which does work well for low-quality files but is significantly less resolving and extended at both ends. I also found the Sony’s various DSP tunings artificial-sounding.

The M1s isn’t perfectly neutral, and treble-averse folks might find it a bit spicy on top. As noted above, it is also brutally revealing of poor recordings. It is, however, unquestionably a lot of machine for the money and will make your higher-impedance wired headphones sound brawnier and better. Thumbs way up.

Disclaimer: sent to me gratis by Aoshida Audio   https://aoshida-audio.com/ . Unless Jürgen has some covert arrangement with them [he has not], we get nothing (other than more gear) for touting their wares.

Specifications Shanling M1s

Contact us!

The post Shanling M1s Portable Hifi Player Review – She Blinded Me With Science appeared first on Music For The Masses.

INTRO

Kiwi Ears Cadenza comes from a newcomer to the playing field of IEMs originating from China for the low price of $34. Opting for a single 10mm Beryllium dynamic driver wrapped in a swirly painted 3D printed medical grade resin plastic shell, it produces a mostly balanced palate restricted bass profile with sweet midrange with a somewhat pumped but clean treble.

DESIGN COMPONENTS

Kiwi Ears opted to use a 10mm Beryllium dynamic driver which being lightweight yet rigid should improve treble response. There are lots of materials used to promote “the best” sound, Graphene, Beryllium, Diamon like Coating (DLC), Liquid Crystal Polymer (LCP), Carbon-nanotubes, but the truth is no one material is the best despite what Kool-aid flavor they are selling this week or the next. It’s all about tradeoffs, pushing resonances higher in frequency in attempts to squeeze out extra details, or just absorbing it as best as possible while losing some detail. Maybe the goal is extreme bass, or light and airy treble. Compromises and tradeoffs.

The Kiwi Ears Cadenza cable irritated me as a phone user with a case. The plug does not have a big enough spacing to bump it out past a case. Thankfully we can change the cable or use a DAC dongle, maybe they assume everyone has an Iphone and use a dongle? Works fine with the Hidizs AP80 Pro-X.

The mostly black 3D printed shell is beautifully available in swirly Red, Purple, Green or Blue, however its loosey goosey in my right ear – must be a combo of a weird angle shorter nozzle and the small shell. I sometimes have fitment issues on the right ear with some of the universals. The large nozzle, small stem is like trying to put on a pair of skinny jeans after gorging on food over the holidays.

Eartip choices appear the same, just 3 different colors white, black with a red stem, and gray. Something about the smaller shell size, nozzle length or angle had me using their large sized eartip in one ear and the medium in the other.

SOUND

Kiwi Ears Cadenza had the best treble out of the recent single dynamics I have tested recently. The Tinhifi C3 had an overly zealous peak that created a ring, while the Truthears Hola had the harmonic flavor removed that left it tasting only full of salt and no other spices.

Sounds effortless through the midrange and a little volume pumping it keeps everything separate with minor congestion. Bass thins out sounding a little hollow due to missing some fatness, but this helps highlight the midrange. Similar to acoustic suspension speaker designs, the bass hits tight but the lower end tails off, sounds like the suspension parts of the driver are limited in travel. It has a high efficiency driver snap reminiscent of large PA drivers. Weirdly, the frequency response measurements indicate a sub-bass centered bass boost, and while I can hear it it does not translate to a sub-bass tuned earphone for me.

The Kiwi Ears Cadenza staging is more wide than deep, timbre is great. It handles extra power from the SMSL HO100 with ease but is not required to listen on a daily basis. I do not normally read other reviews but given that my review set was forgotten it was hard not to come across a general positive attitude. I would say these are great balanced set competing up until about the $80 range where there is stiffer competition.

COMPARISONS

Going up against the BLON BL-03 (~$29), the Kiwi Ears Cadenza bass thins out and the fuller thicker BL-03 doesn’t sound as nimble. The Kiwi Ears Cadenza do not color the upper midrange as a result of less midbass thickness. Upper mid and lower treble have a loftiness that just sounds effortless on the Kiwi Ears Cadenza. The BLON BL-03 sounds like it has to work harder to deliver the same feeling.

Putting the Kiwi Ears Cadenza up against the Tinhifi C3 ($49) is another common request as they are near price competitors and single dynamics. The C3 cable is thicker and better accommodates cases and also fits in my ear better due to the larger size. The bass is more of a throbbing sub-bass jumping into the street without a care in the world whereas the Kiwi Ears Cadenza stops at the corner waiting for the all clear signal with its snappier PA bass presentation.

The Kiwi Ears Cadenza has a minor cleaner more defined upper midrange and treble whereas the Tinhifi C3 I feel like what you hear is the driver break-up through the treble vs actually cleanly trying to produce the music. It is going to come down to focusing more on sub-bass or want a cleaner top end between these two. They measure very similarly generally, but there are sonic differences.

FINAL REMARKS

The Kiwi Ears Cadenza deserves the praise in the under $50 category albeit with the physical drawbacks mentioned previously. Its bass-lite balanced tendencies might turn off some folks, but the cleaner treble is the draw here. The Kiwi Ears Cadenza gets a passing grade from me especially at $34, you may or may not need to source an extra cable for an additional cost.

Disclaimer: I am grateful for Linsoul providing these at no cost allowing Audioreviews to share our opinion, they were quick to rectify a lost order.

SPECIFICATIONS

GRAPHS

• Left vs Right
• Kiwi Ears Cadenza vs Tinhifi C3

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

Get it from Linsoul.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

About my measurements.

The post Kiwi Ears Cadenza Review – Lost In The Mail appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Unamped, and with the included silicon tips, the  Lyra sounded like, well, a $20 cheapo—bass-shy and anemic , with a dark unnatural-sounding tone. Amping these with a Shanling UA-3 dongle, switching to foams and (esp.) inserting the nozzles deeply massively transformed these to warm, rich-textured and (generally) balanced, with tons of thumping-but-controlled subbass, a bit of a dip in the 100-200Hz midbass region and full-bodied mids.  

Treble is smooth and fairly laid-back—it misses a bit of snap on drums and percussion, but wholly avoids the tizziness and sharpness of cheap hybrids. Soundstage isn’t massive, but remains uncongested, and imaging (a typical KZ strength) is very good by any standard.

The Lyra lack the high-end extension and sound less expansive than KZ’s better hybrids (ZSX, ZS10 Pro) but have the more organic, less strident timbre; the Lyra is also less revealing than the $40 budget champ  Blon BL-03, but has superior fit and isolation. In the same price bracket, the amazin’ TRN-STM is bigger-sounding and presents more microdetail and sizzle, but is also hotter at the treble end and more exhausting than the easygoing Lyra.

Durwood praises these as daily-driver material and the current uber-budget go-to. He may be right.

Disclaimer: borrowed from Durwood.

SPECIFICATIONS CCA Lyra

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

Get it from CCA Store on Aliexpress

Our generic standard disclaimer.

The post CCA Lyra Review (2) – Profiles in Polyurethane appeared first on Music For The Masses.

INTRO

Say hola to the Truthear Hola. The Hola is the new budget contender from the company that brought us the X Crinacle Zero and the Hexa. Interesting journey to start at the $50, then $80 down to capture the $20 crowd. I just finished reviewing another PU Liquid Crystal Polymer (LCP) but at the low price of $19 expectations shall be lowered. Somehow Truthear managed to include even the most basic of additional accessories. Makes you curious where the corners have been trimmed. Bass boosted in the sub-bass region sounds rather unexciting, midrange is effortless with the treble being the trouble.

Disclaimer: I would like to thank Shenzhenaudio for sending these for review, however Truthear might not be so thankful of me.

PACKAGE CONTENTS

The Truthear Hola comes equipped with a plastic-y sheathed cable of good construction, detachable 2 pin, chin slider and right angle plug that accommodates phones with cases.

On a provided holder card there are two different sets of ear tips that include three sizes typically shaped with a sharp edged medium exit opening. The second set include 4 pairs of wide U shaped tips that tend to accentuate mid-bass, but risks affecting other unwanted areas of the frequency response. To store your Truthear Hola a coin purse design leather/vinyl case keeps it compact in your pocket. This is not typical of budget models in the sub-$20 price range so it’s a nice bonus.

The design on the shell of the Truthear Hola looks out of place. It has the appearance quality of a sticker decal, but seems to be printed or etched directly onto the face-plate of the 3D printed matte black opaque shell. The printing cheapens the look of the IEM but it does hide the 3D printing marks around the edge. Another oddity for me is the hexagonal pattern leaves me wondering if this model was originally supposed to be called the Hexa and the Hexa the Hola. These are superficial observations. What is important is the size is on the smaller size, with a wide nozzle.

Tested with LG G8 and HIDIZS AP80 Pro-X.

SOUND

The tuning of the Truthear Hola is centered somewhere in the sub-bass region, but then has a quick drop before heading into lower midrange. This causes a little mushy sensation perhaps on the thinner side.

Mid-range presents itself as lightweight and effortless. Vocals tend to sit recessed in the mix at lower volumes but as volume is increased they join the rest of the mix and losing their confidence sounding a little strained. Pinna gain is where it needs to be as nothing is offensive in the upper mid region. Snares and horns lack the aggressiveness they need to wake you up. The problems come later with the treble tuning.

Treble on the Truthear Hola chops out too much in the wrong spot causing some weird timbre issues and some instruments are hard to tell what they are supposed to be. Shakers in particular end up sounding like flaws in the recording rather than an actual instrument. The life is sucked out of cymbals as they sound too damped. All cymbals sound like rubbing two coins together.

