Cons — Needs above-average volume to sound best
– Treble has metallic timbre with hints of splashiness
– Upper-treble rolls off too early
– Over-dampened treble response
– Some bloat in upper-bass, bass decay could be faster

INTRODUCTION TO TOPAZ

BQEYZ is one of the few manufacturers around (along with InTime) who has kept the piezo technology alive in IEMs, especially the budget ones. The likes of Unique Melody, FIR Audio, and Empire Ears also have similar tech inside their IEMs as part of bone-conduction drivers, but BQEYZ uses it for the treble.

Piezo treble definitely sounds unique and it’s more of a personal preference thing. I find it to be super-responsive and having a better sense of “rawness” than typical BA or dynamic driver treble, but then again, piezo drivers are prone to resonances that can be perceived as “splashiness” at times.

BQEYZ Topaz is a cut-down version of the Spring2 in a sense, and the reduced price tag should definitely appeal to those who have been willing to try Piezo on a budget. Do the Topaz scratch that particular itch, or is the novel driver setup inadequate to stand out in today’s hyper-competitive budget segment?

Please read on…

Note: the ratings given will be subjective to the price tier. BQEYZ was kind enough to send me the Topaz for evaluation.

Sources used: Lotoo PAW 6000, Questyle M15.
Price, while reviewed: $76. Can be bought from Linsoul.

PHYSICAL THINGS AND USABILITY

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES

You get 6 pairs of eartips (two different types), a round carrying case, the stock cable (can be terminated into balanced during purchase), and a small cleaning tool. I really like the option of customizing termination during purchase and I hope more brands follow this.

As for the accessories themselves, the stock 4-core OCC SPC cable is very good: flexible, supple, and complements the design of the IEMs well. The stock tips, however, might need changing. I opted for Spinfit CP-100+. Your mileage may vary. The rest of it is absolutely fine for the price tag.

BUILD QUALITY

The Topaz have a two-part design: the inner side is 3D-printed translucent resin, while the face-plate is CNC anodized aluminum. There are several vents throughout the shell: one on the inner side, right in front of the driver, a pair of small vents just on top of it, and one on the face-plate that acts as a back-vent. The 2-pin connectors are recessed, which is another plus.

General build is solid, even though it is a step down from the phenomenal build of the BQEYZ Autumn, for example.

COMFORT, ISOLATION, AND FIT

Comfort is top-notch as I felt no driver flex, and the general shape is fairly ergonomic. Isolation is below average due to the multiple vents.

SOURCE AND EARTIPS

BQEYZ Topaz can scale slightly with higher tier sources, but not so much that investing in one becomes a necessity. The stock eartips did not offer the best bass response for me so I went ahead with the Spinfit CP-100+.

DRIVER SETUP

The Topaz sport a dual driver setup with a 13mm LCP dynamic driver that handles the bass and mids, and a 9-layer piezoelectric ceramic driver on top of it that gets “excited” for the treble notes.

TONALITY AND TECHNICALITIES

BQEYZ Topaz have a warm, bass-focused tuning with rolled-off treble. That’s the summary, so let’s delve deeper.

The bass is definitely the star of the show here. It’s got physicality, texture, and the density of snare hits are especially satisfying. There is some bass bleed into upper-bass, however. This results in “thickened” male vocals, denser snare hits and pedals, and somewhat more fleshed out female vocals (whereas they should be thinner in tone).

The mids have no shout or shrillness, though I wish guitar riffs had more definition. Acoustic guitars and keyboards sound somewhat smoothed over, and this sensation of “over-dampening” carries over into the treble.

Now, the piezo treble is one of the key differentiators between the Topaz and the rest of the competition. BQEYZ probably wanted to not offend those who are adverse of Piezo-treble and decided to play it safe. I’d say, a bit too safe at times. The upper-treble extension is non-existent, which kills the extension that piezo drivers are known for. Despite this cautious approach, some splashiness in treble is evident, even though things sound dampened overall.

Soundstage is surprisingly wide and tall, though depth is middling. Imaging is mostly left and right, with ordinal orientations being less evident. However, there is no “gaps” during stereo pans, which is a positive. General resolution is hindered somewhat by the treble roll-off and bass-forwardness, while the dynamic driver can lag behind the piezo at times.

Overall though, these scenarios are rare and in most cases the Topaz sound warm, with a rich, dense bass. Just that the treble could be more… special. A missed opportunity indeed.

SELECT COMPARISONS

vs Dunu Kima

Dunu Kima are similarly warm-tilted in tone, though they have a more pronounced upper-mid presence. As a result, the Kima sounds slightly cleaner with better clarity. The treble is also not as rolled-off on the Kima, so you get better end-to-end extension. However, I prefer the bass on the Topaz more since the sense of physicality is more evident there. Imaging is better on the Kima, while staging is wider on Topaz.

As for the rest, both are built well, but the Kima are full-metal throughout. Accessories are also better on the Kima though the BQEYZ cable is superior IMO. Between these two, I think the Topaz will suit more to those who prefer a warmer, richer presentation, while the Kima is better suited for the “laid-back without losing all the clarity” crowd.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

BQEYZ Topaz are targeted towards a niche: those who want warm, dense sound while looking for something special in the treble, courtesy of that piezo driver. It’s just a small letdown that the driver is so hindered to make the sound inoffensive that it loses most of what makes it special.

I hope BQEYZ can add in some more upper-treble in the subsequent successor to the Topaz, while utilizing a slightly faster bass driver (or reducing the bass by a bit between 300 – 500 Hz. That should take care of all my qualms and turn the Topaz into something special.

For now, the Topaz are good, just that some small improvements can make them even better.

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

Get it from Amazon

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

The post BQEYZ Topaz Review – Piezo Promises appeared first on Music For The Masses.

At-a-glance Card

Full Device Card

Test setup

Sources: Questyle QP1R / Sony NW-A55 mrWalkman / Questyle M15 / Questyle CMA-400i – Final E tips – Stock cable – lossless 16-24/44.1-192 FLAC and DSD64/128 tracks.

Signature analysis

Tonality

Hodur’s presentation is an evident W-shape, reaching good result in terms of tonal balancing however lacking in terms of timbre coherence and overall organicity. Bass is rather flowery, treble is by converse dry and technical, and such two souls don’t merge one into another as smoothly as they should (and I would prefer).

The general timbre is somewhat lean accross the board, with a partial exception represented by the sub bass – which also contributes to the mentioned incoherency feeling. Mid bass helps warming the presentation up, without adding too much butter to the notes however.

Sub-Bass

Sub bass is well extended and present. The rumble often gets an excessive bit out of control up to sounding bloaty, and interfering with the midbass’ job.

Mid Bass

Hodur’s midbass is… uncommon. I can describe it as strong, warming also insofar as not particularly fast, although not sloppy at all, either. Which would all be good if it were not for a moderate artificial timbre making it lack realism.

In more vulgar terms Hodur’s bass overall (sub+mid) is quite deep, energetic and colored, and as such I find it more pleasant when listening to some genres (electronic, rock…) and less ideal on others (acoustic music in general, jazz, classical…)

Mids

Mids are where Hodur’s overall lean timbre deepens its roots. Their tuning is quite brave in a sense, especially for the higher half of the mids segment which is forward, energetic and somewhat bright while succeeding in staying south of shouty – although sometimes by a tiny margin. Note weight is lacking everywhere, which is a pity as this results in missing organicity especially on acoustic music.

Male Vocals

Male voices like the rest of the lower part of the mid segment are more recessed than the rest. Add some note thinness and you easily look elsewhere if you’re fond of tenor vocals.

Female Vocals

Female vocals are much better than male on Hodur, insofar as much more forward, brighter, cleaner and more energetic. The downside is they come very close to shoutyness some times, and sadly they do pass the sibilance threshold in a few occasions too many, and they lack the body it takes to make them convincingly natural/organic.

Highs

Treble is no doubt “the” strong point on Hodur, with particular regards to its EST driver performance, which kicks in just above highmids, by ear I’d say around 3.5/4K onwards. Highmids’ already fast, BA-style transients become supersnappy thanks to the well tuned EST, never scanting into artificial metallic or “electrical” timbre. Good job here!

Without prejudice to what noted before about horizontal tonal incoherence, here’s where the re-balancing role played by the bass reveals itself as so precious in the overall Hodur presentation, which would certainly come across as “overly trebly” otherwise. Indeed, within its noted limitations the ensemble taken as a whole is indeed pleasant, I reckon especially for “treble heads” longing for “not-just-bright” IEMs.

Technicalities

Soundstage

Hodur draw a modestly wide and high stage, however depth is above average – provided of course a good DAC is upstream, needles to say (or is it?).

Imaging

Hodur’s imaging is no better than average, and that’s already a compensated evaluation resulting from a bit better performance on less crowded passages, and definitely fuzzy rendering on more crowded ones.

Details

Hodur’s EST driver is very good at detail retrieval within of course its applicative scope (treble frequencies). Not the same happens on mid frequencies, where details are at best average due to lean note body, and especially on the bass, where texture is quite basic and an over-flowerly (so to call it) rumble tends to often fog the segment off.

Instrument separation

Even more than imaging, Hodur lack big time on instrument separation. Everything is made difficult by the lack of microdynamics coming off the BA and the EST drivers, negatively paired with sub bass’s “rumble dust” covering the lower registers too often.

Driveability

While not particularly hard to drive in terms of sound volume Hodur are very tricky to bias as their DD is very sensible to dampening, and their 8 ohm impedance calls for quite specific sources – or the midbass gets immediately bumped up which, coupled with the already “egocentric” subbass, makes up for a sort of “indistinct blob” down there, which is certainly not pleasant to hear.

In addition to impedance, beware warm sources mainly as they negatively resonate with Hodur’s difficulties on instrument separation.

Physicals

Build

It’s of course totally subjective but I find Hodur’s “kidney” shape very nice both in terms of ergonomics and aesthetics. I could instead easily do without the thin line of sparkling little stones added as a decoration on the backplate. The aluminum structure comes across as convincingly solid.

Fit

Nozzles are not particularly long so the fit stays on a somewhat shallow level. In my particular case a 1-size-larger than normal eartip on the left channel helps getting the right fit.

Comfort

Very comfy once properly fit thanks to the modest sized, oval shaped and smoothed housings. Surely amongst the most comfortable IEMs I ever used.

Isolation

Passive isolation is quite average, and depends on how you sit the housings into the concha so each one’s experience will be a bit different.

Cable

Hodur are supplied with a nice hybrid material (silver plate copper + pure copper) stock cable bearing modular termination plugs. Oddly enough, only 3.5 and 4.4mm terminations are included in the bundle, no 2.5 plug – a pity.

The modular system does not come with a click-lock mechanism to secure the plug in place, which makes me suspect that terminal plugs may tend to become a bit lose over time. This is however a speculation, as I used the Hodur for a few weeks and those have definitely not produced any form of deterioration on the system.

Specifications (declared)

Miscellaneous notes

Hodur are one of those few IEMs I encountered for which even a short “burn-in” did make for a very obvious improvement. Out of the box the bass was totally unaudible (fully bloated) and the entire presentation was obscure, compressed. Just a couple of short auditions later, it all settled to what I tried to describe here above.

Hodur are supplied with a very, very good bundle of eartips: a full 5-sizes set of Final Type-E (black), a 3-sizes set of Kinera K07 tips (very, very similar – read identical – to Kbear A07), and a 4-sizes set of Kinera K-205-02. In particular, I found it difficult to decide which between Type-E and K07 pair better on the Hodur. In the end I probably prefer K07 as they tend to “tame” the sub-bass bloat a bit.

The carton box… Well this is an odd one. Of course it has nothing to do with sound. It however caught me (in positive) for how creative, well-designed, and well realised it appeared when I unpacked it.

I mean it: it’s a box which is clearly trying to communicate with me, being European, both in terms of historical evocation, colour and shape selections, internal setup, storytelling… everything. Very well conceived. Immediately afterwards, however, I was stunned when I noticed with which incredible lack of accuracy the copywrite has been developed for the box and the literature inside it.

