MACK’S ThermaFit Soft Foam Ear Plugs are barrel-shaped noise stoppers that work well for my large ear canals in terms of comfort, fit, and effectiveness. They are also well suited for Flents Quiet Please users who cannot handle their new formula.

I thank Mack’s for supplying their ThermaFit for my review upon my request – after I could not purchase them at a reasonable price in Canada.

Introduction

Noise is unwanted sound. Noise annoys as the Manchester punk outfit Buzzcocks sang in the late 1970s. My three closest neighbours have an air conditioner, one of them also a hot tub. The guy across the street runs 2-stroke engines 12 month a year, for gardening in the summer and snow clearing in the winter. It is buzzing at any time of the day in and around my house, and sadly also during the night. To add insult to injury, my wife developed snoring recently.

Sadly, I am very sensitive to noise. As a classically trained (but failed) musician, hearing training was part of my education. This hard-acquired sensitivity is backfiring now. The city does not help as their bylaws do not factor in many environmental noises and the resulting vibrations. The choices are moving, educating the neighbours…or dampen the sound by insulating my ear canals.

That’s what the old Greeks did with beeswax, wool, cotton etc. whatever worked. But it was a German guy, Max Negwer, as late as 1907, who produced the first commercial ear plugs “Ohropax” (ear peace), mainly made of wax. Classical musician (another one) Ray Benner and his wife Cecilia purchased Mckeon Products in 1962. The company sold only Mack’s moldable clay ear plugs, named after the company founder. The couple subsequently invented the moldable silicone ear plug, saving swimmers from ear infection.

Memory foam ear plugs followed in 1972, marketed by the Cabot Safety company. They are made from either polyvinyl chloride (PVC) or polyurethane. The disposable ear plugs were born and quickly occupied the drugstores. Memory foam is the most comfortable, optimally moulding, and best sound absorbing material to this date.

Today, many people rely on ear protection for sleep. Some have been subscribing to ear plugs for decades. Others need protection on job sites. For all of us, companies like Mack’s offer a broad range of ear plugs for all ear shapes and noise reduction levels.

Ear plugs come in different shapes, mainly conical/tapered or cylindrical/barrel shaped. I am only concerned with the barrel shaped ones as only these fit my large ear canals, namely Mack’s ThermaFit.

Until recently, the US market featured two memory foam darlings, the Flents Quiet Please and the Mack’s ThermaFit. In Canada, only the Flents were readily available. Recently, Flents changed suppliers and completely switched the product around: different shape, different comfort and fit, and different materials with different physical properties. Long-term subscribers went mad: they reported skin rash, lack of insulation, lack of hold etc. they felt deceived and betrayed.

Mack’s ThermaFit ear plugs come to the rescue. They are very similar to the original Flents Quiet Please. In this article we will have a good look at these.

Specifications MACK’s ThermaFit Soft Foam Earplugs

What makes a good Ear Plug?

People need ear plugs for all sorts of situations and environments, as discussed above. The plugs have to insulate properly (duh!!!) but also provide good comfort, fit, and breathability. They should be skin friendly and not trigger allergies. Important is their ability for long-term use. Many people have subscriptions with the supplier and have used the same product for decades. Product continuity means reliability and is therefore of utmost importance.

The Mack’s ThermaFit tick all these boxes.

How do the Mack’s ThermaFit perform?

Mack’s ThermaFit are made of porous PVC, in the USA. You can see that the ThermaFit are more porous than its competitors (discontinued Flents Quiet Please and 3M Classic), which makes for increased comfort (less surface area in ear canal) and less sweating through better breathing. Less sweating also means that the ThermaFit don’t fall out easily.

I find the Mack’s in-ear tension very soothing. They are shorter than the 3M Classic, and hence you can lay optimally on the side with them. The longer 3Ms are more for job sites in my opinion, and the Mack’s better suited for sleep.

As to sound reduction: varies with insertion depth…the deeper the better. Upon inserting the ear plug, make sure you roll/squeeze them properly, then raise the ear with the other hand while pulling it back from the head: back and up! This ensures the perfect seal.

Rating is rating, and any ear plugs rated at 29 dB insulate the same…there may be slight variations depending on the noise frequency to be blocked and on the fit in the individual ear canals.

None of these works perfectly against a 110 dB leaf blower (obviously not, at 29 dB NRR), they just may round the edges somewhat. For 100% results, you may have to add a noise cancelling headphone like the Bose QC35. I tested the combination of the Mack’s with the older Bose QC15, which reduced my neighbour’s aggressive 2-stroke weed wacker noise to zero.

Are the Mack’s ThermaFit an adequate Replacement for the Flents Quiet Please?

Strictly yes. You cannot put a newspaper between the discontinued Flents and the Mack’s. The Mack’s have better porosity, but the dimensions are essentially the same.

Concluding Remarks

Mack’s ThermaFit ear plugs are as good as it gets for me. They are my new preference for overnight use. I wished they would be more easily available in Canada, too.

Have a good and healthy sleep!

Until next time…quietly yours…and keep on listening!

The post MACK’S ThermaFit Soft Foam Ear Plugs Review appeared first on Music For The Masses.

The new version of the Flents PROTECHS Quiet Please Foam earplugs, advertised as “Now SOFTER for more comfort!”, has essentially nothing in common with the long-established, trusted version. They are problematic for many regulars and consumers should be warned. Fortunately, alternatives exist.

Introduction

Noise is unwanted sound. Noise annoys. We all have some kind of noise sensitivity, be it your neighbour’s leaf blower, lawnmower, or Harley Davidson, the snoring partner next to you, or the hot tub and air conditioner by your bedroom window. Some of us are exposed to industrial noise at work, for example at a construction site. Others are sensitive to loud concerts.

We have different options to minimize or block noise. For example, we can deploy noise-cancelling earphones and headphones, with or without music. But these need battery power and frequent recharges – and they may be bulky — and therefore useless for sleeping. The simplest way to achieve effective noise insulation is therefore achieved just by blocking the ear canals mechanically.

The old Greeks stuffed anything that fit into their ears: beeswax, wool, cotton etc. But it was not until 1907, when German company Ohropax (“ear peace”) released the first commercial earplugs, just in time for WWI. These were only moderately comfortable and it took until the 1960s for the first mouldable silicon earplugs to provide relief.

The designs further advanced with the invention of memory foam earplugs, which first appeared in 1972. Memory foam appears to be the most comfortable, optimally moulding, and best sound absorbing material to this date.

Flents adopted the memory foam idea in their Quiet Please earplugs, which had been produced unaltered back to at least the early 1980s, possibly earlier. The Quiet Please have attracted a huge following since then – and many people have relied on them for decades. The perfect product, it seemed. Made in USA.

But, recently, the company changed suppliers (now in Taiwan). While they kept name and colour of the product, the box now sports the banner “New SOFTER for more comfort!”

In reality, the product was swapped out completely: the new version has nothing in common in terms of dimensions and material properties. As a fallout, haptic, fit, comfort, and noise blocking capabilities have changed, resulting in dissatisfied regular customers.

In this article, I will summarize the problems, reported by others and experienced myself, and look at some alternatives.