Too much is scooped out of the presence region so that the upper treble is left to fend for itself without the necessary harmonics. In an attempt to see what it would sound like if I fixed the hole with EQ, it becomes apparent they were probably trying to tune out the metallic and grating nature of the upper end. No sibilance, and I really have not had a set in along time that exhibits that tendency. Chi-fi has made strides over the years in the budget category.

There is good depth and layering, but the treble seems to float out in front of the mix sounding very wide, while vocals sound narrow. With more volume the vocals come closer to the forefront but the rest of the upper midrange mix gets lost and masked in the busyness of it all. Best to keep the Truthear Hola at low to medium volume.

COMPARISONS

The KZ ESX (~$19) is in the same price range as the Truthear Hola, and it was not something I enjoyed. The bass has more impact and definition than the Hola filling in the lower mids whereas the Hola sounds thinner in nature. The treble of the ESX has a similar energy suck-out, but it sounds cleaner and resolves the treble better than the Hola. Midrange also has more character and grunt, but I find the Truthear Hola more pleasing in this region.

I prefer the CCA Lyra over the ESX, so the Truthear Hola has some better competition. Not to forget, the Moondrop Chu is right there as well without detachable cables. I cannot also help to think the BLON BL03 is not too far away although aftermarket tips are a must to even make those usable for most people, so that brings the BLON BL-03+eartips to double the price of the Truthear Hola.

CONCLUSION

I cannot give the Truthear Hola exceptional praise, but looking at it through the lens of “budget” the glaring problems with the treble can be overstated. The Hexa was a good entree, but the Hola is like being served bread instead of dessert at the end of a meal that will leave you saying not worth the calories.

Recently having received three LCP IEM’s (TinHifi C3, Kiwiears Cadenza), the treble on the Truthear Hola is the least pleasing to listen to, although the others were not exceptional either. I have to remember these are mostly budget sets. The package is enticing with different ear tips and a carrying case, but I would prefer to get the sound right first adding in accessories as price allows. If you would like to support Truthear, save your $20 and aim for the Hexa instead, but if you only had $20 to spend on earphones there are worse ways to spend it.

SPECIFICATIONS

GRAPH

• Left vs Right (New IEC711 coupler for me)

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

Available from Shenzhenaudio who thankfully provided this to audioreviews.org free of charge.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

About my measurements.

The post Truthear Hola Review – More Bread Than Dessert 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.

Sleek metal shells look and feel more substantial than many exponentially more expensive models; isolation is only average but fit and comfort are good. The ED9  is easy to drive with just a mobile but scales well with more power. 

Uniquely for this price class, the ED9 sport replaceable “bass” and “reference” tuning nozzles. With the gold “bass” filter, the ED9 has a bass-enhanced gentle V-shape with impactful, deep subbass which is perfect in quantity and has good pitch definition but could stand to be  quicker and tighter (amping helps considerably). The brass “reference” filter reduces the low end boominess and brings mids forward but sounds leaner and duller overall; I much prefer the gold. Soundstage in either formulation is of average width and height but imaging, esp. for the price, is uncanny—you feel like you’re in a small, well-designed auditorium.

 Brightish reble it’s not hyper-detailed and can get a bit splashy at very loud volume but generally avoids harshness or sibilance. The ED9’s real selling point is its vinyl-like tonal quality; they reproduce drums and acoustic instruments in an extremely natural way and acoustic jazz is very live-sounding. 

Compared to my current mega-cheap fave, the $20 TRN STM (which also sports interchangeable filters), the ED9 has significantly less high-end detail and more unruly bass, but sound considerably less colored, with a less metallic treble. The much-venerated, $30 Blon BL-03 has an even more “natural” timbre, tighter bass and more top-to-bottom coherence; the Blon are the more refined but lack the ED9’s low end impact and don’t rock as hard. KZ’s $40-50 hybrids like the ZS7 and esp. the ZSX have more expansive stages, more high-end information and better-tamed bass but sound somewhat digital/processed against the humbler ED9.

The amazing NiceHCK Bro/Senfer UES excepted, I’m hard-pressed to find a more recommendable cheapo, and ultimately the ED9 is tough to criticize.

Contact us!

All Our >250 Earphone and Earbud Reviews (with Links)

The post KZ ED9 Review – Return of the O.G. appeared first on Music For The Masses.

INTRO

KZ Acoustics is one of the more well known budget kings where they take and constantly tweak models, the KZ X Crinacle CRN Zex Pro is no exception. I wouldn’t be surprised to see a third iteration. KZ has taken liberties with marketing slang to advertise it as an electrostatic but then clearly indicate later it uses an electret microphone. Not the same thing, but seems a little misleading.

So the the original KZ Zex was sort of interesting from a driver standpoint, but sported the usual KZ style of tuning. It received mixed reviews with the CCA NRA being a slightly better take on it from what I have seen but not experienced.

The Zex Pro attempts to rectify some of the short comings by adding a balanced armature to pick up the treble. The tuning appears to be a complete departure from the KZ ZEX based on reviews I have seen of the original ZEX. Instead I believe the KZ X Crinacle CRN Zex Pro is actually inspired by the popular JVC HA-FD01 or Drop JVC HA-FDX1. So if you were curious what a JVC HA-FDX1 sounds like with a sprinkle of bass lift and a resonant treble peak around 8khz, this gets interesting.

Disclaimer: No animals were harmed in the receipt of these free earphones from KZ. I would like to thank the post office for delivering them to my mailbox without incident.

Tested at $35 with the LG G8 and Sony NW-A55, Liquid Spark DAC + JDS Labs Atom

GOOD TRAITS

• Not another KZ tuning, something different and balanced
• Fitment fits snugly
• Isolation

NEEDS IMPROVEMENT

• Resonance around 8Khz, not just measured. Impacts Timbre.
• Higher volume improves staging, but at the expense of the resonance.
• Misleading “Electrostat” verbage if buying based on technology is how you make decisions.

PHYSICAL COMMENTARY

After removing them from the simple KZ white box, I surprised to find the KZ X Crinacle CRN ZEX Pro does not use the ZSN/ZS10 Pro/ZEX shell. Instead it appears to use what I think is the DQ6 shell that is more contoured and offers excellent isolation for a universal shell.

I received them shortly before my workplace decided to do some concrete ceiling work with a jackhammer. Perfect time to really put these to an isolation test. While I cannot say they are OSHA approved, I did find them to be excellent isolation when seated further away in a separate room, better than the more generic shells.

The KZ ZEX Pro 2 pin silver plated flat cable is a departure from the tangling prone twisted cable, and while it looks and feels meh, it does tangle less easily.

PACKAGE CONTENTS

• Detachable 0.75mm 2 pin 1.2m long cable with or without mic depending on order
• IEM pair
• 1 Pair each of S/M/L starline eartips

SOUND

So the KZ X Crinacle CRN ZEX Pro is not a minor incremental improvement of the original flavor Zex, but what is it? I had heard this signature before initially thinking maybe the ZSN series. After a quick measurement, I realized it looks eerily similar to the Drop JVC HA-FDX1 and well sounds a bit like it to.

The difference comes from a lower centered bass boost enough to add fullness to vocals and drums and upright bass that the JVC lacks. It departs from neutral but classifies as balanced for my definition. Vocals dance along the forward line, it’s a less vivid sounding than my preferred signature, but works great for jazz and classical.

For popular music the signature presents a studio effect. It doesn’t have the suckout though that more mellow KZ iterations such as the ZSN, or ES4 had with shoutier 2-4KHz treble plateau.

Listening to drums and cymbals I am picking up some extra twang from that resonance peak, this impacts the timbre as well. The KZ X Crinacle CRN Zex Pro treble experience is a nice departure despite that zest.

I feel like there is a hand off issue between the electret and the BA driver that reminds me of an audio tape slightly boogered up. I don’t always hear it, so it depends on if the music has information in that particular band.

TECHNICALLY SPEAKING

Excellent width combined with above average depth is a good fit for the KZ X Crinacle CRN Pro. While it seems unfair to keep comparing to the Drop JVC HA-FDX1, instrument spacing and overall blackness doesn’t reach top ratings for the Zex Pro, I would classify as above average.

There is not a 10x difference here though so ignorance can be bliss. As volume is increased it starts to sound a little crowded, so best to keep it mid level or a tick north of that for more liveliness.

COMPARISON

BLON BL-03 ($25) vs the KZ X Crinacle CRN Zex Pro ($35)

So I should probably compare the KZ X Crinacle CRN Zex Pro to something in the same price bracket right? The Blon BL-03 was widely dispersed so this should give an idea. Obviously fitment is better on the Zex Pro. Less punch on drums, more blended in the bass for the Zex Pro, the BLON has more natural timbre whereas the Zex Pro gives a more spacious feeling and ambient room portrayal.

There is a minuscule hint of forwardness in the BLON BL-03 only compared to the Zex Pro. Together these two characteristics make the BLON BL-03 feel closed in compared the Zex Pro. Since the treble rise occurs later and that pesky peak around 8khz, cymbals and flutes get more prominence in the the spotlight.

HAPPY ENDINGS

While the misleading use of electrostat leaves a bad taste in my mouth, the rather different tuning makes this KZ X Crinacle CRN Zex Pro a foray into experiencing what some people might view as a more natural tuning with extra low end and narrow treble boost that distinguishes it as a vivid budget HA-FDX1-esque.

Consider it a less technical version where your college roomate has turned the bass boost and treble knobs on that 1970’s vintage stereo system to make it exciting. It’s sculpted custom universal adds more secure fitment with good isolation, so if you played with their earlier KZ ZSR or DQ6 models, you will know what I mean.

I rank these as nice to have budgets way different from other KZ offerings and no issues recommending to friends, but not replacing my daily mid-tier favorites in the $150-$200 category.