Grammaical errors, typos, wrong translations, symplistic lexical forms. Even 2 out of 3 syllabic splittings are ridiculously wrong (this stuff is taught at primary school). Horrible. Seems as if Kinera paid a good level, international-cultured professional marketeer for the general brand design and graphic concept, but didnt put any attention in hiring someone knowing English at a decent level.

A glowing example of how even a single amateur-level contributor can waste the otherwise very good work carried out by other good professionals. Ah, well…

Comparisons

Geek World GK10 ($48)

GK10 feature 2 DD, 1 BA, 2 Piezo drivers, and a price which is 1/6 then Hodur’s

GK10 have more limited sub bass extension so they generate less rumble then Hodur. Mid bass on GK10 is also lower in accentuation compared to Hodur, and at times it appears like a bit “dampened” (for lack of a more appropriate word).

That said however, sub and mid bass are more organic on GK10 and they don’t interfere with the rest of the segments. Mids are more recessed on GK10 but also less lean compared to Hodur, so globally more pleasant.

No female voice sibilance on GK10 unlike Hodur. Trebles are somewhat similar, with Hodur having it this time as the “Piezo-timbre” comes out more prominent and more often on GK10 vs how nicely “discrete” the EST nature of the driver is on Hodur. Detail retrieval is better on Hodur’s trebles, equivalently modest on mids on both models, and much better on GK10’s bass.

Both GK10 and Hodur suffer from timbre incoherence issues, Hodur being the worst of the two due to more invasive bass. Unlike Hodur, GK10 offer very precise imaging and nothing short of surprising layering (especially considering its ridiculous price). Stage drawing is different: taller for GK10, deeper for Hodur, both limited horizontally.

Both are tricky to bias due to identical ultralow impedance (8 ohm). Hodur is more comfortable to wear.

BQEYZ Summer ($129)

Summer feature 1 DD, 1 BA, 1 Piezo ceramic driver at less then half Hodur’s price.

Summer have less important mid-bass, and a sub-bass which is similar in quantity to Hodur’s, but is not bloaty so won’t steal the scene. Mids and vocals are quite similar on the two models, in both cases too lean to sound organic, nontheless decent overall. Highmids are better on Hodur, except for the sibilance.

Trebles are very similar, with Hodur having the edge in terms of quality and timbre, Summer’s piezo nature coming out more evident in comparison. Detail retrieval is better on Hodur’s trebles, similar on either’s mids, and better on Summer’s bass.

Summer images much better than Hodur, although with a sharp preference for horizontal distribution / stereo effect. Layering is obviously better on Summer. Stage is wider on Summer, way deeper on Hodur. S

ummer is much easier to properly bias thanks to its 32 ohm impedance and good sensitivity. Summer is more capricious in terms of eartips selection, and a bit less comfortable than Hodur to wear.

Shuoer Tape ($116)

Tape feature 1 DD, 1 Electret Tweeter for little more than one third of Hodur’s price.

Tape’s sub and mid bass are monumentally better than Hodur in terms of elevation, cleanness, power, texture… everything. Different from Hodur’s W-shape, Tape feature an obvious V-shape presentation resulting in mids being recessed in addition to lean (in that, quite similar to Hodur’s).

Female vocals scant into sibilance on Tape as well. Trebles are extremely good on Tape, and it’s a really tight call on deciding which is better compared to Hodur – I’d probably settle for a tie, considering that Tape offer a tad more body which I like better, but they feature a 16KHz peak which may be nasty for some, and calls for some EQ correction in most cases.

Detail retrieval is similar high quality on either model’s trebles, and is hands down better on Tape for the bass segment.

Imaging and layering are much better on Tape, easy enough for how lacking they are on Hodur. Stage is almost holographic on Tape, which are also much easier to drive then Hodur. Tape are extremely – or I should probably say infuriatingly – capricious as for tips selection, and depending on ear shape they may be not comfortable at all to wear.

Intime Miyabi ($145 + import costs)

Miyabi feature 1 DD, 1 Piezo ceramic tweeter for little more than half Hodur’s price.

Sub bass is less prominent on Miyabi then on Hodur, and never bloaty let alone invasive. Mid bass has similar elevation on Miyabi and Hodur, however quality wise it is very obviously better on Miyabi in terms of precision, slam, texture, detail and organicity.

Mids are more recessed on Miyabi however they are much more organic compared to Hodur. Vocals are much better on Miyabi, tenors are absolutely organic, realistic, and contraltos and sopranos are bodied and even flutey at times.

Trebles is where both models express some of their magic and it’s a tight call to say which is better but I would give the palm to Miyabi in this case: superthin detail comes out a bit better on Hodur but this in my books superseded by Miyabi piezo’s “typical timbre” virtually disappearing, diluted in a well bodied, natural, realistic, transparent treble tone coming off that driver. Miyabi retrieve way more and better defined details from bass and mids.

Imaging and especially layering / separation is where Miyabi excel and are worth a few times their prices so the comparison with the very modest (in this area) Hodur is just… embarassing. Stage is better on Miyabi horizontally and vertically, while the two models are similar in terms of depth.

Both models are very easy to fit and comfortable to wear. Miyabi require some more amping power than Hodur, but are much less tricky to dampen thanks to a much more “urban” impedance (22 ohm).

Conclusions

These Hodur deliver a definitely pleasant overall presentation, featuring energetic, engaging musicality with a particular accent on treble definition and detail, and a solid deep bass counterbalancing the tonality on the opposite end.

They are also amongst the most comfortable UIEMs I ever worn – this is also worth noting. On the down side I hear a non-organic timbre making them hardly fit for acoustic music, timbre incoherence and fuzzy instrument separation.

The sample has been provided free of charge courtesy of Kinera staff, which we thank once again for the testing opportunity.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

The post Kinera Hodur Review – Treble And More appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Cons — Lacks macrodynamic punch and sub-bass rumble
– Notes sound smoothed over at times
– Lower-mids are somewhat recessed
– Imaging is hazy

Note: the ratings given will be subjective to the price tier. Elle Zhou of BQEYZ was kind enough to send me the review sample.
Sources used: Sony NW-A55, Questyle CMA-400i
Price, while reviewed: $200. Can be bought from HiFiGo

INTRODUCTION

The folks at BQEYZ are best known for their hybrid and multi-driver efforts. Their popular models such as the Summer or Spring had DD + BA + Piezo configuration. In fact, BQEYZ is one of the few manufacturers who still use Piezo drivers and has extensive know-how about this driver type.

The Autumn, being a single-dynamic offering, mark a shift in BQEYZ’s approach. Simplifying the driver count allows for easier tuning but also makes maintaining technicalities a challenge.

Do the BQEYZ Autumn pass the hurdle, or do they fall by the wayside? We’ll find out in the following.

PHYSICALS

Accessories

The BQEYZ Autumn come with 6 pairs of eartips, a 4-core silver + copper mixed cable, and the proprietary tuning magnets along side a tool to remove the magnets. A carrying case is also included which gets the job done without being flashy.

Build

General fit and finish are excellent here, with the BQEYZ Autumn having a polished aluminum shell. The shell is a two-piece design with the seam between the pieces barely noticed.

There are three vents on the inner-side of the IEMs. The nozzle is also metal. Lastly, BQEYZ has opted for 0.78mm 2-pin recessed connectors, which I personally prefer over flush or raised connectors.

Comfort and isolation

Comfort is very good but isolation is lacking due to the vents placed on the inner side of the earpiece.

Internals

BQEYZ went for a 13mm single dynamic driver here, with not much being told about the diaphragm material. Elle Zhou confirmed that they are using a 6 micro-meter ultra-thin PEN diaphragm.

The driver is housed in a dual-cavity structure which is becoming pretty standard lately.

BQYEZ Autumn Sound Analysis

Listening setup: BQEYZ Autumn with normal filter + stock cable + Radius Deep-Mount tips + Sony NW-A55

The BQEYZ Autumn have a slightly V-shaped tuning with emphasis around mid-bass and lower-treble. What makes them stand out is how relaxing the signature is, as the transients are rounded and leading edge of notes are softened out.

Bass here is mostly characterized by the mid-bass bloom that adds some extra decay to bass notes. Snare hits also get extra thickness and body as a result. This tuning works well for moderately paced tracks but leaves you wanting in fast metal tracks.

Sub-bass rumble is lacking, so sudden bass drops lack the physicality you expect. Macrodynamic punch is lacking as well, so the BQEYZ Autumn isn’t really suited for portraying the energy in tracks.

Mids are fairly well tuned. Lower mids are recessed but doesn’t sound drowned out. The recession gives a sensation of laid-back vocals that is devoid of shout or shrillness. If you don’t mind midrange recession, the Autumn won’t be disappointing. However, for those seeking more forward or energetic vocals – this ain’t it.

Then comes the treble, and here we have perhaps the only tonal oddity of the Autumn. The 5kHz peak is quite prominent and makes leading edge of cymbal hits sound a bit brittle. This presence region emphasis is needed to keep the Autumn from sounding overly dark but this also leads to over-crispness at times.

Upper-treble is well extended with resonances being heard well until 15kHz. The airiness is kept in check though so it doesn’t lead to fatigue.

Before getting into technicalities, let’s talk about the filters. The filters only increase or decrease the amount of bass but due to how we perceive sound, this change in bass markedly alters the presentation.

The normal filter is the one I found the most balanced, with the bass filter making things too bassy and the treble filter making the 5kHz peak even more prominent.

When it comes to staging, I found the stage width to be quite good. Everything is well separated, and the Autumn don’t sound cramped. However, stage depth is limited.

Imaging is also average with positional cues often being hazy. The saving grace here is the reproduction of microdynamics that allows you to delineate between instruments playing at differing volumes.

Finally, resolved detail is above average for a single dynamic IEM but the Autumn will be bested by a number of multi-BA or hybrid offerings in this range.

Compared to Final E4000

Final E4000 have been one of my default recommendations for a single dynamic driver IEM under USD $200.

In terms of build, the Final are no slouch with a similarly solid aluminium shell. Final went for a barrel shape and mmcx connectors but both IEMs are at equal playing field here.

Comfort and Isolation wise I think E4000 wins as they block more noise than the Autumn. Accessories are about par on both.

As for the sound, E4000 have a similarly bass-boosted, warm tuning but Final has even less emphasis in lower treble. This results in a tad darker tuning than the Autumn. Another noticeable change is the staging and imaging where the E4000 sound more expansive and accurate respectively.

Resolved detail is a bit better on the Autumn due to better upper treble extension. Macrodynamic punch is better on the E4000 meanwhile. Mids are also more engaging on the Final IEMs.

One advantage of the BQEYZ Autumn is the filter system that isn’t available on the E4000 at all. So if you want to change the tuning on the fly the Autumn will be better suited. E4000 are also more difficult to power, requiring better amping.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

BQEYZ have tuned the Autumn fairly well. They didn’t just try to copy-paste an existing target curve and instead went for their own flavor of sound which is rarer to see these days. I do wish that the Autumn were a bit better in terms of technicalities, esp the imaging department. BQEYZ’s previous offerings were better in this regard so this one is a backward step. 

Other than that, the Autumn are a solid pair of single dynamic IEMs, and on sale price they warrant a closer look.

MY VERDICT

4/5

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

Get it from HiFiGo

Our generic standard disclaimer.

The post BQEYZ Autumn Review (2) – Incremental Improvements appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Cons — Relatively high impedance…benefits from amplification.

Executive Summary

Introduction

BQEYZ made themselves a name back in 2018 with one of the first neutrally tuned budget iems, the $30 2DD +2BA BQEYZ KC2, at a time when budget meant V-shaped. The KC2 is still available and has a dedicated following.

The company continued a class higher with the $139 1DD +1BA +1 EST BQEYZ Spring 1, which had wonderful vocals but a somewhat pillowy bass. The subsequent 1DD +1BA +1 EST $169 BQEYZ Spring 2 improved the bass somewhat. All of the above were metal built.

The subsequent $129 1DD +1BA +1EST BQEYZ Summer deviated with its translucent resin shells and finally featured the desired punchy bass.