Specifications Flents PROTECHS Quiet Please Earplugs

Switching Suppliers — Consequences For the Users

The original Flents Quiet Time earplugs, used by many regulars for decades, were made of porous memory foam. The earpieces were compressed and inserted into the ear canal where they expanded slowly to optimally fill them. Their porosity minimized the pressure against the ear canals (while maximizing noise blockage) and made them breathable. They felt comfortable to my ears. An excellent, very popular product. And rightly so.

Flents did not produce these earplugs themselves but relied on an external US supplier, which stopped producing them recently. The company chose a new supplier in Taiwan, which could have been a good choice. After all, the famous SpinFit silicone eartips for in-ear monitors come from there.

However changing the supplier also changed the complete earplug design: the new version under the old name is a completely different product. Regular subscribers feel betrayed and vented in their recent reviews on amazon.com and amazon.ca.

So what went wrong? Let’s have a good look.

When looking at the above images you recognize the following: the original Quiet Please were thicker, shorter, and more porous. The new version is slimmer, longer, and has this dense, greasy, slippery, waxy surface. They are certainly not the same!

What you don’t get from the photos is that the new version is much softer between your fingers, much harder in your ear canals, and it extends much faster. It is very difficult to insert them into my ears and achieve a decent seal. That stems partly from the slimmer shape and partly from the strangely soft consistency.

Once in, the new, denser Quiet Please have more pressure points, they don’t breathe, and they don’t seal properly. They irritate my ears and tend to fall out by themselves during sleep. In comparison, the originals are heavenly comfy and seal very well.

My observations are consistent with the current amazon reviews (September 2023). There, customers report a slick, greasy plastic feel and miss the original porous foam. They further complain about poor expansion capabilities, poor fit, lack of wearing comfort, and that they are falling out. According to many, the new version does not block noise effectively anymore.

But most of all users report dry and itchy ears, irritation, rashes, burning sensation, inflammation, and pain. O dear. I can confirm that these rubber moulds act like squeegees on my ear canals, particularly on hot, sweaty summer nights. Sore ears keeping us from sleeping at night – earplugs undermining their job? Not good.

Alternatives to Flents PROTECHS Quiet Please Earplugs

I tested Mack’s Thermafit Soft Foam Ear Plugs and 3M Classic. Both have approximately the same dimensions and very similar material properties to the original Quiet Please — and all, including the new version, have a 29 dB NRR. Both work very well for my ears in all aspects. I found Mack’s Thermafit very comfortable, optimally fitting, and well insulating. Could not be better.

Can’t say too much about my 3Ms as they are 9 years old and may have lost a bit of their inner tension and become somewhat brittle. They may have been designed primarily for jobsites. But the Mack’s cover the loss of the “old” Quiet Please seamlessly and completely as they have very similar dimensions and physical properties. It is no coincidence that Mack’s founders Ray and Cecilia Benner invented the mouldable silicone earplugs back in the early 1960s.

Concluding Remarks

The new version of the Flents PROTECHS Quiet Please is considered to be a dip in the mud by many – and could become a disaster for the company (if the faithful amazon.com and amazon.ca regulars have their way).

While currently still in denial, the company may have to find another supplier or at least resume production using the original recipe. Coca Cola is a textbook example of reversing such a glaring mistake with their oversugared “New Coke” back in 1985. Otherwise, their loyal customers will talk with their feet. In the meantime, the discerning users and disgruntled regulars may try Mack’s Thermafit, 3M Classic earplugs, or something similar. And perhaps do the Pepsi test.

I wish you a good night’s sleep!

Until next time…keep on listening!

The post Flents PROTECHS Quiet Please Foam Earplugs Review – New, Improved, And Unusable appeared first on Music For The Masses.

The Calgary Community Standards Bylaw 32M2023 protects the industry and offenders but not the community from noise and vibrations, not even from sleep deprivation. Example: air conditioners that are poorly placed AND poorly managed without consideration for the neighbours, a common problem in Calgary. The city does little to promote vibrant, liveable, inner-city neighbourhoods with a high quality of life.

Disclaimer: location images taken from publicly accessible Google Street View and Google Earth Pro. Last edited 2023-08-20.

Introduction

This rather comprehensive article deals with holes in the Calgary Community Standards Bylaw and the consequences for me and many other victims whose quality of life is adversely affected by inconsiderate neighbours. I have been working on this topic since 2008.

Under the Calgary Community Standards Bylaw, residents have the right to not be disturbed by noise and, therefore, have the responsibility to not make noise that disturbs others. Source: Calgary Bylaws site.

In reality, this is not true. The city allows companies to operate 110 dBC leaf blowers indiscriminately during the 48 hour period following a snowfall, nights included.

Air Conditioners have been a similar, long-standing problem. In 2009, Bill Bruce, then the head of Animals and Bylaws Services, reported 1500 annual AC-related noise complaints to me personally. This number must have increased substantially with the increasingly hotter Calgary summers.

Noisy hot tubs are not far behind in negative popularity.

The Calgary bylaws do not consider AC installation locations and the effects of low-frequency noise.

!

Air Conditioners causing Constant Hum and Vibrations – Example from an Established Neighbourhood.

Here a representative sample of an issue that affects many Calgarians: I have lived in the white, semi-attached house with green trimmings (centre right) for 19 years. Structurally, both attached houses are one unit. While we were out of town recently, the neighbours to the left of this double-dwelling installed an air conditioner in the middle of the narrow, reflective sideyard that is partially covered by the two protruding rooflines.

A narrow sideyard ist the worst possible installation site for neighbours as the operators essentially throw their unwanted “garbage” over the property line, but with a twist.

The AC emits sound pressure that is echoing (technical term “reverberating”) between the walls back and forth, is thereby amplified and shoots out of the front and back of the sideyard.

Sound sample recorded with phone at my patio door (2023-10-01 @ 4°C). Would you like to sit on my deck?

But part of the sound pressure is absorbed by the vinyl siding and causes the neighbouring house walls to vibrate. The more rigid the walls, the lesser the vibrations; stucco is the best reflector with the smallest absorption.

The vibrations travel a long way without much attenuation (because of the long wavelengths of low frequencies) and affect all our walls, including the party wall between the attached dwellings.

The science and its consequences are well established and summarized in this document:

Not Cool: Central Air Conditioner Noise in Calgary’s Narrow Sideyards Background and Solutions

Although there are lots of other ACs running in the neighbourhood, including one in the front yard of the attached dwelling, their sound waves do not invade our house as the waves can freely dissipate towards the street. They also do not reach our backyard.

My very problem is not conventional noise but wall vibrations, something omitted by the bylaws.

“…Council will review how to handle complaints about air conditioners, central vacuum systems and even outdoor hot tubs. The concern is the constant hum or vibration is too annoying and doesn’t fall under existing bylaws. Mayor Naheed Nenshi would like to see air conditions only in backyard and not between homes but that would mean changes to land use bylaws…” GLOBAL NEWS 2013.

The Double Nuisance

The AC nuisance is twofold: installation in the “wrong location” and managing its use without consideration for others. Very common in Calgary. In our case…

1. Poor Air Conditioner Placement (between Homes)

Owing to its installation location in the narrow sideyard between homes, the AC’s sound pressure and the resulting wall vibrations generate a constant hum all over our house, from the basement, the basement bedroom, the main floor (kitchen, living room), through my home office to even our master bedroom. And our backyard sounds like a construction site. There is no escape.

