At-a-glance Card

Full Device Card

Test setup and preliminary notes

Sources: AudioQuest DragonFly Cobalt / Chord Mojo / E1DA 9038D, 9038SG3 / Questyle QP1R, QP2R, M15, CMA-400i / Sony WM-1A – Final Type-E silicon tips – Dunu DUW-02S cable – lossless 16-24/44.1-192 FLAC + DSD 64/128/256 tracks.

Signature analysis

Tonality

EA1000 are tuned following a wiiide V shape, and feature a replaceable “tuning nozzles” system to offer interesting variations of the tonal balance on top. There is a slight metallic sheen coming up on the high trebles, also depending on the source material.

No matter the nozzle choice the timbre stays more or less unchanged: mid-bodied notes across the board with a sole exception for lean-ish low mids, and a commendable overall organicity.

The various nozzles deliver different sonic nuances vis-a-vis their building materials (Gold ones are made of brass), their length, their front mesh and of course the sponge or cloth they may be filled with. Here’s a description of the differences each one brings to the board.

Red nozzle : midbass is somewhat “bloomy”, its notes tend to “expand” a little bit; highmids and treble are instead near-precisely the tonality I prefer. Too bad for that bass, which is not as organic as it should.

Gold nozzle: midbass is evidently more combed, and I like it better, but so is treble too, while highmids are more forward. Guitars and femaie vocals are probably best expressed here, but stage height is cut off, and air and spatiality take a hit.

Black nozzle: midbass is the same as Gold, while high mids and treble are very similar to Red, with possibly a slight tad more energy on one hand, and a bit less depth on the other.

It’s a toss between Black and Red for my particular tastes, and well… I experimented further and found out that in the end I prefer Red with a -1,5dB Q=1 correction on 90Hz to “clean” those doublebass vibrations off. And yes, I’m a “never happy dog” !

Sub-Bass

Sub bass is extended but not elevated. Rumble is present but not imposing itself, which is perfectly good for my library but may be a point of contempt for other musical tastes.

Mid Bass

Mid bass notes are very well rendered by EA1000, with the Red nozzle adding a bit more butter compared to the other two alternatives.

While such makes them a bit more greasy than they should to be called perfectly organic when it comes to render acoustic bass instruments, the effect is indeed not excessive so not only it is welcome in conjunction with many musical genres, but also not necessarily unwelcome even to hardbop or modal lovers.

It’s quite easy to guess – or hope? – that the high quality of EA1000’s mid bass rendering is also directly dependent on that uncommon “Passive Radiator” device inside the box, and anyhow this is what Simgot’s marketing insists on making us believe.

Mids

Mid frequencies are a bit of a mixed bag here. They are recessed in their central part, and somewhat lean in their lower segment.

High mids however go up in power quite rapidly between 1 and 2KHz which is where they give their best. As a consequence, and simplifying maybe a bit too much, EA1000 render guitars and sax tenors better than pianos, for example.

Male Vocals

Vis-a-vis what I just noted about mids in general, male vocals are a territory where EA1000 don’t fare particularly well: especially baritone and bass voices come out perceivably leaner than real, and that’s a common trait no matter the nozzle installed.

Female Vocals

Opposite of the male case, female vocals benefit from a better tonal situation on EA1000 and in facts come across very naturally colored, bodied, detailed and very pleasing at all times.

Highs

Treble is one of the areas where EA1000 do best, and at the same time one where the 3 different nozzles apply more significant variations.

As I anticipated above, to my tastes Red nozzles nail it, period: “Red” trebles are energetic yet still not excessively so, bodied, very detailed, and they “breath” a lot of air in terms of spatiality. Their sole real downside is that perceivable metallic aftertaste coming up once too often – it’s not too strong, nor too fastidious, but it’s undoubtedly there to make the final result just a bit less than fully positive (what a pity).

Golden nozzles furtherly strengthen highmids and low trebles, while also taking some of that magic air quantity off. Black nozzles are very, very similar to Red up there, juts a tad less airy (but less so compared to Gold).

Technicalities

Soundstage

Width and height are very extented, much beyond what you normally get on similar priced IEMs. Depth is “only” barely above average, always referred to the same category.

Imaging

Macrodynamics are very well executed on EA1000, with always precise instrument positioning on stage.

Details

EA1000 offer very good detail retrieval in the high mids and low treble.