We have collectively analyzed all of the above to the hilt, including Durwood’s study of the effect of nozzle mesh on the Spring 1’s frequency response.

The latest BQEYZ model is named “Autumn” after the third season of the year, hence “Tre Stagioni” (three seasons). With their BQEYZ Autumn, the company reverts to metal shells being essentially identical in shape to the Summer’s.

New is the driver configuration which is a single DD. BQEYZ also offer maximum sonic flexibility by including three sets of magnetic tuning vents at the font of the shells. Each of these pucks constitutes a different front vent with its very own bass response.

It is an interesting approach contrary to the JVC FDX1, the perceived bass response of which is dosed by screw-on nozzles containing different filters. Although these alter the JVC’s upper midrange response, the effect is only heard at the low end, as the human ear registers the whole frequency spectrum in context.

Specifications

Physical Things and Usability

In the box are the 2 earpieces, the cable, 3 pairs of tuning pucks in a holder, the magnetic tuner pole, 2 sets of eartips (S/M/L), a brush, and a carrying case. The three tuning pucks (“bass”, “normal”, “treble”) are actually the inner earphone vents (also called front vents). They come in different openings: the smaller the bassier. We describe the relevant physical principles in this article.

The metal pucks are inserted and removed with the included magnetic pole. This takes as long as a tire change during a Formula 1 race. The magnetic fit guarantees minimal wear and tear even when swapped frequently. Very handy.

The earpieces are made of CNC machined metal and are built very well. The overall haptic of shells and cable is great. BQEYZ have addressed the criticism of the BQEYZ Summer’s resin shells.

Fit and comfort are very good, isolation is rather poor for my ears. The cable has silver-coated copper and high-purity copper strands. It is loosely braided with minimal contact area between the strands for minimum interference. I find the cable rather pliable and light – it has no microphonics.

2 sets of eartips (S/M/L) are included, one wide bore and the other narrow bore. Note that the nozzle diameter exceeds the usual 4.5 mm so that many third-party eartips will not fit. You may try the SpinFit CP500 or any Azla SednaEarfit models if going for third-party tips.

Tonality and Technicalities

A universally valid assessment of the BQEYZ Autumn is difficult as tonality and technicalities depend on the interplay of several factors: magnetic tuning puck + eartips + source (in any combination). This versatility allows to you pretty much to create your own favourite sound.

Considering its 46 Ω impedance, the Autumn benefits from amplification, although it works surprisingly well with my iPhone SE (1st gen.). For example, the powerful Apogee Groove produces a much cleaner and better defined image than the weaker AudioQuest DragonFly Cobalt.

Using the JitterBug FMJ with the Apogee Groove makes quite a difference in that it ads definition to the image. The difference is actually considerable.

With the wide-bore stock tips, the “bass” vents generate more…yes…bass…which drowns the vocals out somewhat — and the “normal” vents bring voices more into the foreground without sacrificing bass impact. But this latter combination may be bassier than the combination of “bass” vents and JVC Spiral Dots.

I played with the stock eartips but got the best results with the JVC Spiral Dots that disperse some of the mid-bass and produce the tightest possible low end. Bass generally digs deep but the vocals move into the foreground with the JVCs. Signature becomes brighter but notes also cleaner and more articulate.

I also experimented with the vents, and the normal ones yielded the best result (in combination with the Spiral Dots). The bass vents “overthicken” the low end, move the vocals back and therefore remove intimacy and detail.

My favourite combination therefore is the normal vents with the JVC Spiral Dots.

So, how does the BQEYZ Autumn sound, actually (with “normal” puck and Spiral Dots)? It has the classic slightly warm single-dynamic driver sound with a rather crisp attack adding some edge.

The low end is on the tight side, it is well extended and remains focused to the lowest frequencies. There is no mid-bass hump as emphasis is on the lower frequencies, just above sub-bass. Drum kicks in the mid bass are not as pronounced as they could be but they are nevertheless hard as a rock – and dry.

Lower midrange is standalone without bass bleed. Male and female voices are somewhat recessed, of medium note weight, energetic, and natural. There is no shoutiness but we are getting there, although that 5 kHz peak is not irritating to my ears.

Midrange temperature is a bit cooler than in the bass region but still not quite neutral. Midrange resolution is very good, everything clean and clear there. Note definition is very good.

Lower treble rolls of substantially. Cymbals are a bit back and don’t have the best definition – but they are still ok. Resolution is better in the midrange than in the treble region.

Stage is average in width, height and depth. Spatial cues is very good. Attack is sharp and crisp without being aggressive. The dynamic driver is rather nimble. Stage positioning and separation are also good. Timbre is good.

I am a bit short in my sonic description as it mostly applies to this very particular setup.

BQEYZ Autumn compared

The dynamic-driver competition in the $200 region is tight. The Tanchjim Oxygen (which I don’t know) and the JVC HA-FDX1 are standard staples on our Wall of Excellence (also count the 1+1 IKKO OH10 in). The Moondrop KATO is arguably the company’s best dynamic-driver offer.

To disappoint you, it is impossible to tell which is the best of the lot as they are very close in terms of (sound) quality. But they differ quite a bit in ergonomics.

For example, the IKKO OH10 is very heavy in one’s ear, and so – but to a lesser extent – is the KATO. The Oxygen have short nozzles that may not fit everyone and the JVCs have a weird shape altogether that may not be the most comfortable for many either. In this respect, I prefer the Autumn’s compact shells.

But what I can say is that the Autumn sound more refined than the brighter $139 BQEYZ Summer, particularly in the midrange. The JVCs are not as crisp as the Autumn, they are smoother, dampened, with more rounded notes – but not as deep. The Autumn are rougher around the edges, more dynamic/energetic, and they have more midrange body and a much better sub-bass extension.

The Moondrop KATO are brighter than the Autumn (in my setup), with a wider but shallower stage. They have a smoother bass and vocals are not quite as intimate. They also have more sparkle with more air in the midrange. And they are more prone to shoutiness. How graphs can deceive us. Voices are a bit thicker and more rounded in the KATO. Treble resolution is similar between the two.

As I tend to say (well I stole it from Alberto): pick your poison!

Concluding Remarks

The BQEYZ Autumn are well built and good sounding single-dynamic driver earphones that fit their price category well – and that can prevail against their tough competition.

Whilst it is difficult to rank the large crowd of $200 single-dynamic drivers, the Autumn stick out in two aspects: comfort/fit and sonic versatility through the included tuning front vents. They are, in my opinion, the best offering in BQEYZ’s 3 season series.

Tre stagioni? Quattro stagioni! Now we are ready for “inverno”. No, that’s not what you think*…learn Italian…

Until next time…keep on listening!

*Italian: winter

The post BQEYZ Autumn Review (1) – Tre Stagioni appeared first on Music For The Masses.

The BQEYZ Autumn remidies all previous issues and is the best and most mature sounding iem of the series. In fact it is a very good and enjoyable single DD iem. And it is flexible, sonically, as you can adjust the bass response with the three included front vents.

Before you read my Autumn review, you have the opportunity to check out the Autumn’s physical features. Is the nozzle length right for you, will the shell fit your ears well? Sound quality is only one aspect of an iem’s functionality. And the best iem is the one we use most. Don’t you agree?

Specifications

Images

Get the BQEYZ Autumn from aliexpress.

The post PhotoGraphed: BQEYZ Autumn vs. BQEYZ Summer appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Instead of first impressions, we offer completely flavour-neutral optical treatments before following up with our exhaustive reviews of the products’ performances.

Current Photography

1. BQEYZ Autumn vs. BEQYZ Summer (Jürgen Kraus)
2. Hidizs MM2 (Jürgen Kraus)
3. IKKO OH2 vs. IKKO OH1S (Jürgen Kraus)

Vintage Photography (prior to March 2022)

1. AME Custom Argent Hybrid Electrostatic (Jürgen Kraus)
2. Anew X-One (Jürgen Kraus)
3. Blon BL-05 Beta (Jürgen Kraus)
4. Blon BL-05 Beta (Jürgen Kraus)
5. Blon BL-05 MKI & MKII (Jürgen Kraus)
6. BQEYZ Spring 1 (Jürgen Kraus)
7. BQEYZ Spring 2 (Durwood)
8. CCA CA16 (Durwood)
9. Drop + JVC HA-FXD1 (Jürgen Kraus)
10. Fidue A65/A66 (Jürgen Kraus)
11. FiiO FD1 (Jürgen Kraus)
12. FiiO FHs1 (Jürgen Kraus)
13. Hill Audio Altair • RA (Jürgen Kraus)
14. iBasso IT01 V2 (Jürgen Kraus)
15. Hilidac Atom Pro (Jürgen Kraus)
16. Ikko OH1 (Jürgen Kraus)
17. KBEAR Believe (Jürgen Kraus)
18. KBEAR Diamond (Jürgen Kraus)
19. KBEAR hi7 (Jürgen Kraus)
20. KBEAR KB04 (Jürgen Kraus)
21. KBEAR Lark (Jürgen Kraus)
22. Kinboofi MK4 (Jürgen Kraus)
23. KZ ASX (Jürgen Kraus)
24. KZ ZSN Pro (Slater)
25. Moondrop Crescent (Jürgen Kraus)
26. Moondrop Illumination (Jürgen Kraus)
27. Moondrop Kanas Pro Edition (Jürgen Kraus)
28. Moondrop SSP (Jürgen Kraus)
29. Moondrop SSR (Jürgen Kraus)
30. Moondrop Starfield (Jürgen Kraus)
31. NiceHCK Blocc 5N Litz UPOCC OCC Copper Earphone Cable
32. NiceHCK Litz 4N Pure Silver Earphone Cable (Jürgen Kraus)
33. NiceHCK NX7 (Jürgen Kraus)
34. NiceHCK NX7 Pro (Jürgen Kraus)
35. Queen of Audio Pink Lady (Jürgen Kraus)
36. Revonext QT5 (Slater)
37. SeeAudio Yume (Jürgen Kraus)
38. Senfer DT6 (Slater)
39. Sennheiser IE 300
40. Sennheiser IE 500 PRO
41. Shozy Form 1.1 and Shozy Form 1.4
42. Shozy Form 1.4 (Jürgen Kraus)
43. Shozy Rouge (Jürgen Kraus)
44. Simgot EM2 (Jürgen Kraus)
45. Simgot EN700 Pro (Slater)
46. Smabat ST-10 (Jürgen Kraus)
47. Tin Hifi T2 Plus (Jürgen Kraus)
48. Tin-Hifi T4 (Jürgen Kraus)
49. TRN-STM (Jürgen Kraus)
50. TRN V90 (Jürgen Kraus
51. TRN-VX (Jürgen Kraus)
52. Whizzer Kylin HE01 (Jürgen Kraus)

The post Photography appeared first on Music For The Masses.

At-a-glance Card

Full Device Card

Test setup

Sources: Apogee Groove + Burson FUN + IEMatch / Questyle QP1R / Sony NW-A55 mrWalkman – JVC SpiralDots eartips – Stock cable – lossless 16-24/44.1-192 FLAC tracks.

Signature analysis

Technicalities

Physicals

Specifications (declared)

Other notes & comments

A few technical pieces of advice first of all.

One: BQEYZ Summer are extremely eartip sensitive. The package comes with 2 alternative S-M-L silicon tips, neither of which offered me either good comfort or good sound rendering or both. After quite a lot of rolling I settled on JVC SpiralDot silicon tips as the best compromise for my tastes.

Two: if there is one pair of IEMs were “burn-in” does make a difference, that’s BQEYZ Summer! The first few minutes of auditioning resulted in a very “closed”, un-airy, almost “deaf-noted” presentation. I left them down playing for a couple of days and it all became evidently better.

Three: cable’s 2-0.78mm-pin connectors are quite ordinarily recessed, but the housing shape around the receptable is “bowly” – the result is that only a 2-pin male connector featuring a protruded nozzle will fit. Nicehck 16core high purity copper cables won’t fit, for example.

Coming closer to the heart of the matter – how BQEYZ Summer sound – I underline my sincere appreciation to BQEYZ for having been able to brush-off that too common, artificial, “electrical” after taste I heard on most piezo drivers to date, even on higher-tier models (*cough*LZ-A7*cough*).