It is not loud inside but static, visceral, repetitive, and simply everywhere and continuous over long periods. And when you are stationary (bed, sofa), this becomes a Tinnitus. It is a constant stress for people susceptible to low-frequency noise.

It has to be noted that the hum does NOT come in through our windows but strictly from our own vibrating walls.

You can recreate this hum by using this online tone generator, pull the slider to 120, and push PLAY:

https://www.szynalski.com/tone-generator/

120 Hz appears to be the natural resonance frequency of my walls. This is so low in the frequency spectrum that it cannot even be covered up by the TV sound (unless you add a subwoofer)…even earplugs are problematic.

Another example of a low-frequency nuisance is that famous Encana hum that travelled for kilometres.

Now try to sleep when it hums and buzzes around your ears in your pillow at night when ambient noise is low. How can anyone take the liberty to impose themselves on others like that? Well, they can, and it happens all over the city.

Constant low-frequency noise, even at low volumes, is a nuisance for many, particularly at night.

2. Poor Air Conditioner Management (vs. Common Courtesy)

Placing an AC unfavourably for the neighbours is one thing, managing it unfavourably is another.

Calgary has a subarctic (mountain) climate (Dfc according to the Köppen-Geiger climate classification) with cool summer nights (8-16°C). My bedroom is located 1110 m above sea level. Is there ever a need for running an AC in the wee morning hours?

Like many other Calgarians, the owners run their AC in overkill mode: they don’t mitigate the heat problem by keeping the sun out using blinds or opening their windows to let a cool breeze in. And they run it even on cool days.

Relying on a thermostat and/or timer, the AC runs even on 12°C evenings (after a 19°C afternoon peak) for hours and also daily in the middle of the night (independent of outside conditions)…which affects our sleep patterns. No attempt is made to be considerate, to conserve energy, or to protect the environment. And they are by far not the only ones.

If you are lucky, your neighbours acknowledge the impact of their AC and are willing to mitigate the problem. If you are unlucky, they put their heads in the sand. Ours are not even talking to us.

The circular argument is: “installation and use are within current bylaws, hence it cannot affect neighbours”.

Unbelievable that neighbours that far away are allowed to affect one’s life this much.

Blast from the Past

We gathered technical knowledge during a two-season abuse from an AC unit formerly in our sideyard back in 2008/2009, installed by a house flipper.

Although this unit was much closer to our walls and much louder than the currently offensive one on the other side, it did not affect the basement bedroom or my back office. Its more aggressive pitch was filtered out by the walls. Only the familiar 120 Hz wall vibrations remained.

Those neighbours switched their AC off at 11 pm nightly to let us sleep in our master bedroom.

Bylaw Services were of no help, but the AC unit disappeared nevertheless when the flipper wanted to sell the house. Our interaction with potential buyers would have made a sale difficult.

Legal Aspects

The Calgary Community Standards Bylaw 32M2023 states…

No Person shall operate or permit to be operated an air conditioner, fan, central vacuum system or generator that causes a Continuous Sound that exceeds the greater of the following Sound Levels:

1. (a)  70 decibels (dBC) Leq measured during the Day-time; or
2. (b)  60 decibels (dBC) Leq measured during the Night-time;

at any Point of Reception within a Residential Development.

Comment: Air conditioners are rated between 65 dB and 75 dB (manufacturers use A-weightung, not C-weighting, as it does not consider the wall-penetrating low frequencies and produces much smaller numbers). Not having a fixed reference for sound pressure measurements (“at any point of reception”) renders the city’s sound level numbers meaningless.

Essentially all ACs in narrow sideyards would fail these measurements at the property line considering the amplification through ricocheting sound waves. Industry lobby prevents that.

As an educated guess, the neighbours’ AC would clock in at 80-85 dBC at the property line, way above the legal thresholds.

The City of Calgary only considers noise quantity but not noise quality. Even a quietly dripping faucet is excavating over time.

What the Bylaw misses: Installation Sites, Wall Vibrations, Noise Quality, Health Implications

No person should be exposed to a constant hum (or any other CONSTANT MECHANICAL noises of any kind) from neighbours in their own house. If you applied such sounds to a prison cell, you would have Amnesty International after you two days later.

The city only considers noise quantity, but not noise quality (such as pitch, frequency etc.). The current legal quantities are ludicrous, especially since they are not even applied rigorously (“at any point of reception…within a residential development” vs. property line; what is specifically meant with residential development is also unclear).

Also, low-frequency noise is a known health hazard. According to common sense, nobody should be given the right to run their appliances in other people’s houses.

No air conditioners should be allowed to run in narrow, reflective, noise amplifying sideyards…banned, for example, in Vancouver or Denver for that reason.

All these suggestions are common sense. As to common courtesy: it is sadly not governed by bylaws either.

Air conditioners should not be allowed in narrow, reflective, noise-amplifying sideyards.

Air Conditioners and the Calgary Climate Emergency

Air conditioners are both cause and result of climate change. They run on a coal-/natural gas-powered grid and release further CO2 through their refrigerant. Air conditioners first appeared in substantial numbers in Calgary after nine 30°C days in 2003. Their number has grown exponentially in recent years.

In November 2021, Calgary has declared a climate emergency and calls for action:

Pure greenwashing with empty words! It is, however, grotesque, that many young people burn the planet out of convenience – and leave it to their offspring to deal with the consequences. Selfish or just thoughtless?

Concluding Remarks

The new Calgary Community Standards Bylaw continues to fail protecting residents from inconsiderate neighbours. It still caters to industry and offenders – and reflects the city’s lack of knowledge of basic physics and health issues related to noise.

Back in 2013, mayor Nenshi already wanted to ban air conditioners from sideyards (Global News reported), but, on the contrary, the city even loosened their land use bylaw in 2018. CBC had raised the issue first back in 2009 [here].

Today, City Council rather focuses on noisy cars – that come and go in an instant while changing their pitch constantly (“Doppler effect”) – and not on stationary mechanical devices that harass people with constant, static low-frequency noise – day and night.

Since Bylaw is typically on the offenders’ side, all that victims have available is civil disobedience within the legal framework…which worked for us in the past.

Calgary is way behind comparable cities when it comes to establishing and preserving liveable, vibrant neighbourhoods. Compare to Vancouver, Seattle, Minneapolis…

In 20 years from now, I’m sure, the installation and use of air conditioners will be strictly regulated owing to the world’s ever evolving climate crisis. Until then, the number of neighbourly feuds will increase with the rising number of unregulated air conditioners.

Until next time…keep on listening!

The post Calgary Community Standards Bylaw 32M2023 Failure: Intrusive Air Conditioners And Problematic Neighbours appeared first on Music For The Masses.

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.

This article summarizes the current issues with the improper use of gas-powered leaf blowers for snow clearing (mainly at night) enabled by a flawed bylaw and the industry lobby in Calgary. This practice has serious adverse effects on people’s health and the local and global environments. Leaf blowers are a pest at any time and should be banned, as done in many civilized places in Canada and the world.