Retrieval is good on midbass too, where the concessions made to drama and musicality just rarely steal something off note contouring. As my few readers know I’m noticing this as I’m biased towards acoustic music.

Instrument separation

Separation, layering and microdynamics are all no doubt EA1000’s excellence points. It’s indeed very uncommon to find better around, not only at this price point, but much higher too.

Driveability

EA1000 are easy to drive in terms of sound pressure output thanks to a good sensitivity (109 dB/mW) paired with a not too low impedance (16 Ohm). Their sound quality scales with amping quality however – I suspect this may have to do with that passive radiator device.

Physicals

Build

EA1000 offer a very convincing feeling of solidity and reliability. Their full metal housings are obviously impervious to reasonable physical damages (and possibly to some unreasonable ones, too).

Faceplates are covered by what are declared as “crystal” (!) glasses. I couldn’t assess whether it’s actually crystal, all I can say is it does not appear to be easily scratched, and when in contact with a metal tip it does not tend to sound “plastic”.

For the benefit of those who pay particular attention to aesthetics it should be noted that the housings’ chrome finish and of the “crystal” faceplates are very well taken care of, and that will help them feel alive in their compulsion to continually wipe every surface clean of fingerprints.

Fit

EA1000’s housings fit me near-perfectly in terms of size & shape. Nozzles are not too short, and they are mounted on a sort of protruded portion of the shell. Eartips of the right size easily get a grasp – even more than a seal – onto my canals’ internal surfaces, with this contributing to a firm seating once properly worn – all this in spite of the earpieces not being precisely “featherweights”.

Comfort

As mentioned above EA1000 sit well in my outer ears and prove perfectly comfortable to wear, even for prolonged periods of time.

Isolation

Given the housings’ shapes and calibrated dimensions, EA1000 shells form an important isolation barrier. The multiple vents, and most of all the wide opening corresponding to the passive radiator do of course take steps in the opposite direction but I would say that the overall result is more than satisfactory anyhow.

Cable

EA1000 are sold with a replaceable non-modular-terminated 3.5mm cable. Its aesthetics and haptics are more than ok but I could not conduct my usual comparison tests round-robining amongst my various sources as most of them got balanced outputs. I can’t consequently offer an opinion on the stock cable’s sound performance. For my tests I paired a Dunu DUW-02S cable.

On a more commercial note, given the recent (2-3 years) market evolutions, the fact that an otherwise “premium” package like EA1000’s does not offer a balanced termination cable option – be it in form of available choice at order time or of modular termination system – is to be reported as a negative remark in the general evaluation.

Specifications (declared)

Comparisons

Tanchjim Oxygen (€ 190)

Oxygen feature a bit softer attack, yielding into less punchy bass and overall silkier, more relaxing timbre. Oxygen’s tonality is overall more organic, exquisitely neutral – which may of course be a love-hate thing in some cases. Their midrange is not recessed resulting in much better vocal and guitars rendition. Oxygen’s trebles are less energetic, airy and sparkly.

Stage on Oxygen is a bit narrower, perceivably less high, but much deeper. Lastly, Oxygen are much more demanding in terms of source power.

Intime Miyabi Mk-II (€170 + import costs)

You can find my Miyabi review here. Miyabi Mk-II differ from Miyabi insofar as their mids are less upfront, and their timbre is dryer and clearer, and that’s why I’m taking them as a more appropriate comparison to EA1000 here.

Midbass elevation is similar between Miyabi Mk-II and EA1000, but EA1000 have a cleaner timbre, better punch and sound more resolving there. In a nutshell, bass is technically better on EA1000, very possibly due to their Passive Radiator thing.

Miyabi Mk-II’s mids are way more bodied, and obviously more organic. Trebles are overall better on Miyabi Mk-II, less upfront but more refined. Opposite to bass, while good on EA1000 treble is, that is better on Miyabi, likely consequece of the fantastic deeds of Watanabe-sama’s VST driver,

Miyabi Mk-II cast a slightly narrower stage, same height, but way better depth. They require a bit more power than EA1000 but the difference is not big on this.

Ikko OH1S (€ 150)

The two offer very similar timbre, and similar general tonality. Bass is less forward and less punchy on OH1S (almost ruler-flat, indeed), which also contributes to their mids be felt as less recessed, more “meaningful”, and I’m talking about both low and middle mids.