On the flip side the single aspect that I liked less is this timbre mismatch between the BA+Piezo section and the DD section, the former wanting more body to sound organically coherent to the latter. Given this, a competent source featuring at least above average high-mids / treble control is more than a recommendation when selecting a good pair for BQEYZ Summer.

One last consideration about the price category: BQEYZ Summer’s $129,00 asking price is imo indeed compliant with the product’s general quality, both on the non-sound and sound-related aspects. On the other hand, the same is true for a few other IEMs in the $100-$150 price bracket, which makes it extremely difficult for any single one to stand out of the crowd at least a bit, let alone earn a “royal crown”.

Disclaimer

A special thank you to Elle Zhou for providing Summer’s sample for review. You can buy it at the BQEYZ Official Store.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

Contact us!

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

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

The post BQEYZ Summer Review (2) – Amazing Music appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Cons — No balanced circuit; limited Hi Res decoding; no “DragonTail” adapter included. 

Executive Summary

The AudioQuest DragonFly Red is a dynamic and natural sounding miniature headphone amp (dac/pre-amp). As the more vivid sibling of the relaxed DragonFly Cobalt, it is sourced by phones or computers with minimal battery drain.

Introduction

AudioQuest is primarily a cable company, established in 1980, but they also invented this type of small, source-powered portable dac-amp. The concept goes back to a meeting at the 2010 Rocky Mountain Audio Fest between DragonFly’s designer Gordon Rankin, Joe Harley (AQ’s former Senior Vice President of Marketing and Product Development), Steve Silberman (AQ’s former VP of Marketing), and Bill Low (AQ’s founder and CEO). Steve had asked to create a USB cable with an in-line converter with RCA cables coming out of one end.

Looking at a USB stick, Gordon said, “You know, we can make it like this. It could have a USB-A plug at one end and a 3.5mm output jack at the other.” Gordon Rankin had a lot of experience to offer. He had designed his first dac (the Cosecant) in 2003 and simultaneously started working on asynchronous code. He is one of the pioneers of computer audio.

In 2012, the first DragonFly was released, with the “Red” following in 2016. My analysis of the DragonFly Red obviously comes 5 years late so that there has been ample time for reviewers and audio enthusiasts to establish its place in the audio community.

What was new as of 2016, is that all DragonFlys had small enough power consumption to be operated by a phone’s battery. Not having a battery of their own increases their lifespan quasi infinitely over the bulkier transportable dac-amps with non-serviceable batteries (facing planned obsolescence).

I only received the “Red” recently, but had purchased the $99 DragonFly Black v1.5 back in 2016, which has been my goto until now. And I recently reviewed the $299 DragonFly Cobalt, released in 2019, that features very similar (but not quite the same) specs as the “Red” (which can be a bit confusing for the potential buyer).

In the last 2-3 years, Gordon Rankin’s idea of small portable dac-amps has been adapted by many manufacturers, mainly from the Far East, who are currently flooding the market with countless models priced between $10 and $400, with the sweet spot between $80 and $150.

Two main questions arise and will be addressed in this review. First, how do the DragonFlys Red and Cobalt compare? Second, is the 2016 DragonFly Red still current or have the competitors overtaken Gordon Rankin’s innovation?

Specifications

Physical Things and Usability

Just like the other DragonFly models, the “Red” comes with AudioQuest’s obligatory storage sheath and the “flight manual“. And, like the Cobalt, the Red is lacquered with car varnish. Guess its colour!

The DragonFly Red has a nominal output of 2.1 V (like the DragonFly Cobalt). This is no more than average in its category. Hobbyist Archimago measured a very low output impedance of 0.53 Ω. You find other detailed measurements by Stereophile and ASR (beware of overinterpretations).

Measurements, even if performed unbiased and correctly, cannot characterize a dac-amp sufficiently. They only give us half the story as there is no linear correlation between graphs and musical enjoyment/listening pleasure, sonic character/appeal, synergy, soundstage, separation, timbre, sense of ease etc. A correlation between electromagnetic and acoustic waves does not exist in physics. We need to deploy our ears for the ultimate test. There are plenty of examples where a “well-measuring device” does not impress sonically. Measurements are more important for product design than for practical testing. Alarm bells may only go up if measurements are “really bad”.

The DragonFly Red streams Tidal masters (MQA) and Qobuz, and works with all the non-audiophile streaming services such as Spotify, Bandcamp, Soundcloud etc. And it is firmware upgradeable.

For DragonFly Red, the status indicator produces the following colors: standby (Red), 44.1kHz (Green), 48kHz (Blue), 88.2kHz (Amber), 96kHz (Magenta), MQA (Purple).

All DragonFlys can be sourced by a computer (no Windows driver required) or Android/iOS devices…and used as dac-amp with headphones/earphones, or as pre-amp with a dedicated amplifier. Their functionality is described in detail in my Cobalt review.

Amplification and Power Management

There is enough power to drive my 300 Ω Sennheiser HD 600 headphone. The Red also operated all my iems and the mid-sized 70 Ω Sennheiser HD 25 or 60 Ω Koss Porta Pro with ease.

In my 3h battery drain test of several dongles, the DragonFly Red (and Black) had the lowest consumption on my iPhone 5S, the DragonFly Cobalt consumed about a third more, which placed it in the midfield. All DragonFlys stayed pretty cool during operation. But it could have done far worse than that….see the detailed results. In this respect, the DragonFly Red/Black are the clear winners and therefore most useful on the road.

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 Comparisons

Equipment used: Macbook Air/iPhone SE first generation; Sennheiser HD 600, Sennheiser HD 25, Koss Porta Pro; Cayin Fantasy, JVA HA-FDX1, Sennheiser IE 300, Sennheiser IE 400 PRO, BQEYZ Summer, Meze RAI Solo, Moondrop Aria, Shozy Form 1.4.

The AudioQuest DragonFly Red’s sonic qualities have been known for the last 5 years. But how does it hold up against its competition today?

In my perception, the DragonFly Red offers a rather vivid, organic sound with good extensions at both ends resulting in a marginally warm, immersive listening being off strictly linear. The slightly elevated bass contributes to a good depth but takes a bit away from the stage width, which results in a good three-dimensionality.

The Red is the most dynamic dongle I have tested. It has superb separation of good note weight, and is a bit edgy at the top end. The presentation is rather musical (as opposed to analytical) with good PRAT.

The DragonFlys are musical… The rest just gives you sound. Co-blogger and Red/Cobalt owner KopiOkaya.

The DragonFly Red is ahead of its immediate (external) competition listed here in terms of dynamics, microdynamics, and microdetail.

The equally priced and also natural sounding EarMen Sparrow offers an additional balanced circuit. The Sparrow is flatter, less vivid and less (micro)detailed than the DragonFly Red with a shallower but wider and taller soundstage (balanced circuit only). It is more powerful, and has a much higher battery draw.

The $129 EarMen Eagle was hailed by some reviewers to best the DragonFly Red. Eagle is more linear, less bassy, has a wider but flatter stage. Most importantly, it is leaner sounding not quite reaching the Red’s midrange body, dynamics, and resolution. But it has the DragonFly’s USB-A plug.

The $119 Earstudio HUD100 is the flattest/most linear of the lot, and also the least lively, which qualifies it for earphone testing and for use with very thick sounding (bassy) iems. The $119 Hizids S9 PRO is sonically almost indistinguishable from the HUD100. The $85 Shanling UA2 has rather warm and bassy signature. These three models lack midrange body and note weight, and vocals are rather thin compared to the Red.

DragonFly Red’s real challenger is the $299 DragonFly Cobalt. Most specs are identical between the two models. But the Cobalt has a more expensive dac chip, a different receiver chip, and some JitterBug USB-cleaning technology.

Both have different sonic signatures that broadly correspond to their shapes and colour: smoothly rounded in subtle blue vs. edgier in the louder red.

It is the exuberance and the lively treble that distinguishes the DragonFly Red from the smoother, more relaxed sounding, more composed and mature Cobalt. The Cobalt’s notes are more rounded and weightier, vocals have an unparalleled richness, smoothness, and naturalness in the dongle world.

The Red is more spectacular, more forward into your face/ears especially at the top end, where the Cobalt is easing off a bit. The Red’s liveliness works particularly well with powerful music such as rock, pop, EDM, anything that needs a good punch. The Cobalt plays its strength out in acoustic and jazzy music with emphasis on detail, microdynamics, and timbre.

You experience the principal differences between the two models best when having hightened sensitivity be it through a cold or hangover, or simply early in the morning.

JitterBug FMJ adds body and depth to the Red’s presentation, and it rounds the top off. Separate review of the “Bug” is here.

Is the DragonFly Red still relevant?

This question is frequently discussed in audio forums. The Red is very relevant to me. It depends how you look at it.

The present trends are: maxed out Hi RES (PCM: support up to 768kHz/32Bit; DSD: native DSD64/128/256/512), swappable sound profiles, maximum power, an additional balanced circuit, and perfect measurements. All that at a low price. If that’s what you are after, all DragonFlys are outdated.

If you don’t want to handle Windows drivers, they are not. And if you judge by sound quality, the Red has yet to find a challenger (beside the Cobalt).

The competing devices I have tested do not match the Red in terms of note weight, dynamics, and detail resolution. You may get more sound but not more musicality from the competition. There is still catching up to do with dac chip implementation, which is particularly evident in lean vocals reproduction and timbre.

So, what is the point of decoding super HI RES with a mediocre dac – and/or pairing it with a premium earphone?

The DragonFly Red also clearly leads the pack in power management: its low battery drain results an always cool (as opposed to hot) device.

And whereas the Red has had a long shelf life without any necessary re-issues (though it is software upgradable), the competition keeps pushing improved “Pro” versions of their products.

Another advantage of all DragonFlys is the USB-A plug, which makes it equally practical for Android and iOS devices. The new dongle generations mainly feature USB-C plugs or fixed USB-C cables, which result in cumbersome snakes when combined with the Apple camera adapter.

Sure, there are third-party lightning cables to connect to a USB-C socket, but their MFI chips are not optimized for Apple’s power management, which results in unreasonably high additional battery drains.

There are a few products that incorporate such ingenuity that they remain current and relevant over many years. Other examples are the Apogee Groove and Chord Mojo dac-amps, both unmatched since 2015. Gordon Rankin’s experience must have made this sustained difference in the DragonFlys’ case.

Vorsprung durch Technik?

What I use

Ok ok, everybody has different preferences. I am a phone guy who does not want to carry a second device (“dap”) around – and who wants to use the dac-amp between different devices. I don’t listen on my desktop computer so that my stack is catching dust. And my Shanling M0 dap, too.

Since 2016, my go-to has been the DragonFly Black, but in the last 4-5 months, it has been replaced by: the DragonFly Cobalt for acoustic/classical/jazzy music, the DragonFly Red for Rock/Pop and for on the road (low battery drain), and the EarMen Eagle for thick sounding/bassy earphones and headphones. And I am very happy with this.

On top of that, I am having a lot of fun experimenting with the AudioQuest JitterBug FMJ (I also had purchased the original JitterBug upon its release in 2016) and the ifi Audio iSilencer. More about these USB cleaners is coming soon.

Concluding Remarks

Considering its organic timbre and its rich midrange, the Red could be the best-sounding portable dac-amp I have tested. But it is not as the DragonFly Cobalt is one step ahead and takes over the title “Lord of the Flies” (apologies to William Golding). The DragonFly Red comes in second best, but it is also $100 cheaper.

My investigations have shown that the external competitors (I have tested) have yet to match the DragonFly Red in terms of sound quality, which, quite frankly, surprises me, too. They may impress with added features, balanced circuits, and amplification, but there is obviously still some room to catch up with the experience in asynchronous coding and the other nitty gritty that make your earphone/headphone sound “good”.

So, yes, the old “Lady in Red” is sonically still on top of the $200 class imo.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

Disclaimer

The DragonFly Red was kindly provided by AudioQuest up my request and I thank them for that.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

Gallery

The post AudioQuest DragonFly Red USB DAC + Preamp + Headphone Amp Review – Still Lord Of The Flies? appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Cons — Bass could be tighter; non-descript looks and haptic.