This page is being continuously updated. Stay tuned.

Introduction

This note deals with annoyance and health issues by gas-powered leaf blowers, mainly at night, and with their impact on the environment. Global warming is resulting in the atmosphere carrying increasingly more moisture, which results in more (frequent) precipitation…compare to Calgary’s hail season. In the winter, this means more (frequent) snow clearing…and therefore more (frequent) nuisance. Leaf blowers add their fair share to global warming, which will be discussed below.

Gas-powered leaf blowers emit a loud aggressive noise that is perceived as unpleasant and irritating by most. And they constitute an environmental and health hazard. Since about 2015, they are also being widely used for snow clearing in Calgary – as a perceived shortcut to optimize effectivity and/or company’s profits (depending the way you see it).

It is claimed in this article that the latter is the case: leaf blowers are a habit and not a necessity. They are not even a shortcut in most cases. Nuts don’t need to be cracked with a hammer. Leaf blowers are toxic and a tyranny for many.

Calgary’s Community Standards Bylaw 5M2004 regulates things such as firepits, charity collections,…and noise. But it does not mention the environment or address health. The bylaw was created in 2004 and last amended in 2016.

There has always been a bylaw relaxation, according to which snow removal was allowed night and day within 48 h following a snowfall. When inquiring with the city’s 311 telephone line on 12 January 2018, the advisors had the following information available on their computer screens: “Motorized leaf blower types used to clear snow are NOT included in the 48 h noise relaxation.” “NOT” was capitalized.

And although the bylaw has not changed since, its interpretation has – radically. Calgary’s bylaw department does not even respond to service requests anymore following nightly sleep disturbance through leaf blower noise immediately after/during snowfall.

The City is more interested in going after noisy vehicles (but don’t really pursue this consequently either). Noisy vehicles are a pest, too, but they tend to come and go in an instant.

In contrast, try living across a school where gas-powered leaf blowers scream at you for 20 to 50 mins between 3 am and 5 am, night after night. The City of Calgary thinks this is reasonable…until a councillor or other city official will be personally affected. After all, sleep is a basic health requirement.

In contrast, bylaw officers and police go after leaf blowers at night in the summer. Even a single isolated incident attracted the attention of CTV – and they sent a TV team [here’s their video]. And this one below is mine…this does not sound any different after a snowfall.

The justification for nightly noise harassment and and sleep disturbance is public safety. But this argument is flawed as public safety does not rely on the combination of nightly work AND deployment of unreasonably noisy equipment.

The world was safe in winters before leaf blowers, in Calgary’s case before 2015.

It is really all about a quick buck.

General Problems With Leaf Blowers

The gas-powered leaf blower is a Japanese invention from the 1970s. They arrived in Calgary’s winters only a few years ago – way after the Community Standards Bylaw – and have taken over like the pest.

Questionable Benefits

Leaf blowers mean more income for the snow-clearing companies…as blowing snow is SLOW and superficial. Having crews moving along sidewalks in ultra-slow motion results in more chargeable time.

Leaf blowers also only do a superficial job so there is more need for return visits. Pushing snow along with a snow shovel can be done in fast walking speed, particularly when there is only a film to be removed.

Since the slowest sets the pace not only in math class, Pro Property teams also include a few shovelling workers.

Dedicated snow blowing machines have brushes, they are much more thorough…and they move along much faster. And they are relatively quiet. But they have to be lifted from the vehicle…

Nightly Use: Health Impact through Sleep Disturbance

This is my main reason for writing this article. I can keep it short as it addresses common sense. The problem is that common sense does not appeal to the City of Calgary’s legal department and the companies harassing people at night.

Individual neighbours obviously do not do this to each other for obvious reasons. They have to live side by side.

Noise is unwanted sound. Noise can be harmful to people’s health. The health effect is exacerbated by noise at night as it disturbs people’s sleep: wakes them up, keeps them up for the time of the noise pollution, and may cause difficulties in falling asleep again. In the long run, it may alter people’s sleep rhythm.

In the short run, nightly sleep disturbance results in headaches, fatigue, irritability, and it affects someone’s professional performance and productivity. Apart from that night noise causes annoyance and displeasure.

Do I make this up? No, it comes from the World Health Organization – and simply summarizes common sense.

Do you want to be sleep deprived? Well, then you better don’t live close to a school with an inconsiderate contractor.

While common sense alone suggests that noise will disturb sleep, either by waking the sleeper or by changing the level of sleep, actual measure- ment of the problem is not a simple matter (M.J. Epstein, 2020). Buy the book of this UofC researcher here.

Essential Literature Downloads on Noise Impact:

World Health Organization: Guidelines on Community Noise

World Health Organization: Night Noise Guidelines for Europe

Environmental and Occupational Impact

Leaf Blowers are a potent source of air pollution as a third of the oil-gas mixture is not burned but emitted as an aerosol exhaust. The pollutants (nitrous oxides, carbon monoxide, hydrocarbon, and particulates) have been linked to cancer, heart disease, and asthma.

This 2011 study found that the amount of NMHC pollutants emitted by a leaf blower operated for 30 minutes is comparable to the amount emitted by a Ford F-150 pickup truck driving from Texas to Alaska.

Dust clouds caused by leaf blowers contain potentially harmful substances such as pesticides, mold, and animal feacal matter that may cause irritation, allergies, and disease.

Noise pollution is also a concern with leaf blowers, as they can emit noise levels above those required to cause hearing loss to both the operator and those nearby. Source: Wikipedia.

Bans

Leaf blowers have been banned in some Californian cities since the mid 1970s as a noise nuisance. Today, 20 Californian cities have banned leaf blowers, and 80 have restricted their use. Washington DC banned leaf blowers in 2018, and the sale of gas-powered lawn equipment will be banned in California from 2024.

Canada has been working hard to become an environmental leader for reducing greenhouse gas emissions to help mitigate climate change. Ontario, Quebec, and BC have all considered or implemented bans on gas leaf blowers and mowers in specific municipalities. 

The Vancouver City Council has also committed to use only electric lawn maintenance tools by 2024. Many provinces have even banned 2-stroke engines in lakes and waterways.  But the worst culprit for both noise and toxic health and safety emissions on land? The leaf blower.

As far back as 2004, the West End of Vancouver has banned gas-powered leaf blowers.  Montreal had also banned leaf blowers in some suburbs back in 2014.

Noise complaints are the main impetus behind the city council voting these out, where the droning of these blowers echoed down city streets between apartment buildings. This year Victoria council followed suit and advocates for electric blowers in their place. 

But what do you expect from a city where the students’ parents idle outside the school with their trucks and large SUVs twice a day?

What to do about It in Calgary?

Use a shovel, broom, or the much quieter dedicated snow blower for snow removal. And ban this pest. CBC reports here.

The Calgary Community Standards Bylaw – In Dubio Pro Offender

General Noise Loopholes

Calgary bylaws should aim to protect the victims. But, in reality, they are – in my experience – written in favour of the offenders, mainly in order to accommodate and legalize unreasonable commercial interests. Business lobby appears to have ruled city councils through the times – after all, who supports the councillors’ election campaigns?