I had no idea these were Crinacle branded until later when I was told by KZ to use the new ridiculously long name. I can understand that “X Crinacle” is the moniker used for models with his hand in the tuning.

I respect Crinacle’s work, it’s just too long of a name. I would have actually ditched the Zex Pro portion and give credit where credit is due, and if people didn’t like it so what. Chi-fi is a fast moving target where 6 months from now there will be other things in the market catching our attention.

SPECIFICATIONS

GRAPHS

• Left vs Right
• Zex Pro vs JVC HA-FDX1
• Zex Pro vs Blon BL-03
• Impedance

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

Get it from any available reseller.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

About my measurements.

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

The post KZ X Crinacle CRN Zex Pro Review (2) – Inspired By Drop JVC HA-FDX1? appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Cons — None.

Executive Summary

The ddHiFi MFi06 and TC03 are digital cables that are well conducting, well insulated, built rugged and priced right. And they add optical appeal to our devices.

Introduction

ddHiFi have been favourites of our blog for quite some time. They produce very well designed, functional AND optically appealing audio accessories and even earphones.

I have tested their TC25i and TC28i adapters, their Carrying Case C-2020 as well as their Janus E2020A and Janus E2020B earphones. And I purchased a few of their audio adapters. For their accessories, the whole company is attached to our Wall of Excellence.

In this article, I am analyzing the MFi06 and TC03, two USB cables in the broadest sense. Both have a USB-C connector on one and, the MFi06 has a lightning plug on the other, and the TC03 a micro USB plug.

And all USB cables are equal, right? Zeros and ones transfer the sound, the stock cable is as good as the snake oil ones at $$$.

Erm, stop. Not always. The signal carried by the cable is not only zeros and ones (which are actually transmitted as voltage fluctuations), there may be some noise riding along the lines that affects sound quality. Two kinds of noise exist, “Electromagentic Interference” (EMI) and “Radio-Frequency Interference” (RFI).

If the data line is not effectively shielded, nearby electrical components (e.g., switching power supplies, other fluctuating electrical/magnetic fields from computer circuitry) can contribute to EMI that might pollute the USB data.”

Running power and data lines (from a phone or computer) through a single USB cable can cause additional interference and exacerbate the issue. Decrapifiers such as the AudioQuest JitterBug FMJ act as filters to reduce such pollution, but a “good” USB cable adds to this effect, too.

“Good” does not refer to the wire (that’s where the snake oil is) but to the insulation of the power and data lines against each other. In other words, a quality cable does not add anything, it makes sure that nothing is taken away from the signal quality.

A well-known example of the positive effects of insulation is the EarMen Sparrow dongle, that, when operated with a phone, can show strong interference in the shape of intermittent buzzing and clicking (subsides when switching the phone function off). The culprit is the stock cable, and a good third-party cable strongly reduces (but might not completely eliminate) the problem.

One measure of the shielding effectiveness of different cables, the resistance of shield terminations, was investigated in this thread.

Good-quality, well-shielded USB cables do not have to be expensive. USB audio pioneer Gordon Rankin reported very poor $$$ USB cables to me. It is all about the cable’s design, not the price.

ddHiFi are a company that offer a large range of imaginative, well designed, and well built accessories….and even a couple of earphones.

Physical Things

Both cables are 8 cm long. Wire material is high-purity silver-plated OCC copper.

Four strands of separately insulated wire serve as conductor. The inner insulation is teflon. The outer insulation is thermoplastic polyurethane imported from Germany. The aluminum alloy connector are cased in stainless steel to minimize external interference.

Thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU) is any of a class of polyurethane plastics with many properties, including elasticity, transparency, and resistance to oil, grease, and abrasion. Technically, they are thermoplastic elastomers consisting of linear segmented block copolymers composed of hard and soft segments.

As it appears, these cables are technically sound. They feature good conductors and sufficient internal and external insulation. Sonically, they are indistinguishable from the OEOTG cable and one other brand of which I could not identify (see photo at the bottom of this article).

Haptically, the MFi06 and TC03 are vastly superior over the typical stock cables and the Apple Camera Adapter. The connectors feel rugged, the cable is flexible and the shiny, pearly white TPU is dirt and grease resistant.

And, let’s face it, these cables also add a jewelry effect to our gear. Yep, they don’t just feel good between the fingers, they also look good.

All good so far, only one worry remains: the MFi06’s battery consumption.

MFi06’s Battery Consumption

The MFi06’s lightning connector features a decoding chip which draws current from the phone. The question is how much it contributes to the phone’s battery drain.

I measured battery consumption of different dongles (AudioQuest DragonFly Red, Shanling UA2 single ended, Hidisz S9 Pro single ended) with the Apple Camera Adapter vs. the MFi06. I then repeated these tests with two other Lightning to USB-C cables (OEOTG and an unknown brand) for comparison purposes. All tests were performed under identical conditions. The absolute values are meaningless, what is important are the relative values.

.

Results:

1) The Apple Camera Adapter has by far the lowest power consumption.

2) In my 3 h tests, the 3rd-party MFi chip in the ddHiFi MFi06 cable consumed between 130 and 220 mAh (23%-36%) more (for my specific test parameters) than the one in the Apple Camera Adapter.

3) All three tested 3rd-party cables appear to have the same MFi chip (approx. same battery consumption with Shanling UA2).

4) Battery consumption of the ddHiFi MFi06 cable varies vastly between dongles. It is much lower for the DragonFly Red that consumes by far the least battery with the Apple Camera Adapter.

In summary, the MFi06’s power consumption is acceptable for today’s ever increasing phone battery capacities.

Concluding Remarks

The ddHiFi TC03 and MFi cables do what they are supposed to do: they work as promised while adding appeal to our devices. And they don’t break our piggy banks.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

Disclaimer

THE MFi06 and TC03 cables were supplied by the ddHiFi for my review – and I thank them for that.

Get them from the DD Official Store

Our generic standard disclaimer.

About my measurements.

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

Gallery

The post ddHiFi MFi06 and TC03 Digital Cables Review – Unplugged appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Intro

BLON released the A8 Prometheus following several models that fizzled after the success of the legendary surprise hit BL-03. The shell on the BLON A8 Prometheus is out of this world, part sci-fi, part abstract art it’s hard not to marvel at the odd looking structure. Advertised as a sports running flagship earphone, seemingly a bit oxymoronic it surprised me by fulfilling both prophecies. However, I came to realize like the Aliens movie franchise, there was something hiding waiting to surprise.

Disclaimer: They were on loan from the Art Haus von Loomis Johnson

Tested at $85: They can be purchased in the usual places such as Aliexpress, Amazon, Hifigo, Keephifi, etc.

Good Traits

Physical Attributes

Earphone makers that want to set themselves apart from the seemingly endless options these days must stand out. The shell on the BLON A8 is nothing short of different. I don’t recall anything else like it. The outer shell is a 3D hollow structure with a smaller enclosure for the single lightweight diaphragm dynamic driver.

It doesn’t boast any exotic particular materials DLC, Beryllium, Titanium, Unobtanium, etc, but sometimes you don’t need these to pull off a good sounding earphone. Since the shell is metal, this helps reduce weight and it would have been really cool if the structure was optimized to reduce wind noise..haha give it a couple of years and some manufacturer will figure this out and sell it at a premium price. While it’s not designed to reduce noise, it did an amazing job staying put in my ears even during a simple 3 mile hike.

The connectors on the BLON A8 are another oddity, they angle the earhooks towards your head which I thought surely would cause the earphones to push out of my ears. Maybe the opposite was true, it helps create some extra friction to reduce movement of the cables.

Hot tip: It’s important to play around with eartips on these. I did not get the included eartips from Loomis Johnson who previously reviewed the BLON A8. Instead I started with the olive shaped ones from my Tin Audio T2 Plus which turns them into bassy monsters reminiscent of the BMG DMG/Nicehck M6.

The Azla Sedna Light shallow was better, but shallow widebores similar to the ones included with TFZ King Pro were the best. The shallow widebore lets the midrange and treble shine a little more and in my case the seal was “loose” or not tight. This helped cut down on the steep bass rise, just as the BMG DMG third party nozzle with an extra vent release.. Since this is probably hard to duplicate, most of my comments will be based on using something similar to the stock tips.

Package Contents

• Burlap Storage sack
• Eartips
• 2 Pin removeable cable 1.2m silver cable

Sound

Tested with an LG V30, Sony NW-A55, Liquid Spark + JDS Labs Atom

Something was up with the BLON A8, every time I put them in the sound would be different, one minute they were bass monsters the next more balanced (not neutral). I consulted other reviews to see what was going on…

Sculpted bass, but then bass, bass and more bass?

“The Blon A8 Prometheus surprises with its bass quality—tight, well-sculpted and wholly free from bloom and bleed, with adequate but not massive  subbass throb” -audioreviews.org

“The BL-A8 have meaty, punchy bass. If you’re a bass head, you are in for a treat.” -Headphonehonesty

“BLON BL-A8 has meaty and thick lows. This model is perfect for bass heads as it gives a meaty deep rumble” -Headphonics.com

“If you crave those deep, visceral sub-bass rumbles that almost make you lose control of your sphincter then the BL-A8 will oblige.” -primeaudio.org

BASS is all about weighty slam, and it’s in a hurry to please the headbanger, so much so that sometimes the bass take the front stage and hollow the resolution. -nobsaudiophile.com

Originally I though the tips I was using allowed for a light seal. The real reason was more about the stem of the eartip pushing down over the vent hole. I am not sure why BLON made a decision to put a vent hole in the stem, perhaps it was a last minute tuning decision easier to rectify with the nozzle vs the shell? Who knows…well now we all know to watch out for this.