Executive Summary

The BQEYZ Summer is a marginally warm, nimble, mid-centric earphone with well-dosed dynamics across the frequency spectrum that results in an easily digestible, appealing sonic signature with a good sense of ease.

Introduction

BQEYZ had taken the Chi-Fi world back in 2018 with their $50 BQEYZ KC2, one of the few budget releases at the time with a near-neutral bass, which I described as “arid”. This model is still popular today.

The company stepped one up with with their $139 Spring model back in 2019. I remember “unboxing” it at Calgary airport on my way to Rio de Janeiro. It featured a fantastic midrange but my personal overall enjoyment was somewhat marred by a bass, that had transformed itself from “arid” to slow and “wooly”.

Some owners fiddled with the nozzle screens (they took them off, bluntly), which sent the upper midrange screaming while the bass remained the same…as documented by co-blogger Durwood in this article. This fix did not work.

BQEYZ followed up with the Spring 2, which I did not audition, however co-bloggers Loomis and Durwood analyzed both “Springs”, and they still reported a slow bass in the “2” [here].

Most recently, BQEYZ replaced their Spring line with the lower-priced $129 “Summer” model that still carries the Springs’ 3-driver tradition including a piezo tweeter. And – spoiler alert – the bass is now fixed, but the new PU+ LCP [“Liquid Crystal Polymer”] adds a completely different and very appealing sonic lightness to the Summer which somewhat corresponds to the actual season of this name.

I find the BQEYZ Summer a very pleasant listen that is hard to compare to anything in the $50 to $200 price range. In other words, it is somewhat sonically unique in as much as its appearance is rather generic. Yes, gone is the metal flavour of that Chi-Fi era, the current trend is resin.

Specifications

Physical Things and Usability

Tonality and Technicalities

Equipment used: MacBook Air + Earstudio HUD100 (bypass filter); iPhone SE (1st gen.) & AudioQuest DragonFly Red; black stock tips.

The BQEYZ Summer comes with two sets of tips, the blue “bassier” ones, and the black “neutral” ones. I prefer the black ones as they bring out the midrange better. But I could not get meaningful measurements with the black tips owing to their thin membrane. The graph shown here likely exaggerates that 9 kHz spike. I also added a measurement with my standard tips I use for all measurements for reasons of consistency.

Measurements repeated with JK's Standard Eartips

[collapse]

In a nutshell: the Summer is a homogeneous sounding, slightly warm earphone with well-measured dynamics across the frequency spectrum and excellent vocals reproduction that lead to my listening enjoyment, despite a few technical shortcomings.

Yes, although the Summer does not have much in common with the BQEYZ Spring (don’t know the Spring 2), it preserves it excellent vocals reproduction. The money is clearly in the midrange, characterized by well sculptured, full, well composed, and natural voices. Great note definition. Not a hint of shoutiness, but this also means some lack of energy in some situations, the usual tradeoff. Very appealing, overall.

BQEYZ addressed the slow, wooly bass in their Spring models and sped it up a bit. It is well extended into the sub-bass, still not the tightest or best textured one, could have some more kick, but it is also not in the way of the vocals anymore and molds well around the midrange. Bass is not boomy and not too punchy in any way, and both low end and midrange receive a glaze of smoothness and pleasantry from the well-dosed (macro)dynamics and relatively realistic transients (of the BA drivers) that make for a very appealing, delightful and fatigue-free listening over longer periods. Great iems to “chill” with.

Nothing scratches or pierces…and this includes the treble despite the weird 8-10 kHz peak in the frequency response graphs. I don’t hear it (but it is not a coupler resonances either). The steep drop in the upper treble may explain the occasional lack of air and sheen in busy passages. The treble is a bit of a mixed bag, sonically. Cymbals are somewhat elegantly reserved and could be crisper, considering the piezo at work whereas the highest octaves, let’s say of a violin are well imaged, never grainy, but also not particularly smooth.

Timbre is ok for a hybrid, but other technicalities are only average: the stage can be crowded with many musicians and does not allow much space between them. Separation and layering are, however, pretty good with fewer musicians at work. Microdynamics (“the little things”), midrange resolution/clarity, and note definition are also average. Stage is wide and tall, not the deepest but spatial cues is good.

In summary, the value of the BQEYZ Summer is in its smoothness, homogeneity, and composition.

In comparison to the elegantly modest Summer, the BQEYZ Spring 1 was much thicker at the low end [as said, I don’t know the Spring 2]. The $80 single DD Whizzer Kylin HE01 is more fun and exuberant, and the $80 Moondrop Aria (which inherits the Spring’s metal shell type) is tighter in the bass and more articulate in the midrange but also a bit peakier in the treble and with a less expansive but deeper stage, and therefore not as smooth and easy as the Summer.

The BQEYZ was kindly provided by BQEYZ and I thank them for that. Get the Summer from BQEYZ Official Store. Here our generic standard disclaimer.

Concluding Remarks

After having tested so many earphones, the BQEYZ Summer is one of a kind, something new to my ears, one of the most “chilled” listens I have experienced [I credit Thomas Smallman for this attribute]. I am really enjoying these earphones for their lightness and pleasantries in every respect.

As Frank Sinatra sang back in 1960: “Nice ‘N’ Easy does it!”

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

All Our 250 Earphone and Earbud Reviews (with Links)

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

Gallery

The post BQEYZ Summer Review (1) – Nice ‘N’ Easy Does It appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Introduction

The world of portable music changed forever with the arrival of the first iPod in 2001. But it took earphone manufacturers beyond the 2008 release of the first iPhone to offer some premium alternatives to the stock buds at a grand scale. And where are we today in terms of iems? Yes, more or less saturated.

With the advent of the AudioQuest DragonFly Black v1.5 portable headphone amp/dac in 2016, any smartphone could be upgraded to a premium music player (albeit some dap fans may disagree). v1.5 was the first “dongle” to draw so little current that it could be sourced by a phone’s battery (and it still leads the pack in this respect, jointly with the Dragonfly Red).

Again, it took a while for manufacturers catch on, but the market is currently flooded with tens of models so that it is difficult to keep the overview.

Purpose of this Guide

This writeup is foremost a small encyclopedia for my own comparison purposes and will always be work in progress. Feel free to bookmark this page and come back from time to time. I do not claim that it offers complete information – and it is highly subjective as it caters to my personal preferences.

In the future, I will not only add more models but also update and refine the individual entries. I hope it will grow into a representative database with time.

In Q1 2020, mostly by coincidence, I started having a closer look at dongles – and analyzed some. I focused on listening while ignoring tech specs and chip models as manufacturers report amplification power inconsistently…and not always correctly. All of the models tested work even with my power hungry 300 Ω Sennheiser HD 600 headphones, so the details are irrelevant for my daily usage.

In this guide, I also do not worry about special features offered in the individual models, build, drivers, digital filters, Hi Res decoding, or operation…which is your homework. All I focus on in my descriptions is perceived sound quality. But I care about battery consumption – we don’t want to run out of “juice” on the road – which is listed independently below.

Note: when looking at a dongle, don’t forget one of its main purposes: preserving portability. Fixed cables (typically with USB-c connector) can be awkward for use with iPhones and may result in cable snakes. And good adapters are pricey and cumbersome. I am hesitant with dongles featuring fixed cables – and for good reasons.

If you have tested these models and arrive at a different opinion, please drop a line in the comments section.

Spoiler alert: I identified clear trends in my results that are not surprising:

• The pricier models sound better, sorry for the lack of fantasy. No, they may not have stronger amplification or better features but they sound better.
• It is the other way round with value: the cheaper models offer better bang for the buck.

But to keep you happy: all of the models currently tested are very good in their own way and and each one of them is worthy to be used even with premium iems. Yep, I am mainly evaluating these dongles with iems (and not headphones): both are most portable.

When it comes to value, I intuitively compare to what you get in terms of iem for your money…and feel the dongles fare generally better. Nevertheless do many believe, a good dongle should not cost more than $100.

Equipment used: MacBook Air; BQEYZ Summer (32 Ω), Sennnheiser IE300/400 (16Ω)…this list will also grow to consolidate my findings.

The Lineup

I have no humour and arrange my list according to price from high to low.

AudioQuest DragonFly Cobalt ($300)

US design. The smoothie of the dongle world and the dongle with the best sound quality by a long shot. Has simply the biggest note weight, most natural/organic sonic reproduction, and best musicality. It is not its power or resolution or staging that puts it ahead (by $100), it just sounds better. Voices are richer and fuller compared to the other models below.

For people who do not want to make compromises. Received criticism for being overpriced by people looking at the specs/measurements only. You pay for the sound quality, not sound quantity. Output is the same as in the DragonFly Red. Review.

AudioQuest DragonFly Red ($200)

Is somewhat more dynamic and edgier than the Cobalt. In fact, it is the most dynamic dongle I have tested. The most visceral of this lineup. Both DragonFlys have a slight bass boost compared to the other models. Vocals are still richer and fuller than in the Sparrow and HUD 100, but not as smooth as in the Cobalt, which is simply richer sounding. Has by far the smallest battery draw of the lineup. Review.

EarMen Sparrow ($200)

European design. Features two circuits (3.5 mm single ended and 2.5 mm balanced) of which the balanced excels and offers the widest staging and biggest headroom of the competition, beating both DragonFlys in this respect (you need a balanced cable to use this circuit). But the midrange reproduction is not quite a rich as in the DragonFly Red…though pretty impressive. Natural sound.

The Sparrow is more linear, less bassy, and less punchy than the Red and cleaner through the whole frequency range. Review.

EarMen Eagle ($130)

Features essentially the same sound as the Sparrow’s single-ended circuit. Less bassy and with slightly leaner vocals department than the DragonFly Red. Comes close to the “Red” in terms of sound quality, but has a substantially higher battery drain. Natural sound. The lowest-price premium sounding dongle imo. Review.

Earstudio HUD100 ($120)

Korean design. Offers two single-ended circuits with different output powers and three digital filters (I used the “bypass” filter for testing). A bit less dynamic than the Sparrow but very linear with no elevations and a nice wide, stage.

The HUD100 is the most polite of the lot, which is a good thing for taming punchy iems. Received a lot of flack on drop.com for being overpriced, which is simply not warranted. It is the best deal of this selection and worth every penny imo.

Gains richness and depth with the AudioQuest Jitterbug FMJ. HUD100 Review.

This is only a start. There are some upscale favourites that were highly recommended to me such as the Luxury & Precision W2 and the Lotoo Paw S1…but I have yet to get my hands on these. Co-blogger KopiOkaya auditioned these and let me know that they sound technically good but not musically good , and that the DragonFly Cobalt (he bought one in Q1 2021) sounds more natural.

Power Consumption

This is an important aspect when using the dongle on the go. The DragonFly Red wins the “power saving” contest comfortably.

Power Consumption Test: Parameters and 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]

Sneak Peak into the <$100 Realm

That’s where the biggest crowding is, currently, although it appears to shift toward the $150 – $200 category with the recent releases by interesting companies (Astell & Kern, Razer…). Of the sub-$100 dongles I can really only offer the Shanling UA2 right now, which is not any less powerful than the >$100 models listed above, sounds natural, features a second balanced circuit and the same dac chip as the DragonFly Cobalt (and even more power).

But where it falls short in comparison even to the (admittedly much pricier) Earstudio HUD 100 is its less linear response, particularly its leaner, sharper midrange and elevated bass.

This is in line with my observations that the more expensive models offer a richer, thicker, fuller, smoother sound. That said the Shanling UA2 offers tremendous value alone for its natural sound. Review.

Concluding Remarks

My preliminary observations (based on the few available data points) appear to correlate somewhat with desktop equipment: more money buys you a better sounding dac. But where it does not compare well is the amp part, at least in terms of power. You can get a lot for less in this respect. Your choice will depend on your budget and personal preference.