3 Examples of Bylaw Failure

The first is about air conditioner placement – many others had similar experiences – and Bylaw Services had 1500 calls about AC noise that year:

In 2007, a house flipper put an industrial AC unit underneath my bedroom – after covering his walls (6 ft away) with 1 inch of stucco. He ran it between May and October, even at 3C. The unit caused vibrations of my plastic siding…and a constant low-frequency drone sound inside my house. The bylaw officers refused to measure the noise at the property line (30 cm away from the unit) and advised us to move.

According to the bylaw, any measurements are to be taken “at any point of reception”. It is totally up to the officer at which location that is (which means the results are not reproducible…or, in scientific terms, that the precision “reproducibility of results” is zero).

Any decent legal document needs fixed reference points for measurements such as the property line to be meaningful. The Calgary Community Standards Bylaw is not worth the paper it is printed on. Cities in hotter climates such as in Australia have these reference points clearly defined – and it is just a matter of googling for their bylaws.

In another example, some 15 years ago, hockey player Iginla positioned two AC units on his property line, right in front of the neighbour’s Bungalow’s bedroom. Mrs Iginla advised the neighbour to move their bed away from the wall. The neighbour was even on CBC’s Eyeopener – and the City remained tone deaf.

5 years ago, a new neighbour placed their hot tub on the back patio of our attached houses. She is hearing impaired but the constant 2-3 hr low-frequency drone was driving me crazy in my office. We could amicably resolve this by her running the tub’s heater after business hours.

Noise Aspects missing in the Community Standards Bylaw

The community standards bylaw only considers noise quantity (measured in dBA), but not quality. A very-low frequency drone sound will barely yield 30 dBA, but be excavating on most people within a few minutes (compare to a dripping faucet). It is well established in the scientific literature that it is harmful to health.

A masterfully played violin at 65 dBA may sound pleasant over 90 mins, a drill certainly not. The difference between all these is that drone sound (AC, drill) is repetitive and static whereas a voice or violin is variable as it changes frequencies and sound pressure level (“volume”) all the time. The latter is much more tolerable.

Another aspect in bylaws of more mature communities is considering reflective walls. An AC between 2 infills 6 ft apart will emit sound waves that reverberate between the house walls, which amplifies the noise: the famous “gun barrel effect”. Therefore AC placement is important for noise impact.

In summary, whoever has drafted up this bylaw has insufficient understanding of the basic physics – and zero common sense.

Leaf Blower Noise Loopholes

Leaf blowers were explicitly banned at night a few years ago – and the bylaw’s wording has not changed since.

What has changed is the interpretation of the bylaw text when somebody found a loophole in the wording: an ambiguous text passage is interpreted in favour of the offender – out of fear the city could loose the battle in court. Suddenly the banned leaf blowers were allowed again – out of the blue. A true paradox!

As a result of the city’s incompetence, the bylaw’s simplified web version is even more removed from the original bylaw and from reality:

Many people rely on motorized equipment to clear snow, including City crews. Noise restrictions for using such equipment are lifted for 48 hours after a snowfall ends to clear walkways for safety and accessibility. This means anyone is allowed to operate a motorized snow clearing device (including leaf and snow blowers) — at any time of day/night — during that 48-hour window to remove snow and ice. ​Outside of that window, night use is not permitted. For more information, download the Community Standards Bylaw​ and refer to sections 31.1(e) and 31.1(2).

Sidewalks have become walkways and leaf blowers are now snow removal devices. You find the problem with the wording behind this spoiler:

Abuse of Bylaw Relaxation

Snow-clearing/landscaping companies have much experience with police encounters and bylaw officers from their illegal nightly summer work. Since the city is typically business friendly, nothing happens to them. They can be even more relaxed when backed by a bylaw relaxation (anything goes within 48 hrs of a snowfall) or when arguing with safety, particularly when children are involved.

But the bylaw relaxation gives no incentive for these companies to work efficiently, and community or environmentally friendly.

Leaf Blowers and Calgary’s Climate Emergency Declaration

On November 15, 2021, Calgary City Council voted to declare a Climate Emergency. A declaration of Climate Emergency is a resolution passed by a governing body such as a city council. It puts the local government on record in support of emergency action to respond to climate change, and recognizes the pace and scale of action needed.

Calgary subscribed to making climate change a strategic priority and taking action on climate change – while bending all possible bylaws and rules of decency to cater to industry lobby allowing the use of leaf blowers, one of the biggest environmental pests around.

Considering that City Council has refused to understand, let alone taken action on any noise pollution issue that had been on their agenda for the last 20 years, nobody is surprised by their clownery.

This hardly comes as a surprise considering Alberta has always been (one of the) last with most progress in Canada, for example the introduction of seat belts, distracted driving, smoking laws etc.

Open Questions

The above treatment results in the following questions for you, dear reader:

• Do you think it is reasonable having to put up with sleep disturbance by aggressive noise night after night?
• Do you think you should put up with such noise at any time?
• Why do bylaw makers think using motorized garden tools at night is unreasonable in summer but not in winter?
• Why was it possible for the city to interpret their own bylaw first contra and then pro nightly leaf blower relaxation?
• Why should public safety rely on the use of leaf blowers? They are a 1940s invention, but have only been widely used in the last 10 years in Calgary.
• If public safety relies on leaf blowers, how unsafe was the public before?
• Why does City Council not ban leaf blowers simply on the basis of their horrific environmental impact? After all, the city has declared a climate emergency.
• How does city view that feedback loop according to which global warming increases precipitation – and leaf blowers are a major contributor to global warming.

Concluding Remarks

In summary, the City of Calgary adheres to their flawed interpretation of their botched Community Standards Bylaw 5M2004, out of fear of losing court battles against businesses that feel entitled to impose themselves on neighbourhoods. Common sense does not appear to be an argument.

The City’s inaction is in stark contrast to their climate emergency and public and occupational health.

Calgary City Council is advised to revise their bylaws to the standards of common sense and adapt it to their climate emergency declaration and the reality of ever increasing precipitation. Right now, they have no credibility. No city councillor or reasonable person would put up with such ongoing nuisance personally – and should not, according to the bylaw, section 27. (1):

Except as authorized pursuant to this Bylaw, no Person shall make or cause or allow to be made or continued any noise which would disturb or annoy a reasonable person.

But acccording to the city’s bylaw interpretation, such reasonable persons don’t exist. They never have. As former mayor Nenshi would say: “this bylaw is hot garbage”.

The city will have to catch up with the times and get rid of this environmental and occupational pest – period, it is just a matter of time. Get civilized!

Until next time…keep on listening – but to real music!

The post Calgary Leaf Blower Noise Nuisance: Health Hazard And Environmental Impact, Night And Day appeared first on Music For The Masses.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Key technologies

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

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

1 – “Vertical Super Tweeter”

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

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

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

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

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

2 – Graphene coating

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

3 – Brass housings

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

4 – HDSS

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

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

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

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

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

At-a-glance Card

Full Device Card

Test setup

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

Signature analysis

Tonality

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

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

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

Sub-Bass

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

Mid Bass

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

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

Mids

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

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

Male Vocals

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

Female Vocals

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

Highs

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

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

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

Technicalities

Soundstage

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

Imaging

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

Details

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

Instrument separation

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

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

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

Driveability

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

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

Physicals

Build

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

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

Fit

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

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

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

Comfort

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

Isolation

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

Cable

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

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

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

Specifications (declared)

Comparisons

Tanchjim Oxygen ($ 250)

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

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

Ikko OH1S ($ 159)

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

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

Ikko OH10 ($ 199)

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

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

Dunu Zen ($700)

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

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

Considerations & conclusions

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

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

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

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

The Tin Hifi P1 Max are a safe choice for listeners who would like to experience the planar-magnetic sound without the typical lean mids and the brightness of other models – but at the expense of technicalities.