It makes sense why the shallow wide bore eartips work very well since these are less likely to push down over that vent hole. Another possibility is to use something with a thicker tighter stem so it doesn’t slip down. A combo of short, thick and tight would be super ideal, keep it clean folks.

Final Remarks

Rather than rehash what my fellow com-padre Loomis has already laid out for the BLON A8 Prometheus, I have to agree with his take on them and am wrapping this up early. I think these are attention grabbing socialites that did not make the splash they could have if it were not for the troublesome placement of that nozzle vent hole. Good effort BLON, one of your better ones minus the misstep on hole placement. I rank these cool to have if you use the right tips and avoid blockage.

BLON A8 PROMETHEUS SPECIFICATIONS

• Impedance 32ohm
• Sensitivity 115db
• 10mm driver
• 3.5mm 1.2m silver cable (mic optional)
• Color Options Silver/Gun Metal

GRAPHS

BLON A8 Left vs Right

BLON A8 Nozzle vent partially covered / eartip inconsistencies

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

The post BLON A8 Prometheus Review (2) – Smoking Hot Tip: Black Hole Ahead appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Cons — Boomy, texture-less bass
– Lack of sub-bass rumble at the extreme end
– Scooped lower-mids, male vocals sound muffled
– Treble sounds harsh when listening to higher volumes
– Imaging/staging/resolution are average at best
– Compressed dynamics

INTRODUCTION

KZ is perhaps the most popular chi-fi manufacturer and in terms of sheer number of models available I think they got everyone beat. I did not keep up with their hectic release schedule for the better part of the year, but the KZ ZEX did catch my attention. Why, you ask? The EST (Electrostatic) buzzword, of course.

Most IEMs in the budget range go for a single-dynamic or a balanced-armature hybrid setup, so the ZEX is a refreshing change of pace. Let’s see if the sound quality is as good as it’s supposed to be.

Note: the ratings given will be subjective to the price tier. KZ sent me the ZEX for evaluation.

Sources used: Hidizs AP80 Pro
Price, while reviewed: $25. Can be bought from KZ’s Official Website.

PHYSICAL THINGS AND USABILITY

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES

The packaging is no-frills but has all the necessities. You get 3 pairs of Starline tips (white) and a 2-core SPC wire. The cable itself is rather nice, especially given the price and how some manufacturers cut corners here. I wish there was a carrying case, but I am nitpicking here.
4/5

BUILD QUALITY

The KZ ZEX have plastic shells (including the nozzles) with a metal backplate. The finish is good with no visible seam between the plastic shell and the metal backplate. At the bottom of each earpiece you’ll find the 2-pin port (protruted ones, sadly). There are no vents which is surprising given the existence of a dynamic driver inside. A pretty generic build overall but it’s well-executed.
4/5.

COMFORT, ISOLATION, AND FIT

Due to their lightweight nature and lack of vents, the KZ ZEX are very comfortable to wear and they isolate well. There is some pressure build-up but it only occurs occasionally. Not bad for a vent-less shell design.
4/5

SOURCE AND EARTIPS

The ZEX is very easy to drive and shouldn’t need any special source to sound its best. For the review I primarily used the Hidizs AP80 Pro. As for tips, I used the stock tips and they worked well.

DRIVER SETUP

KZ ZEX is a dual-driver hybrid, with a 10mm dynamic driver in charge of the lows and mids, and a 6.8mm “electrostatic” driver in charge of the highs. In reality, the electrostatic driver is a magnetostatic one and operates similarly to the principle of electret mics (just reverse-engineered). Despite the misleading marketing, the driver combination is quite rare in the budget realm and warrants a closer look.

TONALITY AND TECHNICALITIES

The KZ ZEX has a V-shaped signature with the mid-bass bloom dominating the sound signature.

I usually start my sound section with the bass and then I go upward, but this time I’ll change things around a bit. The treble will be the highlight here for me because the KZ ZEX has a quite interesting treble response. In moderate listening volumes (around 70dB or so) the treble has a nice attack and sounds crisp without being overbearing or fatiguing. However, as you push the volume up, the treble becomes even more peaky ~5KHz and loses its composure.

I believe that this particular electret/magnetostatic driver is not suited for high SPL listening. So perhaps this is something to take note of when auditioning the ZEX. As for the midrange – it is not well-tuned. I am not a fan of the scooped out male vocals. Moreover, the upper-mids sound suppressed in high-pitched vocals, resulting in a boxy vocal reproduction.

The bass response, meanwhile, is mostly mid-bass focused and sub-bass rumble is not prominent. Bass lacks texture and has slow decay so bass notes can smear into each other. The emphasis on the upper-bass is a bit too much (rising from 700Hz almost) and this masks lower-level detail.

Speaking of detail, the ZEX isn’t particularly resolving even for the price. Dynamics sound compressed due to aforementioned upper-bass boost. Soundstage is below-average whereas imaging is basically left and right. Not much to write home about here.

Bass: 3/5
Midrange: 2/5
Treble: 3.5/5
Staging: 2.5/5
Imaging and Separation: 2.5/5
Dynamics and Speed: 2/5

KZ ZEX FREQUENCY RESPONSE GRAPH

SELECT COMPARISONS

vs BLON BL-03

The BLON BL-03 have been one of the few hype-trains that did not get derailed. It’s been a couple of years now that the BL-03 has remained the de-facto budget IEM recommendation.

In terms of overall build, comfort, accessories – the KZ ZEX are superior to the BL-03. The BLONs require a cable and tip change as the stock ones are horrible. When it comes to sound though, these IEMs go for different direction.

BLONs go for a slightly V-shaped tuning with warm mids and slightly rolled-off treble. The KZ ZEX on the other hand goes for a more pronounced treble response. In terms of midrange tuning and timbre, the BL-03 trounce the ZEX. I do think the ZEX has more sparkle in their treble. BL-03 bass is also more textured and doesn’t sound as smeared as ZEX.

Staging is middling on both whereas imaging is better on the BL-03. BL-03 also sounds more dynamic and less compressed than the ZEX. So apart from the treble, the ZEX is not really an upgrade over the BLON in most factors. Rather the opposite is often true.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

The most interesting part about the KZ ZEX are their driver configuration and their treble response (in moderate listening levels).

Sadly, the midrange tuning isn’t up to the mark with overly recessed male vocals, and the bass is just slow and texture-less. The treble itself can get grainy once the volume is pushed up, so the ZEX have caveats all around.

The KZ ZEX falls victim to poor tuning decisions in the bass and mids despite having a fairly novel driver configuration. I hope KZ goes back to the drawing board and fixes the tuning issues in the upcoming model. For now, I cannot recommend the KZ ZEX.

MY VERDICT

2.5/5

Interesting driver configuration let down by questionable tuning decisions.

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

Get it from KZ Official Store

Our generic standard disclaimer.

PHOTOGRAPHY

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

The post KZ ZEX Review (1) – Patchwork appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Cons — Shell size of the BL-MAX may be too large for some
– Prone to attracting scratches
– Mid-bass lacks texture
– Lower-mids are recessed
– Treble is muted and rolls off early
– Average imaging/staging
– Somewhat compressed dynamics

INTRODUCTION

BLON has been around for a while as an IEM/Headphone manufacturer (circa 2014 as per their logo). However, they reached stardom with the BLON BL-03 which have earned a place in our Wall of Excellence as the de-facto budget IEM. Since the breakout success of the BL-03, BLON has tried to re-capture the lightning in the bottle but never gained the same traction.

Enter BLON BL-MAX, their latest attempt at improving upon the BL-03, or perhaps providing something different enough to co-exist (just as the BL-05S were). Priced well under $50, the BL-MAX face stiff competition, even from within the family itself. Do the BL-MAX justify their existence, or are they doomed to fall into obscurity? Let’s find out.

Note: the ratings given will be subjective to the price tier. Dunu was kind enough to send me the Luna as part of the Review Tour (thanks Tom!)

Sources used: Questyle CMA-400i
Price, while reviewed: $36. Can be bought from KeepHiFi.

PHYSICAL THINGS AND USABILITY

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES

BLON is notorious for their below-par (often atrociously poor) accessories. This time around, though, they decided to at least provide a good quality cable. The stock cable of the BL-MAX is quite good IMO and I don’t see any reason to go for a third-party one unless you are too bothered by the (slight) stiffness. The stock tips, as always, are horrible and must be ditched if you care about fit. Finally, there is the fabric carrying pouch.

Overall, it’s an improvement for BLON but things can get better.
3/5

BUILD QUALITY

Build quality of the BL-MAX is solid. Each earpiece has a two-piece metal assembly (zinc alloy) with a visible-but-unobtrusive seam. There is a singular vent near the nozzle and at the bottom you have the protruded 2-pin connectors (not my favorite). The backplate has a chrome-finish that’s prone to picking up smudges and scratches and looks similar to the earcups of the Apple Airpods Max.

It is a fact that the BL-MAX shells are rather… maximized and looks quite menacing in the photos. However, the inner-side is mostly ergonomic and slowly tapers into a more “human-like” shape. Overall, the build quality is as good as one should expect at this price with the scratches being a concern.
4/5

COMFORT, ISOLATION, AND FIT

Comfort seems to be a major point of discourse when it comes to the BL-MAX. For me it was not an issue once I swapped tips. For others, they found the housing to be too big to wear. I can only talk about my own experience but I also acknowledge that others may have issues given the unconventional shape.

As for isolation – it’s above-average once you get the right tips to fit.
3.5/5

SOURCE AND EARTIPS

BLON BL-MAX doesn’t need much amplification and ran fine on the Sony NW-A55 (which has fairly weak amplification). Eartips are another story, however. I highly recommend changing tips. Spinfit CP-145 worked great for me, your mileage may vary.