Oh, and the EarMen Eagle is about to arrive for analysis. And the Helm Bolt is also somewhere in limbo.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

The post A Simplified Personal Guide To Small Portable Headphone DAC/Amps ($100-300) v0.9 appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Cons — Midrange attenuation; high battery drain from phone.

Executive Summary

The Shanling UA2 is a slightly off-neutral, rather natural sounding, and very powerful portable DAC/amp with good dynamics that features single-ended and balanced outputs at a budget pice. Compared to some of its much more expensive rivals, the UA2 has a leaner midrange while being competitive in terms of power.

Introduction

Shanling is a Chinese HiFi company established in 1988. They hit the western markets in the early 2000s with premium amplifiers at very competitive prices. At the time, while working in China, I talked to them about getting a 110 V version of one of their famous tube CD-players manufactured. This, unfortunately, failed because of export regulations.

More than half a generation later – Shanling has long established itself as a quality player and brand name around the world – I finally try my first Shanling product, the UA2 Portable USB DAC/Amp. And TL;DR, it is a good one.

Shanling is currently joining an army of companies populating the market with portable dac/amps that turn you phone into a dap. In this ever more crowded field, where the potential buyer cannot try before buying, reviewers like me have to provide the overview. But since it is impossible to test all interesting products, you have to check out a few qualified opinions before pulling the trigger.

Specifications

Physical Things and Usability

In the box are the UA2, a USB-C to USB-C cable, and a USB-C to USB-A adapter. The UA2 body is made of metal and its coating feels smooth and appealing between my fingers.

In contrast to most other dongles does the UA2 offers two different circuits: a single-ended output through a standard 3.5 mm socket and a balanced output through a 2.5 mm socket. Both outputs/sockets work simultaneously. And it is the balanced output that makes the UA2 particularly attractive.

The two headphone sockets are on end, a USB-C port on one the other: the 3.5 mm single-ended socket is reinforced with a thick metal ring in expectation of the higher usage of the two.

There is a little LED light between them indicating sampling rate and connection to a gaming console.

Functionality and Operation

A summary of what it does

• Can be connected to Windows/Mac computers or Android/iOS sources
• Works as a pre-amplifier or dac when connected to a dedicated headphone amplifier
• Features two circuits: 3.5 mm single ended and 2.5 mm balanced
• Drives two earphones/headphones simultaneously through its two outputs
• Drives small loudspeakers through its 3.5 mm output
• Handles even power-hungry headphones well, imo up to 300 Ω

…and of what it does not

• …needs no battery; draws power from source…and lots of it
• …is not driverless: needs a USB driver for Window computer (download)
• …needs an Apple camera adapter or other third-party lightning cable for connecting to an iOS device

The Shanling UA2 has only a single button that serves the purpose of enabling a connected gaming console. It is powered and operated from the source device and decodes Hi Res up to 32 bit/768 kHz and DSD 512.

Shanling are offering their free Eddict player companion app that allows fine tuning the UA2 (and other Shanling products) with Android and iOS devices.

Amplification and Power Management

The Shanling UA2 is powerful. It delivers 125mW @ 32 ohm (single ended) and 195mW @ 32 ohm (balanced) according to the manufacturer. Even the single-ended circuit drives my 300 ohm Sennheiser HD 600 reasonably well.

But the UA2 consumes a lot of battery – twice as much as the AudioQuest DragonFly Black/Red. This makes it less beneficial for mobile use. You certainly need a big battery.

Power Consumption Test: Parameters and 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]

But hold the horses. This is not as bad as you think. Co-blogger Alberto Pittaluga actually likes this drain. But why? For him it is a matter of choices. The Shanling UA2 pushes more current than its competition, which drives low-impedance and low-sensitivity headphones and iems better. After all, transducers are moved by current.

Sound

Equipment used: Macbook Air/iPhone SE first generation; Sennheiser HD 600 / HD 25, Shozy Form 1.4, Meze RAI Solo, BQEYZ Summer.

The Shanling UA2 offers a relatively natural, well rounded, dynamic, appealing sound, but could deserve a richer midrange.

Its sound is slightly off linear and off neutral by a slight bass boost that improves the sound of anemic earphones/headphones, keeps the sound away from sterile, and it adds depth. But, in some earphones, it can also narrow the soundstage and smear into the lower midrange/vocals, which adversely affects separation. The bass rumble becomes weaker under higher impedance loads.

What distinguishes the UA2 from its more expensive competition is not its amplification power…it is its attenuated, recessed, thin and occasionally sharp midrange (in comparison) that is evident in both single-ended and balanced circuits.

Vocals are set back in the UA2 but they are also a bit lean and pointy, they could be smoother, richer, and more intimate. This attenuation may exacerbate shoutiness in some earphones and moves the bass into focus.

But this is very-high level criticism with perfection as reference. The overall sound is dynamic with a good punch, it is not edgy at the upper end and comes off as pleasant during normal recreational listening (I was listening “analytically” for this review).

I assign good musicality and liveliness to the Shanling UA2, it is not technical, sterile, or boring sounding. Overall, the UA2 is more homogenous and natural sounding than the $40 Tempotec Sonata HD PRO or the $70 Tempotec BHD.

The UA2’s balanced circuit does not only deliver more power than the single-ended one, but also a marginally wider and deeper soundstage, improved dynamics and separation, and more intimacy. But it is still affected by the lean midrange.

When comparing the UA2 – I only had more expensive models available – they all rank sonically according to their price. The $120 Earstudio HUD 100 was more linear and cleaner at the bottom end with a wider stage and a headroom similar to the UA2’s balanced circuit’s. This also applied to the $199 EarMen Sparrow (balanced circuit) and $199 Audioquest DragonFly Red but with improved resolution added. The DragonFly Red reproduced voices richer, cleaner, and more intimate.

None of the higher-priced models with single-ended outputs has less headroom than the UA2’s balanced circuit – but also not necessarily more power. This also applies to the AudioQuest DragonFly Cobalt, the smoothest and most natural of them all. More in this video:

Concluding Remarks

To pack my testing results in a single sentence: the $85 Shanling UA2 is a $200 dongle with a thinner midrange. No it does not quite rival, let’s say, the more homogenous DragonFly Red or the EarMen Sparrow sonically, but it offers better value while still sounding very good.

I heard it. Can’t get anything better for $85. Larry Fulton, co-blogger.

Considering the current uber offer of portable DAC/amps in the $100 category, I surely will be asked how the UA2 compares to X, Y, and Z at a similar price. While I cannot answer this question, I speculate its sound quality is hard to beat in its class, and claim that the UA2 is a great choice.

It feels good, is well accessorized, sounds organic, it has two powerful circuits – and also works with portable gaming consoles. And it is a brand-name product with R&D behind it. Is it the new $100 one to beat? Time will tell.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

Disclaimer

The UA2 was provided by Shanling and I think them for that. Shanling also kindly included a third-party USB-C to lightning adapter.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

The post Shanling UA2 Portable USB DAC/Amp Review – Crazy For You appeared first on Music For The Masses.

All Our Earphone-related Articles: here

ALL OUR REVIEWS (headphones, earphones, dacs/amps, daps, bluetooth, clean power & USB, microphones, cables/adapters, eartips, earpads, noise insulation): here

Models labelled with “*” are on our Wall of Excellence.

April additions: TRN BAX PRO ,Creative Aurvana Ace 2, CCA Rhapsody.

March additions: TRN Conch, Simgot EA1000.

February additions: Truthear X Crinacle Zero Red, Oladance OWS Sports, Simgot EA500, Sennheiser IE 600.

Reviews in Alphabetical Order:

1. 7Hz Timeless (1) (Alberto Pittaluga)
2. 7Hz Timeless (2) (Durwood)
3. 7Hz Timeless (3) (Loomis Johnson)
4. Acefast T8 (Kazi Mahbub Mutakabbir)
5. Acoustic Effect TRY-01 (Baskingshark)
6. AFUL Performer 5 (Jürgen Kraus)
7. Akoustyx R-220 (Jürgen Kraus)
8. Akoustyx S6 (1) (Jürgen Kraus)
9. Akoustyx S6 (2) (Alberto Pittaluga)
10. AME Custom Argent Hybrid Electrostatic (Jürgen Kraus)
11. Anew X-One (Jürgen Kraus)
12. Anker Soundcore Liberty Pro 2 (Loomis Johnson)
13. Astrotec AM850 MK2 (Jürgen Kraus)
14. Astrotec Vesna (Jürgen Kraus)
15. Audbos/Tenzh P4 Pro (Loomis Johnson)
16. Audiosense DT200 (1) (Baskingshark)
17. Audiosense DT200 (2) (KopiOkaya)
18. Aune Jasper (1) (Loomis Johnson)
19. Aune Jasper (2) (Jürgen Kraus)
20. AXS Audio Professional Wireless Earbuds (Loomis Johnson)
21. BCD X10 (Loomis Johnson)
22. Beyerdynamic Soul Byrd (Jürgen Kraus)
23. BGVP DM9 (Durwood)
24. Beats Powerbeats Pro TWS (Loomis Johnson)
25. Blon A8 Prometheus (1) (Loomis Johnson)
26. Blon A8 Prometheus (2) (Durwood)
27. Blon Bl-01 (1) (Baskingshark)
28. Blon BL-01 (2) (Alberto Pittaluga)
29. Blon BL-03* (1) (Jürgen Kraus)
30. Blon BL-03* (2) (Loomis Johnson)
31. Blon BL-05 (1) (Baskingshark)
32. BLON BL-05 (2) (Loomis Johnson)
33. Blon BL-05s (1) (Jürgen Kraus)
34. Blon BL-05s (2) (Kazi Mahbub Mutakabbir)
35. Blon BL-05s (3) (Baskingshark)
36. Blon BL-Max (Kazi Muhbab Mutakabbir)
37. Blon Mini (Baskingshark)
38. Brainwavz Delta (Jürgen Kraus)
39. Brainwavz Koel (Jürgen Kraus, Biodegraded)
40. BQEYZ Autumn (1) (Jürgen Kraus)
41. BQEYZ Autumn (2) (Kazi Muhbab Mutakabbir)
42. BQEYZ KC2 (Jürgen Kraus)
43. BQEYZ Spring 1 (1) (Durwood)
44. BQEYZ Spring 1 (2) (Loomis Johnson)
45. BQEYZ Spring 1 (3) (Jürgen Kraus)
46. BQEYZ Spring 2 (1) (Durwood)
47. BQEYZ Spring 2 (2) (Loomis Johnson)
48. BQEYZ Summer (1) (Jürgen Kraus)
49. BQEYZ Summer (2) (Alberto Pittaluga)
50. BQEYZ Topaz (Kazi Muhbab Mutakabbir)
51. Cambridge Audio Melomania 1 (Loomis Johnson)
52. Campfire Audio Ara (Alberto Pittaluga)
53. Cambridge Audio SE1 (Loomis Johnson)
54. Campfire Audio Andromeda 2020 (Alberto Pittaluga)
55. Campfire Audio Honeydew (Kazi Muhbab Mutakabbir)
56. Campfire Audio Satsuma (Kazi Muhbab Mutakabbir)
57. Cat Ear Mia (1) (Loomis Johnson)
58. Cat Ear Mia (2) (Durwood)
59. Cat Ear Mia (3) (Kazi Mahbub Mutakabbir)
60. Cayin Fantasy (Jürgen Kraus)
61. CCA C10 (Slater)
62. CCA C10 (Loomis Johnson)
63. CCA C10 Pro (1) (Durwood)
64. CCA C10 Pro (2) (Baskinghark)
65. CCA CA16 (1) (Durwood)
66. CCA CA16 (2) (Loomis Johnson)
67. CCA CKX (Durwood)
68. CCA CRA+ (Durwood)
69. CCA CX4 Wireless (Loomis Johnson)
70. CCA Duo (1) (Jürgen Kraus)
71. CCA Duo (2) (Durwood)
72. CCA Lyra (1) (Durwood)
73. CCA Lyra (2) (Loomis Johnson)
74. CCA Rhapsody (Jürgen Kraus)
75. CCZ Plume (Baskingshark)
76. Celest Pandamon (Jürgen Kraus)
77. Cozoy Hera C103 (Jürgen Kraus)
78. Creative Aurvana Ace 2 (Durwood)
79. CVJ CS8 (Baskingshark)
80. ddHiFi Janus1 (E2020A) (Jürgen Kraus)
81. ddHiFi Janus2 (E2020B) (Jürgen Kraus)
82. ddHiFi Janus3 (E2023) Jürgen Kraus
83. Donner Dobuds One (Kazi Mahbub Mutakabbir)
84. Drop Grell TWS1X (Darin Hawbaker)
85. Drop Grell TWS1X (2) Loomis Johnson
86. Drop + JVC HA-FDX1* (1) (Jürgen Kraus)
87. Drop + JVC HA FDX1* (2) (Loomis Johnson)
88. Dunu DM-380 (Jürgen Kraus)
89. Dunu DM-480 (Baskingshark)
90. Dunu Falcon Pro (Alberto Pittaluga)
91. Dunu Kima (Kazi Muhbab Mutakabbir)
92. Dunu Luna (1) (Kazi Mahbub Mutakabbir)
93. Dunu Luna (2) (Baskinghark)
94. Dunu Studio SA6* (Kazi Mahbub Mutakabbir)
95. Dunu Talos (Jürgen Kraus)
96. Dunu Vulkan (Jürgen Kraus)
97. Dunu Zen* (1) (Kazi Mahbub Mutakabbir)
98. Dunu Zen* (2) (Jürgen Kraus)
99. DZAT DR-25 (Jürgen Kraus)
100. Earstudio HE100 (Jürgen Kraus)
101. Earsonics AERØ (Jürgen Kraus)
102. Earsonics ONYX (Kazi Mahbub Mutakabbir)
103. Einsear T2 (Loomis Johnson)
104. Elevoc Clear (Loomis Johnson)
105. Etymotic E2XR (Loomis Johnson)
106. EZAudio D4 (Jürgen Kraus)
107. FAAEAL Datura Pro (Baskingshark)
108. FIIL CC2 (Kazi Mahbub Mutakabbir)
109. FIIL T1XS TWS (Loomis Johnson)
110. FiiO FA1 (Loomis Johnson)
111. FiiO FD1 (Jürgen Kraus)
112. FiiO FH1s (Jürgen Kraus)
113. Fiitii HiFi Air 2 (Durwood)
114. Fiitii HifiDots (Durwood)
115. Final Audio A3000* (Alberto Pittaluga)
116. Final Audio A5000 (Alberto Pittaluga)
117. Final Audio B3 (Alberto Pittaluga)
118. Final Audio E3000* (Baskingshark)
119. Final Audio E-Series Roundup (Kazi Mahbub Mutakabbir)
120. Final Audio F7200 (Alberto Pittaluga)
121. Final Audio ZE3000 (English) (Jürgen Kraus)
122. Final Audio ZE3000 (Japanese) (Jürgen Kraus)
123. Geek Wold GK10 (1) (Baskingshark)
124. Geek Wold GK10 (2) (Loomis Johnson)
125. Gravastar Sirius Pro TWS (Alberto Pittaluga)
126. Hidizs MD4 (Durwood)
127. Hidizs MM2 (1) (Jürgen Kraus)
128. Hidizs MM2 (2) (Kazi Mahbub Mutakabbir)
129. Hidizs MP145 (1) (Durwood)
130. Hidizs MP145 (2) (Loomis Johnson)
131. Hidizs MS1 Rainbow (1) (Durwood)
132. Hidizs MS1 Rainbow (2) (Loomis Johnson)
133. Hidizs MS3 (1) (Durwood)
134. Hidizs MS3 (2) (Loomis Johnson)
135. Hidizs MS5 (1) (Durwood)
136. Hidizs MS5 (2) (Alberto Pittaluga)
137. Hidizs MS5 (3) (Kazi Mahbub Mutakabbir)
138. Hifi Walker A1 (Jürgen Kraus, Biodegraded)
139. Hill Audio Altair • RA (Jürgen Kraus)
140. Hill Audio S8 (Jürgen Kraus)
141. Hisenior B5 (Loomis Johnson)
142. Hisenior Okavango (Kazi Mahbub Mutakabbir)
143. HZ Sound Heart Mirror (1) (Baskingshark)
144. HZ Sound Heart Mirror (2) (KopiOkaya)
145. iBasso IT00 (Baskingshark)
146. iBasso IT00/Tin Hifi T2 Plus/Moondrop Starfield comparison (Durwood)
147. iBasso IT04 (Alberto Pittaluga)
148. iBasso IT07 (Alberto Pittaluga)
149. Ikko OH1 (Jürgen Kraus)
150. Ikko OH1S (1) (Alberto Pittaluga)
151. Ikko OH1S (2) (Jürgen Kraus)
152. IKKO OH5 Asgard (Alberto Pittaluga)
153. Ikko OH10* (1) (Alberto Pittaluga)
154. Ikko OH10* (2) Jürgen Kraus
155. IKKO OH2 (Jürgen Kraus)
156. Intime Miyabi (Alberto Pittaluga)
157. Intime Miyabi (Italian) (Alberto Pittaluga)
158. Intime Miyabi (Japanese) (Alberto Pittaluga)
159. Intime Sora 2 (Alberto Pittaluga)
160. Intime Sho DD (Alberto Pittaluga)
161. ISN Audio Rambo (Jürgen Kraus)
162. KBEAR Aurora (1) (Baskingshark)
163. KBEAR Aurora (2) (Durwood)
164. KBEAR Aurora (3) (Loomis Johnson)
165. KBEAR Believe (1) (Jürgen Kraus)
166. KBEAR Believe (2) (Baskingshark)
167. KBEAR Believe (3) (Kazi Mahbub Mutakabbir)
168. KBEAR Believe (4) (Loomis Johnson)
169. KBEAR Diamond in Japanese (Jürgen Kraus)
170. KBEAR Diamond (1) (Jürgen Kraus)
171. KBEAR Diamond (2) (Loomis Johnson)
172. KBEAR Diamond (3) (Christophe Branchereau)
173. KBEAR Diamond modding (Biodegraded)
174. KBEAR hi7 (Jürgen Kraus)
175. KBEAR KB04 (1) (Loomis Johnson)
176. KBEAR KB04 (2) (Baskingshark)
177. KBEAR KB04 (3) (Jürgen Kraus)
178. KBEAR KS1 (Baskingshark)
179. KBEAR KS2 (1) J ürgen Kraus)
180. KBEAR KS2 (2) (Baskingshark)
181. KBEAR KS2 (3 (Loomis Johnson)
182. KBEAR Neon (1) (Baskingshark)
183. KBEAR Neon (2) (Kazi Muhbab Mutakabbir)
184. KBEAR Lark (Jürgen Kraus)
185. KBEAR Qinglong (Jürgen Kraus)
186. KBEAR Robin (Baskingshark)
187. KBEAR Rosefinch (Jürgen Kraus)
188. KBEAR TRI I3 Pro (Jürgen Kraus)
189. KBEAR TRI Starsea (1) (Kopiokaya)
190. KBEAR TRI Starsea (2) (Baskingshark)
191. Kefine Klanar (Durwood)
192. Kinboofi MK4 (Jürgen Kraus, Biodegraded)
193. Kinera BD005 Pro (Baskingshark)
194. Kinera Hodur (Alberto Piitaluga)
195. Kinera Idun 2.0 (1) (Durwood)
196. Kinera Idun 2.0 (2 (Loomis Johnson)
197. Kiwi Cadenza (Durwood)
198. Kiwi Ears Orchestra Lite (Kazi Mahbub Mutakabbir)
199. Kiwi Ears Quintet (Kazi Muhbab Mutakabbir)
200. Klipsch T5 II TWS Sport (Loomis Johnson)
201. Knowlege Zenith AS24 (Standard Version) (Jürgen Kraus)
202. Knowledge Zenith AS24 (Tunable Version) (Durwood)
203. Knowledge Zenith ASF (Kazi Mahbub Mutakabbir)
204. Knowledge Zenith ASX (1) (Jürgen Kraus)
205. Knowledge Zenith ASX (2) (Loomis Johnson)
206. Knowlege Zenith F-Fi (Kazi Mahbub Mutakabbir)
207. Knowledge Zenith ED9 (Loomis Johnson)
208. Knowledge Zenith ED16 (1) (Jürgen Kraus)
209. Knowledge Zenith ED16 (2) (Loomis Johnson)
210. Knowledge Zenith EDX (Jürgen Kraus)
211. Knowledge Zenith ESX (Durwood)
212. Knowledge Zenith Ling Long (Jürgen Kraus)
213. Knowledge Zenith VXS Pro TWS (Durwood)
214. Knowledge Zenith ZEX (1) (Kazi Mahbub Mutakabbir)
215. Knowledge Zenith ZEX (2) (Durwood)
216. Knowledge Zenith ZEX (3) (Alberto Pittaluga)
217. Knowledge Zenith ZSN (Loomis Johnson)
218. Knowledge Zenith ZSN Pro (Slater)
219. Knowledge Zenith ZSN Pro X (Jürgen Kraus)
220. Knowledge Zenith ZS4 (Loomis Johnson)
221. Knowledge Zenith ZS7 (Loomis Johnson)
222. Knowledge Zenith ZS10 (Jürgen Kraus, Biodegraded)
223. Knowledge Zenith ZS10 Pro (Loomis Johnson)
224. Knowledge Zenith ZSX Terminator (Loomis Johnson)
225. Knowledge Zenith ZVX (Jürgen Kraus)
226. K’s Earphone Bell-LBs (Alberto Pittaluga)
227. K’s Earphone K300 (Alberto Pittaluga)
228. LETSHUOER Conductor (Biodegraded)
229. LETSHUOER DZ4 (Jürgen Kraus)
230. LETSHUOER EJ07M (Jürgen Kraus)
231. LETSHUOER EJ09 (Biodegraded)