Pros — Good cohesion, decently weighty vocals; zero shoutiness; good build and cable.

Cons — Not much mid bass kick; not very sparkly or energetic; rather fast note decay; not the largest headroom.

Introduction

Tin Hifi are an established name in the Shenzhen audio scene. Their initial claim to fame was the famous T2 (under their previous brand name “Tinaudio”), a neutrally tuned $50 earphone, that stuck out within the masses of V-shaped budget models.

The company has released iems that were perceived as hit and miss (we reviewed many of them) – and their signature design was always metallic shells, often nicely polished. The P1 Max deviate from this presentation not only with a completely new appearance but also with a new sound.

TL;DR: the Tin Hifi P1 Max don’t have the usual ChiFi weaknesses of overcooked upper midrange and lean, recessed vocals. Whether they stand out against their competitors in a tight market is another question. Read on.

Specifications

Physical Things and Usability

In the box are the shells, a cable, a series of eartips, a storage bag, and the standard paperwork. The earpieces are of a bulbous shape and made of resin, very similar to the Shozy 1.4. They are light, not too big, therefore comfortable for me, and just refreshingly different from the average offerings.

I also like the cable: it has no microphonics and the right rigidity while looking rather inconspicuous. The included eartips didn’t work for me so that I used Spinfits.

Tonality and Technicalities

The overall signature of the P1 Max is neutral-warm, articulate, cohesive, unobtrusive…with the typical planar-magnetic timbre (“fast note decay”) but lacking the usual brightness and lean midrange — at the expensive of other technicalities. The “flattest tuned” and therefore least offensive, but also technically least capable of the sub-$200 planar magnetics I have tested (LETSHOUER S12, 7Hz Timeless). The P1 Max excel through their cohesion (“jack of all trades, master of none”) and just play and play without getting annoying – hence they are probably underestimated by many.

The P1 Max have a somewhat unusual bass. It is reasonably tight (somewhat boomy with the stock tips), digs deep into the sub-bass, but lacks mid-bass kick. It is robust but misses layering, the punch is hard enough, but there could be more of it. A one-trick pony. Bass lines are usually somewhat subtle and dry. This may be a combination of the rather linear low-end tuning and the planar-magnetic driver technology.

The midrange is not as bright and lean as typical for a planar-magnetic, there is no shoutiness at all, a huge advantage over the S12 and Timeless. Vocals are of medium note weight and of good note definition, they are not recessed and quite intimate – they are not breathy and lean but nicely firm and compact. They are well placed in 3-D space. Midrange transparency is quite good. There is also no sibilance!

Treble resolution is ok…but treble is somewhat dry and devoid of sparkle. Cymbals are well defined and fast decaying, an artifact of essentially all planar magnetics. They can also be tizzy.

Although headroom is not the greatest (compared to S12), there is good spatial cues. You are not standing in a Football stadium but in a smaller, more intimate club. The soundstage is average in the big picture. The other technicalities such as imaging, separation, and layering are average for the price.

Timbre is typically planar magnetic: decay is rather fast, which can make the presentation a bit dry and analytical. Cellos sound just too robotic. This leaves the impression of a well accentuated sound often bordering on hard (the opposite of soft and lingering), but it is never harsh, strident, or aggressive.

In summary, despite my bickering, the P1 Max have no dealbreaking flaws and their strength is cohesion….and a good haptic and fit.

The LETSHOUER S12 is technically superior over the P1 Max with much better staging, bigger headroom, more bass kick, more energy, but it is also on the bright side with the leaner vocals. The 7Hz Timeless is also on the leaner side in the midrange and has this pronounced mid bass-hump not everybody likes. The P1 Max is overtaking from behind but in the slow lane.

In the meantime, another planar magnetic contender has appeared – highly advertised – and as a consequence – hyped: the Salnotes Dioko. I have not tested it but looked at reviews (such as this one). The earpieces are rather large (potential comfort/fit problems), the midrange is somewhat lean and pushed back, and the top end is boosted to the point that it is harsh and bright, while bass and the resolution and other technicalities are apparently very good. The tenor is that the Dioko is a polarizing model. Since a direct comparison with the P1 Max is not possible, all I can say is that this Tin Hifi is on the safer side.

Concluding Remarks

I tend to say, the best earphones are the ones we use. And the Tin Hifi P1 Max may be such a candidate. I can enjoy them for hours. They are lively enough not to be boring and cohesive enough not to be intrusive.

Technically and energetically behind the competition, they make up by not having any obvious flaws and turnoffs such as an overwhelming mid-bass hump of the 7Hz Timeless or midrange brightness of the LETSHOUER S12. The T1 Max are the safest sub-$200 planar-magnetics out of the three I have tested, which is in agreement with their frequency response graphs.

Their biggest strength is that they are spectacularly unspectacular…and therefore usable. Well usable. I just took the Tin Hifi P1 Max on my summer trip to Europe as my go to.

Until next time…keep on listening!

The post Tin Hifi P1 Max “Big Panda” Review (1) – The Meat-And-Potato Planars 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 — Difficult to pick the right model.

Distinctive Features — Swivel mechanism; narrow-bore tips.

BOOKMARK ME – PAGE WILL BE UPDATED

Executive Summary

I have tested SpinFit eartips for this review since summer 2019, the results are reported here, and an overview of the different models is given. The main advantage of Spinfit eartips are in the added comfort, appealing appearance, and most importantly in their “kaiten”, the Japanese word describing their swivel mechanism (they don’t really “spin”). Kaiten results in deeper insertion and therefore sonic improvement over stock tips in many cases. Results may vary between earphones in combination with individual ear canals. While it cannot be said that Spinfits are universally better than other tips, they frequently are. They therefore fill a niche and should be in everybody’s eartips box. IMO, SpinFits are a good investment particularly for more expensive earphones.

Introduction

There are different ways to alter an earphone’s sound: cable, modding, nozzle-screen replacement…but eartips is the easiest and one of the cheapest, even taking the premium prices of some into account. The tips are at the end of the audio chain and can be a real bottleneck. If they don’t fit our ear canals properly, the whole listening experience is spoilt.

Some earphones come with a generous selection of eartips, others don’t. And in some cases, none of the eartips fit or provide an effective seal for the listener, so that the sound quality is compromised. In such situations, third-party eartips come to the rescue.

Eartips manufacturers can frolic as there is no real competition between them: all their products are different and there is no universal fit for any earphone/ear canal combination.

Eartips of the different makes are rather complementary and listeners have to acquire a box full of different types before “tip rolling” to find the best sound appeal for their individual ear canal geometry. So third-party eartips companies must be the best of friends.