DRIVER SETUP

The BLON BL-MAX is their first dual-driver IEM with a 10mm CNT driver (likely 1st gen) for the lows and mids, and a 6mm micro-driver for the highs. The micro-driver uses a “lightweight” diaphragm as per the promo materials but the exact composition is missing. I assume it’s a PET/PEN diaphragm since a metal plating would surely be advertised.

An interesting thing is the orientation of the drivers which are stacked together vertically. This kind of driver assembly was first used on JVC’s FX-T90 and a “throwback” revival on the BL-MAX reminds me of the olden days.

TONALITY AND TECHNICALITIES

In a nutshell, the BL-MAX has a sub-bass boosted V-shaped signature with darker treble. Some also call this a W-shape these days.

Given the sub-bass prominence one would expect that the bass would be skull-shaking but in reality it’s not that dense of a bass response. You do hear the sub-bass rumble and some mid-bass punch but due to the driver limitation texture is lacking. The slow decay exacerbates the problem with the mid-bass sounding rather one-note. Fast-flowing bass sections are often reduced to a hum that fails to portray the rhythmic nature of these notes. I have seen some suggesting to EQ the bass to be even more prominent but I’d advise against that since this CNT driver is already at its limit.

Mids are quite alright though there is the obvious lower-mid recession that drowns out male vocals and low-notes in bass-heavy mixes. Fortunately, the upper-mid has adequate amount of gain and thus female vocals are well-articulated, so are string instruments and guitar riffs. Treble meanwhile is characterized by a noticeable peak around 5KHz that tends to make leading edge of cymbal hits somewhat exaggerated. However, the treble rolls-off quickly after that with perhaps a slight peak around 8KHz.

None of these treble are too noticeable in most songs since the sub-bass masks the peakiness. However, in songs with sparse instrumentation (acoustic tracks, singer/songwriter stuff) you may experience the unevenness in the treble region. The treble lacks extension and air and sounds darkened up top as cymbal and hi-hats decay abruptly, with no sense of airiness or sparkle.

Due to the recessed mids, soundstage feels “wide” but in reality it’s not very deep or tall. Imaging on the other hand was surprisingly decent and could even portray some “ordinal” directions well. Instrument separation was above average. General resolution is below average, and dynamics (both sudden changes in volume and gradual ones) are compressed. Compressed, as in: you don’t feel the immediacy of a sudden bass drop, or the minute changes in volume level of instruments/vocals. However, most budget IEMs fail in this category so no big deal there.

Bass: 3.5/5
Midrange: 4/5
Treble: 2.5/5
Staging: 3.5/5
Imaging and Separation: 4/5
Dynamics and Speed: 2.5/5

BLON BL-MAX FREQUENCY RESPONSE GRAPH

Channel-matching is very good for a budget IEM, so a job well done on that front.

SELECT COMPARISONS

vs BLON BL-03

The OG superstar of the BLON family still remains unchallenged and seems to have been one of the rare “justified” hypes in recent years. The BL-03 is cheaper than the BL-MAX, has a worse fit, and requires both cable and tip changes.

However, once you have managed to get a fit, the BL-03 has a more analogue-ish tone with a warm tuning that offers a colored-yet-appealing midrange. The treble is also more present than the BL-MAX.

BL-MAX strikes back with better imaging, staging, instrument separation, and a deeper bass-reach. The sub-bass on the BL-MAX is better than on the BL-03. If you prefer to have a more mid-centric tuning the BL-03 is still an excellent IEM. For those who think the BL-03 needs more sub-bass or find the upper-midrange shouty – the BL-MAX can be a good alternative.

vs BLON BL-05S

The BLON BL-05S is my personal favorite BLON till date. It offers the best technicalities among all BLON offerings that I’ve tried and the tuning is pretty solid as well. The fit is a notable improvement over the BL-03 and even the BL-MAX but the cable and tips still require swapping out.

Once you change the cable and get appropriate tips, the BL-05S sounds better than the BL-MAX in nearly all categories except for sub-bass rumble (BL-05S is rolled-off in that region). Imaging and separation is class-leading on the BL-05S so the BL-MAX don’t sound that impressive anymore. However, the BL-05S has a controversial color and I know many who didn’t buy simply because of the jade-green paintjob. BL-MAX has their own idiosyncrasies though with the oversized shell, so it’s a toss-up between them on aesthetics.

For my personal taste and given the much improved technicalities, I will pick the BL-05S over the BL-MAX. If you think the BL-05S sound thin in the mids or too dry in the bass for your liking – BL-MAX might suit you better.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

The BL-MAX did not stand out or impress in a hyper-competitive market and got overshadowed by its own brethren. It’s a complicated situation where BLON is somewhat bogged down by their own success.

BLON has been ramping up their release cycle lately with new IEM releases appearing almost every month. On one hand, it’s good to have more options in the market, and the potential for another “budget gem” is ever welcome. On the other hand we got this “scattershot” approach where brands try random stuff to see what sticks.

The BL-MAX does not look like a scattershot to me as the design and driver assembly hint towards a more planned approach. However, BLON did not get it right with their first dual-driver IEM, esp since dual-dynamic setups are hard to pull off. I hope BLON goes back to the drawing board, retunes the drivers/swaps them for something better, and while they are at it – redesigns the shell since it has caused fitment issues for some.

MY VERDICT

3.25/5

BLON BL-MAX fails to impress, but they are not too shabby either.

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

The Blon BL-Max was provided by KeepHifi and I thank them for that.

Get it from KeepHiFi

Our generic standard disclaimer.

PHOTOGRAPHY

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

The post BLON BL-MAX Review – Size Matters appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Cons — Upper-midrange glare.

Executive Summary

The Shanling UA1 is a well-built and organic sounding budget dongle that could be a bit tamer at the top end.

Introduction

I recently analyzed the Shanling UA2, a rich and warm sounding dongle-shaped DAC/amp that features single-ended and balanced outputs – possibly the best of its kind below $100.

The company had slit the the $45 UA1 as an encore in that package, which was Shanling’s first foray into the world of small DAC/amps. It joins an army of sub-$50 dongles that presently crowd the market – but with a distinct difference: Shanling is a brand name that is also established in the premium segment.

Let’s find out whether “noblesse obliges” also works for the budget domain.

Specifications

Physical Things and Usability

The box’s content is spartan: device, USB-C to USB-A adapter, and a manual. The enclosure is made of anodized aluminum, and the 3.5 mm headphone socket is reinforced with a gold-plated metal rim. There is a tiny LED status light by the socket. The haptic of the enclosure is top notch.

The fixed cable is made of high purity copper with cotton shielding against outside interference. The strain reliefs appear to be sturdy but a detachable cable would have been favourable.

Functionality and Operation

The Shanling UA1 is another entirely source operated/powered DAC/amp. It works plug’n’play with mobile devices and Mac OS, but requires a driver for Windows.

It is powered and operated from the source device and decodes Hi Res up to 32 bit/384 kHz and DSD 256. I have not found MQA decoding capability in the documentation.

Amplification and Power Consumption

I my 3h battery drain test of several dongles, the Dragonfly Black and Red had the lowest consumption on my iPhone 5S, the Shanling UA1 consumed about a third more, which placed it in the midfield. But it could have done far worse than that….see the detailed results. I would call the UA1’s battery consumption ok but not outstanding.

Power Consumption Test: Parameters and Raw Results

I tested the power consumption of several portable headphone amps connected to my iPhone 5S. The conditions were as identical as possible: 3 h test, volume calibrated to 85 dB  ± 0.5 dB white noise with Dayton microphone, no sim card, BT off, no other apps open; network on, 32 ohm Blon BL-03 iem, Genesis’s Supper’s Ready (from the Seconds Out album) played in an endless loop.

The iPhone’s battery was fully charged at the start of the test and the remaining charge was measured thereafter. The result is shown in the table below. Since the tests were performed at different times and considering the ongoing battery deterioration, the results have to be seen with a grain of salt.

[collapse]

Sound

Equipment used: Macbook Air/iPhone SE first generation; Sennheiser HD 600 & HD 25; Sennheiser IE 400 PRO, JVC HA-FDX1, TRI I3 Pro.

The Shanling UA1 features the ESS ES9218P (dac + amp), a “System-on-Chip” (SoC) that leaves the audio engineer little room for tweaking, it comes down to mainly filtering. This means devices with this SoC will actually sound alike or very close.

The UA1 is close to neutral, but has a faint tone colour with a slightly boosted bass, but also with an elevated upper midrange/lower treble, which adds some grain to the top end top-end that can be fatiguing to some in the long run – and that’s the UA1’s only downside. There is a companion app for Android phones that allows filtering which may mitigate the issue, but it does not work with a computer or iPhone.

Presentation is leaner compared to a $100+ dongle, but not in a bad way. Staging is fine. Midrange is clear and clean, and resolution is pretty good. Nothing sterile or analytical. I also did not record any hiss.

It drives my 300 ohm Sennheiser HD 600 with some pain but any iems, including the power-hungry planar-magnetic TRI I3 Pro earphones with ease.

The $99 Helm Bolt and Shanling UA1have a very similar general sound signature (and even a very similar build; the Bolt decodes MQA, the Shanling does not). The Bolt has less bass, which is a tad tighter and cleaner, it sounds more open and the vocals are more up front because of it, and it is a bit more dynamic. The UA1 has more low-end rumble whereas the Bolt is more composed and “sweeter” at the top end. These differences are not earth shattering but the Bolt appears o be better balanced by more sophisticated filtering.