232. LETSHUOER S12 vs. 7Hz Timeless (Jürgen Kraus)
233. Lker i8 (Jürgen Kraus)
234. Lypertek Tevi L3 Powerplay (Loomis Johnson)
235. LZ A2 (Jürgen Kraus)
236. LZ A7 (Baskinghark)
237. MEE Audio Pinnacle P2 (Loomis Johnson)
238. Meze 12 Classics V2 (Kazi Mahbub Mutakabbir)
239. Meze RAI Penta (Kazi Mahbbub Mutakabbir)
240. Meze RAI Solo (Jürgen Kraus)
241. Mifo S TWS (Loomis Johnson)
242. Moondrop Alice (1) (Durwood)
243. Moondrop Alice (2) Loomis Johnson
244. Moondrop Aria (1) Jürgen Kraus)
245. Moondrop Aria (2) Kazi Muhbab Mutakabbir)
246. Moondrop Aria SE (Kazi Muhbab Mutakabbir)
247. Moondrop x Crinacle Blessing2:Dusk (1) Jürgen Kraus)
248. Moondrop x Crinacle Blessing2:Dusk (2) Biodegraded
249. Moondrop CHU (1) (Kazi Mahbub Mutakabbir)
250. Moondrop CHU (2) (Alberto Pittaluga)
251. Moondrop CHU (3) Jürgen Kraus)
252. Moondrop Crescent (Jürgen Kraus)
253. Moondrop Illumination (Jürgen Kraus)
254. Moondrop Kanas Pro (1) Biodegraded
255. Moondrop Kanas Pro (2) (Jürgen Kraus)
256. Moondrop Kanas Pro (3) Loomis Johnson
257. Moondrop KATO (Jürgen Kraus)
258. Moondrop Lan (1) (Durwood)
259. Moondrop Lan (2) (Loomis Johnson)
260. Moondrop May (Durwood)
261. Moondrop Quarks (Kazi Mahbub Mutakabbir)
262. Moondrop Spaceship (Jürgen Kraus)
263. Moondrop Space Travel (1) (Jürgen Kraus)
264. Moondrop Space Travel (2) (Loomis Johnson)
265. Moondrop SSP (Jürgen Kraus)
266. Moondrop SSR (1) Jürgen Kraus
267. Moondrop SSR (2) (Baskingshark)
268. Moondrop Starfield (1) (Jürgen Kraus)
269. Moondrop Starfield (2) Loomis Johnson
270. Moondrop Starfield (3) (Durwood)
271. Moondrop Starfield II (1) (Durwood)
272. Moondrop Starfield II (2) (Loomis Johnson)
273. Moondrop Stellaris (Jürgen Kraus)
274. Naenka LITE Pro TWS (Loomis Johnson)
275. NF Audio NM (Kazi Mahbub Mutakabbir)
276. NF Audio NM2+ (1) (Jürgen Kraus)
277. NF Audio NM2+ (2) Loomis Johnson
278. NiceHCK Bro (Jürgen Kraus)
279. NiceHCK DB1 (Jürgen Kraus)
280. NiceHCK DB3 (Jürgen Kraus)
281. NiceHCK DT600 (Jürgen Kraus)
282. NiceHCK EB2 (Jürgen Kraus)
283. NiceHCK EB2S (Jürgen Kraus)
284. NiceHCK EBX21 (Baskingshark)
285. NiceHCK EP10 (Jürgen Kraus)
286. NiceHCK EP35 (Jürgen Kraus)
287. NiceHCK F1 (Jürgen Kraus)
288. NiceHCK Lofty (Jürgen Kraus)
289. NiceHCK HK6 (Loomis Johnson)
290. NiceHCK M5 (Jürgen Kraus)
291. NiceHCK M6 (1) (Jürgen Kraus)
292. NiceHCK M6 (2) (Loomis Johnson)
293. NiceHCK N3 (Loomis Johnson, Jürgen Kraus)
294. NiceHCK NX7 (1) (Loomis Johnson)
295. NiceHCK NX7 (2) (Jürgen Kraus)
296. NiceHCK NX7 Pro (Jürgen Kraus)
297. NiceHCK NX7 MK3 (1) (Loomis Johnson)
298. NiceHCK NX7 MK3 (2) (Jürgen Kraus)
299. NiceHCK NX7 MK4 (Jürgen Kraus)
300. NiceHCK P3 (Jürgen Kraus)
301. NiceHCK X49 (Jürgen Kraus)
302. Oladance OWS Pro (Jürgen Kraus)
303. Oladance OWS Sports (Durwood)
304. Oladance Wearable Stereo (Loomis Johnson)
305. Oneodio OpenRock Pro (Loomis Johnson)
306. Oriolus Isabellae (Jürgen Kraus)
307. Oriveti OH500 (Alberta Pittaluga)
308. Paiaudio DR2 (Jürgen Kraus)
309. Penon Fan 2 (Alberto Pittaluga)
310. PHB EM-023 (Jürgen Kraus)
311. Pioneer CH3 (Jürgen Kraus)
312. Queen of Audio Pink Lady (Jürgen Kraus)
313. Reecho Insects Awaken (Kazi Mahbub Mutakabbir)
314. RHA CL2 (Alberto Pittaluga)
315. Rose Mojito (Alberto Pittaluga)
316. Rose Technics QT9 MK2S (1) (Jürgen Kraus)
317. Rose Technics QT9 MK2S (2) (Kazi Mahbub Mutakabbir)
318. Samsung Galaxy Buds Live (Loomis Johnson)
319. Samsung Galaxy Buds Plus (Loomis Johnson)
320. SeeAudio Bravery (1) (Loomis Johnson)
321. SeeAudio Bravery (2) (Baskingshark)
322. Semkarch CNT1 (Loomis Johnson)
323. Senfer DT6 (1) (Jürgen Kraus)
324. Senfer DT6 (2) (Loomis Johnson)
325. Senfer UEs/NiceHCK Bro (Loomis Johnson, Jürgen Kraus)
326. Sennheiser CX 400BT (Loomis Johnson)
327. Sennheiser IE 40/400/500 PRO compared (Jürgen Kraus)
328. Sennheiser IE 40 PRO (Jürgen Kraus, Biodegraded)
329. Sennheiser IE 200* (Jürgen Kraus)
330. Sennheiser IE 300 (Jürgen Kraus)
331. Sennheiser IE 400 PRO (Jürgen Kraus)
332. Sennheiser IE 500 PRO (Jürgen Kraus, Biodegraded)
333. Sennheiser IE 600 (Jürgen Kraus)
334. Sennheiser IE 600 and IE 900 Counterfeits (Alberto Pittaluga)
335. Sennheiser IE 900* (1) (Alberto Pittaluga)
336. Sennheiser IE 900* (2) (Jürgen Kraus)
337. Sennheiser IE 900* (Deutsch) (Jürgen Kraus)
338. Shanling ME80 (Jürgen Kraus)
339. Shanling Sono (Durwood)
340. Shuoer Tape (Loomis Johnson)
341. Shozy Form 1.1 (Biodegraded)
342. Shozy Form 1.1 vs. Form 1.4 (Jürgen Kraus)
343. Shozy Form 1.4* (1) (Jürgen Kraus)
344. Shozy Form 1.4* (2) (Durwood)
345. Shozy Form 1.4* (3) (Loomis Johnson)
346. Shozy Rouge (1) (Loomis Johnson)
347. Shozy Rouge (2) (Durwood))
348. Shozy Rouge (3 (Jürgen Kraus)
349. Simgot EA500 (Alberto Pittaluga)
350. Simgot EA1000 (Alberto Pittaluga)
351. Simgot EM2 (Jürgen Kraus)
352. Simgot EM2 (Loomis Johnson)
353. Smabat M0 (Durwood)
354. Smabat M2 Pro (1) (Baskingshark)
355. Smabat M2 Pro (M2) (Jürgen Kraus)
356. Smabat Proto 1.0 (Alberto Pittaluga)
357. Smabat ST-10 (Jürgen Kraus)
358. Smabat X1 (1) (Baskingshark)
359. Smabat X1 (2 (Jürgen Kraus)
360. Sony MH755 (Jürgen Kraus)
361. Sony IER-ZR (Kazi Mahbub Mutakabbir)
362. Sony WX-1000XM3 (Loomis Johnson)
363. Soundpeats H1 (Loomis Johnson)
364. Soundpeats Opera (Kazi Mahbub Mutakabbir)
365. Status Audio Between Pro TWS (Loomis Johnson)
366. SuperEQ Q2 Pro ANC TWS (Loomis Johnson)
367. Tanchjim Blues (Jürgen Kraus)
368. Tanchjim Cora (Jürgen Kraus)
369. Tanchjim Darling (Aberto Pittaluga)
370. Tanchjim Ola (Loomis Johnson)
371. Tanchjim Oxygen* (Alberto Pittaluga)
372. Tanchjim Tanya (1) (Baskingshark)
373. Tanchjim Tanya (2) (Alberto Pittaluga)
374. Tangzu WAN ER (Jürgen Kraus)
375. Tansio Mirai TSMR-6 (Alberto Pittaluga)
376. TempoTec IM05 (Jürgen Kraus)
377. Tennmak Dulcimer (Loomis Johnson)
378. Tforce Yuan Li (1) (Durwood)
379. Tforce Yuan Li (2) (Loomis Johnson)
380. Tinaudio T1 (Jürgen Kraus)
381. Tinaudio T2 (Jürgen Kraus)
382. TINHIFI C2 Mech Warrior (Jürgen Kraus)
383. TINHIFI C3 (1) (Durwood)
384. TINHIFI C3 (2) (Jürgen Kraus)
385. TINHIFI C5 (1) (Durwood)
386. TINHIFI C5 (2) Loomis Johnson
387. TINHIFI P1 Max (Jürgen Kraus)
388. TINHIFI T2 DLC (Jürgen Kraus)
389. TINHIFI T2 EVO (Jürgen Kraus)
390. TINHIFI T2 Plus (1) Jürgen Kraus
391. TINHIFI T2 Plus (2) (Loomis Johnson)
392. TINHIFI T2 Plus (3) Durwood
393. TINHIFI T4 (1) (Durwood)
394. TINHIFI T4 (2) (Loomis Johnson)
395. TINHIFI T4 (3) (Jürgen Kraus)
396. TINHIFI T4 Plus (Jürgen Kraus)
397. TINHIFI T5 (Alberto Pittaluga)
398. TINHIFI Tin Buds 3 (Loomis Johnson)
399. Tinker TK300 (Baskingshark)
400. ToneKing Nine Tail (Loomis Johnson)
401. TOZO Golden X1 (Loomis Johnson)
402. Triaudio I3 (1) (Baskingshark)
403. Triaudio I3 (2) (Jürgen Kraus)
404. Triaudio I3 Modding (KopiOkaya)
405. Triaudio I4 (1) (KopiOkaya)
406. Triaudio I4 (2) (Loomis Johnson)
407. Triaudio Meteor (KopiOkaya)
408. Tripowin X HBB Olina (KopiOkaya)
409. Tripowin Leá (Jürgen Kraus)
410. TRN BA5 (1) (Durwood)
411. TRN BA5 (2) (Jürgen Kraus)
412. TRN BA5 (3) (Loomis Johnson)
413. TRN BA8 (1) (Baskingshark)
414. TRN BA8 (2) (Jürgen Kraus)
415. TRN BAX PRO (Jürgen Kraus)
416. TRN Conch (Durwood)
417. TRN Kirin (Alberto Pittaluga)
418. TRN ST5 (Looomis Johnson)
419. TRN-STM (1) (Loomis Johnson)
420. TRN-STM (2) (Baskingshark)
421. TRN-STM (3) (Durwood)
422. TRN T300 (1) (Baskingshark)
423. TRN T300 (2) (Loomis Johnson)
424. TRN T300 (3) (Alberto Pittaluga)
425. TRN V80 (Jürgen Kraus)
426. TRN V90 (1) (Durwood)
427. TRN V90 (2) (Jürgen Kraus)
428. TRN V90S (1) (Baskingshark)
429. TRN V90S (2) (Jürgen Kraus)
430. TRN VX (1) (Loomis Johnson)
431. TRN VX (2) (Baskingshark)
432. TRN VX (3) (Jürgen Kraus)
433. TRN-VX modding (KopiOkaya)
434. Tronsmart Apollo (Baskingshark)
435. Tronsmart Apollo Bold TWS ANC (Baskingshark)
436. Truthear Hexa (Durwood)
437. Truthear Hola (Durwood)
438. Truthear X Crinacle Zero (Kazi Muhbab Mutakabbir)
439. Truthear X Crinacle Zero Red (1) (Jürgen Kraus)
440. Truthear X Crinacle Zero Red (2) (Kazi Muhbab Mutakabbir)
441. Unique Melody 3DT (Jürgen Kraus)
442. Urbanfun YBF-ISS014 (Baskingshark)
443. Venture Electronics BIE Pro (Jürgen Kraus)
444. Venture Electronics Bonus IE (Jürgen Kraus)
445. Venture Electronics Monk Go (Jürgen Kraus)
446. Vision Ears Elysium* and VE8 (1) (Jürgen Kraus)
447. Vision Ears Elysium* and VE8 (2) (Biodegraded)
448. Vision Ears EXT (Jürgen Kraus)
449. Vision Ears Phönix (Jürgen Kraus)
450. Westone MACH 40 and MACH 60 (Kazi Muhbab Mutakabbir)
451. Whizzer BS1 (Jürgen Kraus)
452. Whizzer Kylin HE01 (1) Jürgen Kraus)
453. Whizzer Kylin HE01 (2) (Baskingshark)
454. Whizzer Kylin HE03AL (Jürgen Kraus)
455. Whizzer Kylin HE03D (1) (Durwood)
456. Whizzer Kylin HE03D (2) (Loomis Johnson)
457. Whizzer Kylin HE10 (Jürgen Kraus)
458. Yinyoo BK2 (Baskingshark)
459. Yinyoo D2B4 v2 (1) (Biodegraded)
460. Yinyoo D2B4 v2 (2) (Jürgen Kraus)
461. Yinyoo V2 (Jürgen Kraus)

Also check out our HEADPHONE REVIEWS

The post 461 Reviews – A World Class Earphone Database appeared first on Music For The Masses.