SpinFit out of Taiwan are one of the pioneers of third-party eartips and their products have become somewhat of an industry standard. Most premium earphones that went through my hands as a reviewer came with SpinFit CP145 silicone tips, and these have become one of my starting points for “tip rolling”.

SpinFit have not only produced sonically appealing and comfortable eartips, they have also rolled them into some kind of appealing eyecandy, with coloured inner stems indicating type and size – for the advanced users. I sometimes feel like eating them. They are generally soft and pliable, comfortable, and durable.

Each of SpinFit’s offerings have distinct bore sizes (to fit the earphone nozzle) and umbrella size (to fit the ear canal). A unique swivel mechanism in all models helps connecting the two in an optimal manner – earphone and ear canal, that is. The swivel mechanism helps optimizing sound transfer and comfort. The mechanism also corrects for unfavourable nozzle angles on the earphone.

The Japanese word “Kaiten” describes the spin, which is actually not a spin at all, but a swivel. Some Japanese words also read as Chinese, because both languages share the “Kanji” characters.

Selecting the Right SpinFits for Your Earphone

Eartips are a very personal thing. There is no good or bad in most cases, there is good fit and lesser fit, which depends on both the devices they are mounted on and the listeners’ ear canals. These variables create a large number of possibilities and uncertainties so that no eartip is fitting universally. These variables are:

Fitting earphone nozzles: the first problem for the novice is – and it certainly was for me – to find the right SpinFit model to fit a particular earphone. First, one has to select the right diameter of the inner stem so that the SpinFit is being held safely in place. As a rule of thumb, most earphones have a nozzle diameter of 4.5 mm so that the CP145 is the most universal model for initial tip rolling.

Fitting ear canals: the second problem is that the umbrella size has to fit one’s ears. Size M fits most listeners (use the stock nozzles for comparison). I personally need L or XL. Also important is the length of the inner stem. Earphones with short nozzles such as the Blon BL-03 work best with a long-stemmed eartips, and most TWS earphones require short tips such as the CP360.

Check out the SpinFit Size Chart

[collapse]

Optimizing sound: the SpinFit’s swivel mechanism corrects for unfavourably angled earphone nozzles, which contributes to sound optimization. Another parameter that influences perceived sound is the eartip’s bore diameter. All Spin Fits are narrow-bores and they therefore are even less competition to JVC Spiral Dots and Azla SednaEarfit tips, which are wide-bores. Narrow-bores and wide-bores differ in their sonic characters with most earphones [explained in detail here]. Trial and error rules, and there is no recipe for success.

I’ll give you an illustrated overview of the available below. Check the underlined links in the figure captions to follow up on the details.

The SpinFit Catalogue in Pictures

Please note that the SpinFit CP350 have been discontinued.

Co-blogger Kazi is going a bit more into detail of the individual models in his complementary SpinFit article.

What KopiOkaya says

Co-blogger Larry Fulton alias KopiOkaya summarizes the main characteristics of the leading third-party eartips in his famous eartips guide. He covers most of the SpinFit catalogue. You find his thoughts behind this spoiler.

Concluding Remarks

Eartips are the cheapest sonic upgrade of an earphone (without modding). SpinFit have established themselves as one of the industry leaders because of their special swivel mechanism, their comfort, fit, durability, and last but not least their optical appeal. I have dropped a few dollars on their offerings in my time as hobbyist.

SpinFit eartips are no miracle cure in all cases, but they are possibly the first ones to choose for “tip rolling”. They should therefore be in everybody’s audio toolbox.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

Disclaimer

I spent about $100 in my lifetime on SpinFit eartips, mainly on CP145, CP100, CP500, and CP800. Some of the SpinFits used in this review were kindly provided by SpinFit, in several stages since Aug 2019.

Get more information from the SpinFit website.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

The post JK’s Introduction To SpinFit Eartips appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Cons — Sub-par bass response
– Treble extension is lacking
– Rai Penta has below-average technicalities
– Price

INTRODUCTION

It’s hard being a flagship.

Just being “pretty good” across the board won’t cut it. Outright supremacy is the aim here, and that’s the bar that Meze Audio has set for themselves with their flagship Rai Penta, tested at $1099. It’s quite a jump considering that their previous highest-tier IEM was the Meze 12 Classics worth ~$80.

Meze did take their sweet time with the whole building and tuning process of the Rai Penta, which added further to the expectations. Then again — better safe than sorry. So, how close do the Rai Pentas get close to excellence? Read on.

Note: the ratings given will be subjective to the price tier. The Rai Penta was sent courtesy of the Review Tour. I would like to thank Andy sincerely for organizing the whole thing.

Sources used: Yulong Canary, Questyle QP1R, LG G7
Price, while reviewed: $1100. Can be bought from Meze’s Website.

PHYSICAL THINGS AND USABILITY

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES

The accessory set is more than adequate, but with a few caveats. You get basically everything you might need: 8 pair of tips (regular silicone, double-flanges and foams), a really good 4-core SPC cable with Rhodium plated jacks, a balanced upgrade cable, a fancy-yet-practical carrying case, a 3.5mm to 6.3mm jack (handy for certain amps), an airplane adapter (a rare sight nowadays) and a small cleaning brush. All of these are of rather high quality and I personally didn’t feel the need to use a third-party tip.
4.5/5

BUILD QUALITY

Well, Meze hit the ball off the park right at the start. The Rai Pentas are meticulously built, and the feel in hand/while wearing is especially sublime. They are sculpted from a single block of aluminium, and are as smooth as pebbles. You don’t feel the joints at all, and boy do they feel dense! The mmcx connectors are rather robust and didn’t seem to lose their solidity even after multiple cable swaps.
The nozzle has three sound-bores: one for the dynamic driver, and the other two for the dual mid and high BA drivers. These bores are also milled from aluminium and is a rather unique feature of these IEMs since many multi-BA IEMs use plastic tubes to channel the sound towards the bore. On the back, there is a curiously designed vent (presumably for the dynamic driver) that Meze calls the PES (Pressure Equalization System). It does its job seemingly well as there is no noticeable driver flex.
5/5

COMFORT, ISOLATION, AND FIT

The Rai Pentas are as comfortable as they come for a set of regular-fit universal IEMs. The smooth, beveled edges fit snugly in the ears and you can wear them for hours. Lying down with them is slightly problematic however as their weight tends to tilt them downwards. The stock tips are plenty comfortable for me, but you can of course try your favorite tips to see which fits best.
4.5/5

SOURCE AND EARTIPS

For this review, the primary source was Questyle QP1R. I used the stock tips since they worked fine for me. Also Rai Penta is fairly source agnostic so you can use any source to get it to loud volumes, but depending on source the balanced cable might provide slightly better separation.

DRIVER SETUP

The Meze Rai Penta is a 5-driver hybrid with a single-dynamic driver taking care of the low frequencies, two composite and customized (Knowles?) BA drivers for the mids, and two composite BA drivers for the highs and ultra-highs. The entire wave-guide and driver chamber is made up of CNC-cut aluminium, resulting in precise crossover-points and eliminating phase/crossover-related incoherency issues.