When going up the ladder, the $85 Shanling UA2 has a richer, bassier sound, better staging, better 3D rendering, more punch, and the corners are smoother.

Concluding Remarks

At $45, the Shanling UA1 is an impressive performer with a warm-bright, organic signature, good staging, dynamics, and resolution that does justice even to $200-300 iems (I have not tested any higher-priced ones as I don’t have any). The only polarizing feature may be its hot upper midrange/lower treble glare, other than that it plays one league higher than its price and comes close to the $99 Helm Bolt that shows a few better rounded corners. However, the Shanling’s lively top end will bring some life to iems with an early treble rolloff.

I am a particular fan of the great haptic and build of Shanling’s UA1 (and also the UA2) that compare even to the most expensive models.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

Disclaimer

The Shanling UA1 was included with the UA2 and ME80 in a review package from the manufacturer. I thank them for that. I sent the UA1 to Biodegraded for a second opinion.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

The post Shanling UA1 Review – Prefab Sprout appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Nice build and good comfort. Beautiful shells.
Organic timbre.
Pleasant tonality.
Big bass yet with good quality and speed.
2 pin connector, better lifespan than MMCX in general.
Adequate accessories at this price bracket.
Easy to drive.

Cons

Below average isolation.
Shells may be a fingerprint or scratch magnet.
Not the best microdetails.
Not the most extended treble.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The KBEAR Aurora is a lush harmanish single DD set. It features a beautiful shell, organic timbre and great tonality. This set generally scores good marks across most departments, only perhaps lacking in treble extension and microdetails.

SPECIFICATIONS

• Driver configuration: 10mm Nano Titanium Plated Diaphragm
• Frequency response: 20 Hz – 20kHz
• Impedance: 18 Ω
• Sensitivity: 105 dB/mW
• Cable: 2 Pin (0.78mm), OFC Silver plated cable
• Tested at $169 USD

ACCESSORIES

The Aurora comes in a nice packaging featuring an Aurora Borealis motif.

Included are:
1) SPC blue cable (ties in nicely with the Aurora snowfield motif) – The cable is well braided, no microphonics, very thicc and substantial. The blue colour may be a bit too showy for some though.
2) Silicone tips of various sizes. Do tip roll to see what suits you sonically and for fit/isolation.
3) Carry case – faux leather, similar to the case seen in other KBEAR products
4) Cleaning cloth
5) Cleaning brush

The accessories provided are par for the course for a $100 USD range set.

I liked that KBEAR is using a cable with a 2 pin connector, I had my fair share of mishaps with MMCX type connectors after switching cables once too often, they ended up like spinning windvanes.

For the purposes of this review, the stock tips and stock cables were used, so as not to change the sound signature with aftermarket gear.

BUILD/COMFORT

Build wise, the Aurora has a shiny mirror like finish, akin to the HZSound Heart Mirror or Moondrop KXXS. The Aurora is quite light and smooth, it is well built with no funny edges to poke the ear. Comfort is very good. But due to the mirror like finish, this set may be finger print or scratch magnet, so do be careful with em.

The shells are quite a looker, while using them on the subway for isolation tests, a few curious commuters kept looking at the Aurora earpieces.

I didn’t have driver flex on my set, but this is partially related to ear anatomy an types of tips used, so YMMV.

ISOLATION

Unfortunately, the Aurora’s isolation is below average. I lost quite a lot of the bass frequencies when using them on a subway (bass is generally the first frequency lost in a noisy place). This skewed the sound to be a bit shouty in the upper mids/treble. So personally, I think the Aurora’s ideal sound is to be gotten when using them at home or in a quiet area.

DRIVABILITY

I tested the KBEAR Aurora with a Khadas Tone Board -> Schiit Asgard 3 amp, Khadas Tone Board -> Topping L30 amp, Sony NW A-55 DAP (Walkman One Plus v2 Mr Walkman Mod), smartphone, Shanling Q1 DAP, Tempotec Sonata HD Pro, E1DA 9038D, and a Khadas Tone Board -> Fiio A3 Amp.

The Aurora are relatively easy to drive, but scale well when amped, in the areas of bass tightness, soundstage, dynamics etc. They are definitely easier to drive than their older sibling the KBEAR BElieve.

SOUND & TECHNICALITIES

The KBEAR Aurora is a harmanish warm set. The Aurora Borealis icy motif may give an impression that this is an ice cold set in terms of tuning, but far from it be. The Aurora is actually warm and lush and leans towards analoguish, rather than a sterile frosty wintery wonderland.

The bass of the KBEAR Aurora is midbass focused, it is north of neutral but not at true basshead levels. Subbass extends well, you will get your rumble for the subbass frequencies.

Despite the copious bass, the bass speed is quite agile, note weight is on the thicker side, yet with very minimal midbass bleed. Listening to some of the faster bass movements on songs such as Sting’s “Englishman In New York” (interlude portion), some slower DD drivers can make the bass notes sound like a nebulous haze, but the Aurora passes this test.

Bass is not as fast as BA bass though, but not many sets manage to get a good mix of bass quantity/note weight and bass quality (speed, without bleed). Timbre and texture in the bass is quite good, in keeping with its DD roots.

The KBEAR Aurora’s lower mids are slightly depressed (not overly so). There is a boost in the upper mids, but they have an upper mids that is a few dB lesser than a traditional harman IEM. So generally, they manage to thread a fine line of having a forward upper mids without going too much into shouty territory. Perhaps there is some upper mids glare if one uses them outdoors (poor isolation kills the bass and overly emphasizes the upper mids/treble), or on some poorly recorded tracks or at louder volumes (Fletcher Munson curve).

But by and large, this set doesn’t have the usual banshee upper mids seen in CHIFI tuning, the pinna gain here is around 10 – 11 db. Vocals are forward compared to instruments, and timbral accuracy for vocals is rather organic. I would describe the mids in the Aurora to be on the lusher and thicker side, but it may not have the best transparency or clarity. Think of an analoguish signature like the BLON BL-03 but with better technical performance.

The KBEAR Aurora has moderate treble extension, though it may not be as airy as some multi BA types. So sparkle is a bit tamed, cymbal and high hat hits are a bit muted with the tuning, but consequently, I don’t find the Aurora fatiguing. Some slight microdetails are lost as such. Sibilance is very mild.

In technicalities, the KBEAR Aurora have above average soundstage (in height, depth and width). Imaging and instrument separation are also above average at this price bracket (for a single DD set), though clarity and microdetails are not the best. Those multi driver/hybrid types at the $100ish bracket might be better at technicalities, but some of them have timbre or coherency issues. So different strokes for different folks, pick your poison.

Timbre on the KBEAR Aurora is very good. In fact, I’d say the Aurora have better timbral accuracy than the KBEAR BElieve and some other similarly priced single DD sets. Acoustic instruments like brass, woodwind and stringed instruments all sounded organic. Considering the KBEAR Aurora use a titanium driver, I was pleasantly surprised by the timbre (my past experiences with titanium drivers IEMs wasn’t the best when it came to timbre, eg DUNU DM480, Audiosense AQ7).

COMPARISONS

I have compared the KBEAR Aurora with a few single DD at the upper budget-midfi segment. Hybrids and pure BA types were left out of the comparisons as they have different pros and cons among the different transducer types.

KBEAR BElieve ($159 USD)

Compared to the older KBEAR BElieve, the Aurora is much easier to drive, and it has more subbass extension than the BElieve. The BElieve has more upper mids and treble, and also has better technicalities and resolution. The Aurora has better bass speed, especially at the midbass, whereas the BElieve’s midbass could be quite nebulous, especially when underpowered.

Timbral accuracy is better on the KBEAR Aurora, and it isn’t as hot in the upper mids either.

The KBEAR Aurora and the BElieve are kind of sidegrades, each have their pros and cons as such.

The KBEAR BElieve is no longer in production, but word on the street is that the Vento Conductor T-500 Pro is very similar to the BElieve, or might be an OEM of sorts. So if you are still looking for the BElieve, perhaps consider getting the T-500 Pro.

Tanchjim Oxygen ($269 USD)

The Tanchjim Oxygen is one of the benchmark single DD sets in midfi CHIFIdom. The Oxygen has a more extended treble and air and it also has all round better timbre, better technicalities and a better bass quality (better timbre, texture and speed). The Oxygen has a slightly thinner note weight though, when compared to the more analoguish sounding Aurora.

Definitely the Oxygen is the superior set, but it is $100 USD more expensive.

TForce Yuan Li ($119 USD)

The TForce Yuan Li is a bit less V shaped than the Aurora. The Aurora has bigger bass quantities and more subbass extension. Timbre is better on the Aurora, with the Aurora also having a not so hot upper mids region. Technicalities are also better on the Aurora.

Both sets have a very nice shell and accessories, but if you can top up the $50 USD or so, the Aurora is a marginal upgrade.

CONCLUSIONS

The KBEAR Aurora is a lush harmanish single DD set. It features a beautiful shell, organic timbre and great tonality. This set generally scores good marks across most departments, only perhaps lacking in treble extension and microdetails.

The “Aurora borealis” naming convention here is quite a good choice, as this set melds good looks and sound in a nice little package, like the northern lights.

Definitely the Aurora is a set that single DD lovers and timbre lovers should consider!

Contact us!

You find an INDEX of all our earphone reviews HERE.

DISCLAIMER

I would like to thank KBEAR for providing this review unit. It can be gotten at https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005003109134536.html

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

The post KBEAR Aurora Review (1) – Aurora Borealis appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Cons — Fixed cable.

Executive Summary

The Helm Bolt is a very small and light MQA certified portable DAC/amp that excels in terms of its organic/natural reproduction.

Introduction

The source-operated dongle dac-amp has experienced a huge upsurge recently. Originally designed in 2012 to convert your phone into a high-quality digital analog player (dap) and first able to do so in 2016, the market is currently flooded with tens to hundreds of such devices – which makes it is essentially impossible for a single person to keep the overview.

Prices range from a handful of dollars to $400 with a crowding in the $80 to $150 range. The Helm Bolt fits into this sweet spot.

Helm is a young British-American company that specializes in portable devices from headphones/earphones to amplification.

The Bolt is the company’s sole portable DAC/amp that works with a phone, either alone or in combination with the Helm DB12 AAAMP amp. It appears to be a popular item as it is always sold out. Many favourable reviews of the unit exist already, so I would like to put it to my ultimate test.

Specifications

Visit mqa.co.uk for more information.

Physical Things and Usability

The box/s content is rather spartan: Helm Bold, USB-A adapter, and pleather storage case.

The dongle comes with a fixed USB-C cable, which is great for connecting to an Android device or a newer Mac, and, with the USB-A adapter, to a Windows computer. But using the Bolt with an iPhone requires the Apple camera adapter, which doubles the “snake” in length. Since the enclosure of this 8 g dongle is very small, the whole construct is effectively just an extension of the earphone/headphone cable.

The housing is made of metal and feels premium. The cable is cotton-shielded against outside interference and the strain reliefs on both ends could be a bit longer and sturdier.

The Bolt has no physical controls and is operated through its host device. It is completely plug-n-play, and does not even need a Windows driver.

The enclosure features a small LED that changes colour with playback rate/type: Blue SD Audio <= 48kHz – Red HD Audio > 48kHz – Magenta For MQA.

Headphone output level automatically detects headphone impedance and sets level accordingly: 1V for < 150 ohms, 2V for >= 150 ohms, which corresponds to low gain and high gain. The device is plug and play, there are no Windows 10 drivers needed. 

Amplification and Power Consumption

The Helm Bolt drives all iems I have thrown at it, but it reached its limits with the 300 Ω  Sennheiser HD 600. For large cans, Helm offers the Helm DB12 amp [product page],which can be used in series with the Bolt. The DB12 adds a constant 12 dB gain, and a 6 dB bass boost (if selected).

I my 3h battery drain test of several dongles, the Dragonfly Black and Red had the lowest consumption on my iPhone 5S, the Helmo Bolt consumed about a third more, which placed it in the midfield. But it could have done far worse than that….see the detailed results. I would call the Bolt’s battery consumption ok but not outstanding.

Power Consumption Test: Parameters and Raw Results

I tested the power consumption of several portable headphone amps connected to my iPhone 5S. The conditions were as identical as possible: 3 h test, volume calibrated to 85 dB  ± 0.5 dB white noise with Dayton microphone, no sim card, BT off, no other apps open; network on, 32 ohm Blon BL-03 iem, Genesis’s Supper’s Ready (from the Seconds Out album) played in an endless loop.

The iPhone’s battery was fully charged at the start of the test and the remaining charge was measured thereafter. The result is shown in the table below. Since the tests were performed at different times and considering the ongoing battery deterioration, the results have to be seen with a grain of salt.

[collapse]

Sound

Equipment used: Macbook Air/iPhone SE first generation; Sennheiser IE 400 PRO, Meze Rai Solo, JVC HA-FDX1; Sennheiser HD 600.

The Helm Bolt has an organic sound with a good tonal colour. It is not warm and not neutral, that is not dark and not analytical, but it strikes a balance between the them. The presentation is clean and lean (in a positive way), think of slimline – as opposed to fat and congested.

The Bolt is not the bassiest dongle, which keeps the vocals up front. Midrange is clean and clear with a tinge of warmth. One of its biggest qualities is the very pleasant, well-rounded, smooth, appealing top end. It works well with most earphone/headphone signatures and, in particular, helps taming shouty ones.

Compared to the $10 Apple audio adapter or the $10 VE Odyssey HD, the Bolt sounds much more refined and it is more powerful. The $50 Shanling UA1 features the same SoC and almost identical specs. Both therefore feature principally the same sound signature with one big difference at the top end: the Shanling is much scratchier/grainier in the upper midrange and lower treble. Helm must have applied effective filtering.

The Shanling UA1 is also a tad bassier which pushes the vocals back. The Bolt’s bass is tighter and cleaner, it has a more open sound with a wider stage, and it is a tad more dynamic.

Scaling up to the $200 AudioQuest DragonFly Red. The Red is punchier, bassier, fuller bodied with bigger staging and more midrange clarity and depth. Bolt is more relaxed, softer on the attack and has the lesser separation, but is sweeter in the treble.

Using the Bolt as a preamp and adding the Helm DB12 as an amp opens up the stage substantially, however takes away from the note weight. The sound is fluffier, bigger, “inflated” like a balloon. But since both devices have fixed cables, this combination can create some cable chaos in your pocket.

Concluding Remarks

The Helm Bolt is a fine sounding dongle which I like a lot. It may not have the strongest amplification but it has a very refined sound. It sticks out of the crowd by its small size and weight and convinces by its natural sonic reproduction. The Bolt has played any iem well for me I had thrown at it. It is a quality product and I am not surprised it is always sold out. It is a serious contender in the $100 segment.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

Disclaimer

The Helm Bolt was supplied by Helm Audio for my review – and I thank them for that.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

Gallery

The post Helm Bolt DAC/Amp Review – Sweet Dreams Are Made Of This 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: Oladance OWS Pro wearables | Sennheiser IE 900.

In-Ear Monitors, Earbuds & Wearables

Past excellences, now discontinued or superseded

Headphones

Digital Audio Players (“DAPs”)

Past excellences, now discontinued or superseded

Desktop Amplifiers

Desktop DACs

Desktop Integrated Headphone DAC/AMPs

Portable Headphone Amplifiers

Portable Integrated Headphone DAC/AMPs

Past excellences, now discontinued or superseded

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 appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Cons — Small soundstage; hissy with sensitive iems, rel. high current draw.

Executive Summary

The highly rated VE Odyssey HD dongle is tested against the Apple audio adapter, both priced at $10. It is concluded that the Odyssey excels in amplification, build, and haptic, whereas the Apple prevails in terms of sound quality. Both dongles constitute very good value.

Introduction

Dongles – little source-powered DAC/amps – have been on everybody’s mind and phones for the last couple of years. I personally have used one since 2016 (with iPhone) as I don’t want to carry a dap as a 2nd device in my pocket. And I have given dongles a closer look in my reviews in the last 1.5 years.

Apple were the first to introduce the “Lighting to 3.5 mm Headphone Jack” a dongle that is a microscopic stereo digital-to-analog converter (DAC), a stereo headphone amplifier, a microphone preamplifier, and monophonic analog-to-digital converter (ADC) – and power converters to run this all. And it costs a measly $10. Not bad, eh? My review of this adapter is now one of our blog’s standard staples.

But the competition has not been sleeping, and Venture Electronics released the Odyssey HD in 2019, also priced at $10. The Odyssey HD has been riding on a wave of euphoria in some forums recently, to a point where it is believed to compete with and even outclasses dongles at multiple times its price.

If this was justified, the Odyssey HD should beat the Apple dongle hands down – for a start. Let’s put it to the test.

Specifications

Physical Things and Usability

The Odyssey HD has a stellar build and haptic. Great industrial design with snug fitting premium metal connectors, good enough even with the $800 Cayin Fantasy. The cable between the 3.5 mm headphone jack and then USB-C connector looks somewhat cheap in context, but is actually Oyaide 102 ssc high-quality copper cable from Japan [Oyaide website].

The Odyssey HD is available with different headphone jacks: standard 3.5 mm TRS, or 2.5mm/2 mm TRRS, or 4.4 mm TRRS. While the balanced plugs work with balanced devices they do not produce balanced sound. The accessories are completed by an complementary Type-C to USB 3.0 adapter.

In comparison, the USB-C Apple audio adapter is flimsy, only comes in standard 3.5 mm TRS, and there is no USB-A adapter included. It is also available in a Lightning version.

Under the Hood…

The Odyssey HD features the Realtek ALC4042 chip, introduced in 2018. Typically, and against all urban myths, a dac chip does not tell you anything about a dongle’s sound. Different dongles with the same dac ship do sound completely different in almost all cases [as discussed here].

This is different in this case, as the ALC4042 is an SoC, a “System on Chip”, hosting both the digital analog converter and the headphone amplifier. You can purchase this SoC on Shopee, Tobao, or aliexpress. The current bulk price is about $4.50 per piece (I saw the iPhone 5s’ for $3.50 audio circuit on ebay ).

An SoC leaves the audio engineer very little room for tweaking. For example, he/she cannot add code (for re-clocking etc.) so that any two dongles with the ALC4042 will essentially perform alike or at least very similarly.

Power Consumption

I my 3h battery drain test of several dongles under identical conditions, the Apple audio adapter had by far the lowest consumption on my iPhone 5S, the Odyssey HD consumed about 2.5 times as much.

Power Consumption Test: Parameters and full Raw Results of more Dongles

I tested the power consumption of several portable headphone amps connected to my iPhone 5S. The conditions were as identical as possible: 3 h test, volume calibrated to 85 dB  ± 0.5 dB white noise with Dayton microphone, no sim card, BT off, no other apps open; network on, 32 Ω Blon BL-03 iem, Genesis’s Supper’s Ready (from the Seconds Out album) played in an endless loop.

The iPhone’s battery was fully charged at the start of the test and the remaining charge was measured thereafter. The result is shown in the table below. Since the tests were performed at different times and considering the ongoing battery deterioration, the results have to be seen with a grain of salt.