TONALITY AND TECHNICALITIES

Meze Rai Penta doesn’t have a bass-heavy signature, which is in stark contrast to their previous two IEMs (11 Neo and 12 Classics) both of which had prominent sub and mid-bass impact (a guilty pleasure, I concede). Bass decay is faster than average dynamic driver IEMs but nothing to write home about. There is a slight mid-bass bloom that adds body to snare hits and to certain baritone vocals but that’s about it. The sub-bass seems rather muted, which is disappointing. It’s more of a faint whimper than an actual rumble. In Audioslave’s Be Yourself, the opening bass-line can be heard, but not felt, and that’s the weakest part of these IEMs for me. Many prefer a bass-light signature, however, so this might be what they are looking for.

Midrange is where the Rai Penta shows its true prowess. This is one of the best midrange renditions I’ve heard in any IEM, period. Nothing is accentuated unevenly, no absurd 3K gain or scooped lower-mids *cough* LCD i4 *cough*. Vocals have a effortless quality to it, and even the highest-pitched female vocals don’t sound shrill or fatiguing. String instruments have a very natural attack and decay, and best of all — they don’t exhibit the “BA-timbre” that I often dread. Micro-detail retrieval is also a strong point, even though they are not exaggerated as certain other IEMs at this range and is mostly there if you want to focus on them rather than being obtrusive. Listening to Ben Howard’s Old Pine was an absolute delight, and you could hear every single breath that the singer drew. Switching to some metal, Deftone’s My Own Summer has an interesting mix of clean and growling vocals, and the transition between them is seamless. No phase-issues here (something that often plagues multi-BA hybrids) and it’s a job well done. One thing that the Rai Penta does really well is pulling out the mid-range details off of bass-heavy tracks. This can come handy if your library consists of some poorly mastered tracks.

Treble takes a back seat, just like the bass, though it’s less extreme in this regard. There is some treble energy around 8KHz so cymbals hits have a pretty noticeable initial attack (really useful if you listen to a lot of rock and metal). However, it take a nose-dive from there on and barely rises post 10KHz, resulting in a treble response that’s very relaxing and sibilance-free, but rather unexciting and unremarkable. It’s not an issue for slower tracks, as Dave Matthews Band’s Crash Into Me sounds oh-so-sweet and you don’t really notice anything missing. It’s the faster, heavier tracks that suffer. Machine Head’s Aesthetics of Hate could definitely sound better, especially around the solo section where there are numerous rapid cymbal hits. The Rai Penta doesn’t do justice to the grandeur of tracks like these, so it’s definitely an IEM more suited for slower genres.

Soundstage is average in width and above-average in terms of depth. It’s not a holographic sound-stage, neither is it a densely-packed one. Instruments have good layering but they are not spread apart like some other IEMs in its class. The mid-range being pulled forward is another factor here so I wouldn’t call this a huge negative. Imaging performance is good, but not exceptional. Cardinality (top-right/top-left) is where it suffers compared to other multi-BA flagships, which is surprising since Meze’s budget IEM, the 11 Neo, had fantastic imaging for its class. The Rai Penta is definitely not worse than the 11 Neo, but it is not class-leading like the 11 Neo was. In Yosi Horikawa’s Crossing (my go-to track for testing imaging performance), the initial passage is remarkably well done, but the moment the song gets busier with multiple instruments that fade in and out, the imaging loses its sharpness. Also another area where the Rai Penta falls short is overall dynamics. Macrodynamic punch is lacking, whereas microdynamics are not its strongest suit, resulting in instruments playing at about similar volume.

Bass: 3/5
Mids: 4.5/5
Treble: 3.5/5
Imaging/Separation: 3/5
Staging: 3.5/5
Dynamics/Speed: 3.5/5
Timbre: 4/5

SELECT COMPARISONS

vs Beyerdynamic Xelento: The Xelentos are one of my favorite universal TOTL IEMs, and for good reasons. They are very comfortable and are built like a tank (though I’m always wary of the mmcx connectors), not too dissimilar to the Rai Penta. In terms of sound signature, however, they are somewhat the exact opposites of each other.

Xelentos have an extended sub-bass that’s lifted a few dBs over the mid-bass, unlike the Pentas where you have a mid-bass boost while the sub-bass has a rather early roll-off. Mid-range takes a back seat on the Xelentos and are clearly an area of superiority for the Pentas. In case of treble, however, Xelentos are noticeably more emphasized on the regions between 5–8KHz, thus giving an impression of better detail retrieval. This does not work well for poorly mastered tracks, where Rai Pentas are more forgiving. Then again, if you want a more extended treble — Xelentos will provide you that unlike the Mezes.

Soundstage goes to the Xelentos, while imaging is about par on both. In summary: the choice between them would depend upon your own preference, as they complement each other rather than truly compete.

vs Campfire Andromeda: The Andromedas are build really well, but I’m not too fan of the paint-job myself (the green one that is) and they are significantly less comfortable than the Mezes. The stock cable of the Rai Penta is better, whereas the Andros got better stock eartips (Final E-type ftw!). A potential issue with the Andromeda is their hyper-sensitivity. These are too picky about sources, so you gotta spend some time (and most probably cash) to get them a suitable source where it doesn’t hiss like a kettle on a stove.

In terms of sound, both have a lean bass presentation, but I still prefer the dynamic bass on the Mezes (though it’s only marginally better than the allA Andromeda). Midrange is where the Rai Pentas shine, again. The upper-mids on the Andromeda sounds slightly more stringent in comparison and lacks the fullness of the male vocals that the Rai Pentas can deliver.

Treble, however, is the great differentiator between these two, with the Andromedas having one of the best treble responses around (even though they absolutely ravage poorly mastered tracks) while the Rai Pentas trading absolute detail retrieval for a more relaxing signature. In terms of soundstage and imaging, Andromeda reigns supreme. Both are, however, not suitable for metal genres and sub-genres for the most part as those genres are usually not mastered well and can get either too intense (Andromeda) or too dull (Rai Penta). So if you are a closet metalhead like yours truly, I guess you will be left asking for something different entirely. In terms of soundstage and imaging, Andromeda reigns supreme. Period.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

The Rai Pentas are not the $1000+ end-all and be-all of things. It lacks a distinct wow-factor, and that perhaps is the biggest flaw of these IEMs. That’s a darn shame though, as the midrange here is beautifully rendered. Despite the lack of extension on both ends, I can see how these might captivate long-time who tend to focus more on the midrange.

So while the Rai Pentas fall short of a number of aspects of the sound, they excel at certain others. The build quality is as good as it gets, and they do the midrange oh-so-well that it keeps a lingering “what if” in your mind — what if these got everything right? Ah well, who knows if such a thing even exists at all.

Meze got part of the equation right with their initial attempt at a flagship. The rest of it — hopefully they hit the jackpot with the successor. Meanwhile, if you are solely looking for a flagship IEM that excels at vocals and acoustic genres — give these a try. They just might be what you are looking for.

MY VERDICT

3.5/5

Great midrange tonality held back by sub-par bass response/technicalities.

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

Get the Penta from Meze’s Website

Our generic standard disclaimer.

PHOTOGRAPHY

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

The post Meze Rai Penta 5-Driver Hybrid IEM Review – Master Of One 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.