[collapse]

Sound

Equipment used: Macbook Air, iPhone SE (1st gen.); Sennheiser HD 600; JVC HA-FDX-1 @ 32Ω; Sennheiser IE 300 @ 16Ω.

Let’s have a look at the well established Apple dongle first. …Neutral, clear, clean and very precise. Basically as audibly transparent, good-sounding and clean-sounding to my ears as it gets. Precise and tight bass reproduction with sensitive multi-BA in-ears.

In comparison, the Odyssey HD is more powerful and therefore able to drive power-hungrier headphones or iems than the Apple dongle. It is also bassier and therefore not neutral. However, users report a hiss above 11 kHz with sensitive iems. Even company CEO “Wild Lee” admits to a high noise floor.

Iems with low impedance, let’s say 16 Ω, may not get enough current and sound muddy at the low end [the underlying physics is discussed here]. 32 Ω iems work fine. Attack is pretty soft, the Odyssey lacks that brittle crispness of the Apple dongle and it has a fairly narrow soundstage in comparison. The Apple does not distort with low impedance iems as it draws much less current, and it has the cleaner midrange and better controlled treble.

Both dongles are aching under the 300 Ω load of the Sennheiser HD 600 headphones. The Odyssey HD amplifies louder but its attack is softer than the Apple’s, which is crisper while playing quieter. But, let’s face it, none of the two is well suited for running power-hungry headphones.

Throwing the $200 AudioQuest DragonFly Red into the mix: it excels with better imaging, better dynamics, and a richer sound than the two current protagonists. Even the $100 Helm Bolt is far superior over both Apple and Odyssey: it has a nicer tone colour, a sweeter top end, and is overall more homogenous sounding, albeit leaner and less punchy than the DragonFly Red.

But, the Odyssey is still MUCH better sounding than my MacBook’s integrated audio circuit.

Concluding Remarks

Well, there is no $10 miracle in this world, sadly. The Venture Electronics Odyssey HD is a well-built and decent sounding dongle that may not justify its current hype, but you can very well listen to music with it. It may not even beat the [probably heavily subsidized] Apple audio adapter in most respects but it provides more amplification power and has a more robust haptic.

At $10 these competitors are affordable enough so that you can pick them up both for your own testing.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

Disclaimer

The VE Odyssey HD was provided unsolicited by Venture Electronics for my analysis. I thank them for that.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

The post VE Odyssey HD Review – Taking Bites Out Of The Apple? appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Comfortable, light, good build.
Neutralish sound – doesn’t colour frequencies, and potrays the connected IEM as it is.
Excellent sound quality.
Good battery life.
Modular system to allow MMCX and 2 pin options for IEMs.
Strong and easy BT connectivity and range. No dropouts for BT.
Has a mic to take calls.
Volume controller.

Cons:

No LDAC or aptX LL/HD
No charging case.
Hisses with highly sensitive IEMs.
No water proofing.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The NiceHCK HB2 is a bluetooth wireless adapter that has a modular MMCX/2 pin connector, this increases pairing options for detachable IEMs. It has great sound quality, good battery life and excellent connectivity.

SPECIFICATIONS

• Bluetooth version: Bluetooth 5.2 (Qualcomm QCC3040)
• Bluetooth coding: SBC, AAC, aptX
• Wireless range: 10 meters
• SNR: 59 dB
• Playtime: 13 hours
• Charging time: 1.5 hours
• Tested at $79 USD

ACCESSORIES

In addition to the BT adapter, it comes with:

1) Modular MMCX, 0.78mm 2 Pin and NX7 2 Pin types.

• This is the selling point of the NiceHCK HB2! It comes with a unique 3 types of detachable modules, where one can disconnect the module from the BT adapter, so one can use various IEM connector type housing with it – MMCX, 0.78mm 2 Pin and NX7 2 Pin types.
• The modular design is also good in that usually the connector area is the first point to fail after repeated wear and tear, so no biggie buying the detachable modules, rather than replacing the entire device.

2) USB-C charging cable

BUILD/COMFORT

The NiceHCK HB2 is very comfortable, light and ergonomic. I’ve even used it for 10 hour sessions and forgot it’s in use. The wire guides are flexible and they don’t impinge on the ears, even with a mask and spectacles on. The build quality is rather sturdy too.

The NiceHCK HB2 has no waterproofing mentioned in the specs unfortunately. But FWIW, I’ve used it in some slightly rainy conditions and even with gym and exercise for the past 3 weeks and there are no issues thus far, fingers crossed.

FUNCTION/CONNECTIVITY

Holding a long press on the back of the device turns it on. The left and right sides pair up automatically when turned on, and I had no issues with pairing it with multiple BT devices, all devices recognized the NiceHCK HB2 on the spot. Pressing the power button for 5 seconds conversely turns it off.

The buttons for the NiceHCK HB2 work as advertised:

Interestingly, only one side of the NiceHCK HB2 can be used independently without the need to turn on the other side. This can be an option for some who only want one side in the ear for calls, or say if the other side is being charged. One thing to nitpick is that the buttons are quite sensitive, and are located at the rear of the device, so they can be accidentally touched sometimes.

The NiceHCK HB2 has a mic and can take calls, with good sound quality for calls. I’ve tried it on a few online meetings with no complaints from the others in the conferences with regards to voice quality.

I also liked the volume controller on the NiceHCK HB2. In contrast, some BT adapters like the iBasso CF01 have no volume control on it, so if say one is far away from the BT device used to pair with it, one has to physically go over to the device to change the volume, unlike the NiceHCK HB2, which just requires a tap on the housing.

Connectivity is excellent on the NiceHCK HB2, I have not a single drop out whatsoever in the past 3 weeks that I’ve been using them. The BT range is about 10 meters or so, assuming no walls/obstructions are in the path.

The NiceHCK HB2 doesn’t come with a charging case unfortunately, but it takes around 1.5 hours to reach a full charge. Battery life is advertised at 13 hours, I think it is thereabouts ballpark from my testing, but as per most BT/wireless devices, that is expected to go down with repeated charging cycles, and it also depends on the volume one listens at and perhaps the file type (lossless versus lossy).

TECHNICAL ASPECTS

The NiceHCK HB2 uses the Qualcomm QCC3040 TWS chipset. It has BT 5.2 with support for aptX, SBC and AAC, but unfortunately doesn’t support LDAC or aptX LL/HD.

For the purposes of this review, I paired the NiceHCK HB2 with a range of 15 IEMs. From more power hungry sets like the TRI I3 (contains planars) and the KBEAR BElieve (low sensitivity beryllium driver), to some fussier low impedance/high sensitivity multi driver sets like the Audiosense T800 and TRI Starsea.

Pairings:

• Audiosense T800
• BLON BL-03
• BLON Cardinal
• iBasso CF01
• KBEAR BElieve
• Kinera BD005 Pro
• LZ A7
• Oriveti New Primacy
• Tanchjim Oxygen
• TFZ Tequila
• TRI I3
• TRI Starsea
• Westone 3 (MMCX modded)
• Westone W30
• Whizzer HE01

This device packs quite a lot of juice, and it could power the KBEAR BElieve and TRI I3 with headroom to spare. One thing I would have to nitpick, is that there is some hiss noted with high sensitivity type multi BA IEMs like those mentioned above.

One can mitigate the hiss to some extent by lowering the volume on the NiceHCK HB2, and just jacking up the volume from the BT device you are connected to. Generally the hiss also is not perceived when one is outdoors or when music starts playing anyway.

Dynamics are good on the NiceHCK HB2, there isn’t much loss of the subbass, which is a common occurance in TWS/BT sets. There is some loss of the higher treble, but when one uses BT and wireless stuff on the go and outside,

I think it is quite hard to really notice this. I really liked that the NiceHCK HB2 doesn’t colour the sound much, it just faithfully transmits the sound signature of the attached IEM. So far of the IEMs I’ve paired with it, they all sound the same in terms of general FR as the wired version of these IEMs, though of course wired gear in general tends to have better dynamics, microdetails and technical performance.

COMPARISONS

Even among wireless gear, I generally prefer BT adapters (like the TRN BT20S and TRN BT20), rather than TWS stuff, as I’d like to use my favourite detachable IEMs (with famililar sound signatures) on the go, and hence these BT adapters allow me to reuse the IEM. Plus I think that TWS buds are limited sooner or later by the BT tech or battery life (with repeat charges), so at least the IEM can be kept even if the TWS bud dies/gets outdated.

I’ve the TRN BT20 and TRN BT20S and the iBasso CF01 for these BT adapters. The NiceHCK HB2 sound better than these 3 in terms of sound quality/dynamics and also in terms of connectivity. The iBasso CF01 is more expensive, but comes with a charging case.

I’ve had a few drop outs with the iBasso CF01s and there is a shorter connection distance than the NiceHCK HB2. The iBasso CF01 also only features a MMCX non detachable connector, so that limits the IEM types that can be used with it. The iBasso CF01 has no volume controller as mentioned prior.

CONCLUSIONS

The NiceHCK HB2 is a bluetooth wireless adapter that has a modular MMCX/2 pin connector, this increases pairing options for detachable IEMs. It has great sound quality, good battery life and excellent connectivity.

If a charging case was added, this BT adapter would have been perfect, but as it is, I would recommend this set for those that want the convenience of a wireless connection on the go!

Contact us!

You find an INDEX of all our earphone reviews HERE.

DISCLAIMER

I bought the NiceHCK HB2 with a discount from the NiceHCK Aliexpress shop: https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005002848089532.html.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

The post NiceHCK HB2 Review – Nice, As Per Namesake! appeared first on Music For The Masses.