Trebles are more energetic on EA1000, which is an advantage at times, but a disadvantage when this pairs negatively with some tracks or musical genres. Separation is similar on the two models, layering is a bit better on EA1000 due to better microdynamics. Stage is narrower on OH1S, but deeper.

Final A5000 (€ 299)

A5000’s presentation is more markedly V-shaped compared to EA1000’s. Both offer a dry timbre with little concession to warmth, with A5000 being by a whiff the coldest of the two.

Bass are a tie game, both models offering very significant quality in the region. Mids are also similar, in this case meaning both models choose to let them in second-layer position, accepting sub-organic leanness. Trebles are better on EA1000, with A5000 too often scanting into excess and sibilance, and delivering less air.

Technicalities – all of them – are in favour of A5000, sometimes vastly too. Stage is wider and deeper on A5000, just a bit less high. Layering and separation is macroscopically better on A5000. Ditto for detail retrieval, which is “sensational” on A5000.

Considerations & conclusions

Simgot hit a strike with EA1000, there’s very little doubt about this. Their nice timbre and even more their greatly calibrated tonality are of absolute value. Technicalities are also extremely good, with a particular mention deserved by layering and microdynamics. Their less shiny aspects are in the end very few in comparison.

As you may or may not know I’m quite selective, and that’s why I’m pleased to state that EA1000 fall amongst the very IEMs I find recommendable around the €200 mark. For that, I’m double thankful to Simgot for the review opportunity I’ve been offered.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

The post Simgot EA1000 Review – Hitting A Strike appeared first on Music For The Masses.

It is customary for us in these cases to write a rather succint piece to avoid too much replication of the previous article’s contents but I’m going for an exception here. These little ones do in facts make me feel compelled to share my extended opinions with my few readers. I know, it’ll be boring. Few readers, however, means little damage. So let’s just get down to it.

Just for the record: Akoustyx S6 are currently on deeeep discount sale (like: 50% off) on Drop.

The manufacturer’s official page is instead here.

At-a-glance Card

Full Device Card

Test setup

Apogee Groove / Sony NW-A55 mrWalkman / Questyle QP1R / Questyle M15 / Questyle CMA-400i – Final E tips – Stock cable – lossless 16-24/44.1-192 FLAC and DSD 64/128/256 tracks.

Signature analysis

Tonality

S6’s timbre is natural, sculpted, muscular and well bodied, and stays so all across the spectrum. There’s above decent microdynamics, and no sign of “artificial” aftertastes. This, alone, would be worth closing my article with a glowing rec.

S6’s tonality indeed deserves some articulated comments. The manufacturer underlines S6 are intended for “studio reference acoustics”. Talking through with them they reported they tuned them closely following the Harman IE2017 target (see below) – and I must say it does show, big time. The presentation I hear from the low mids all the way up is definitely that. Sub-bass elevation is only more modest on S6 compared to the theoretical target.

Simply put IE2017 is not my personal preference, period, and this for two main reasons.

One: the circa 11+dB value gap between the 1Khz and 3Khz points results in highmids being slapped hard into my face when I raise volume beyond a very moderate level, and

Two: the depressed lowmids values convert in a very dry, too dry tonality – I do prefer bright neutral to warm balanced, but IE2017 is below neutral, it’s almost aseptycal.

This has to do with the target itself. Then, depending on the particular driver technology and/or implementation accuracy or lack thereof on this or that driver the “actual” result will be for me moderately bad, very bad, or downight unbearable.

Now, the good news is that planar drivers in general bear tonality corrections by means of equalisation with a certain ease. And, S6’s driver is very flexyble (pretty much in Audeze iSine or RHA CL2 league), so first thing I did of course was bringing tonality more in my preferred ballpark, and a bit off the effing IE2017 “thing”.

Here’s the scoop:

My experience with S6 refers to the first 2 corrections (3K and 4K) imperatively applied. I will outline differences when the optional ones are applied too.

Sub-Bass

S6’s sub-bass is fully extended and quite present. Typical snappy planar transients apply without distortions here so there’s little more to squeeze off the onion so to say. That said those who prefer an even more visceral rumble can experiment with a Low Shelf correction from 50-ish Hz, +3dB (or more) and a very wide badwidth (0.3 or so).

Mid Bass

S6 midbass is seriously good. Oh well, of course it’s good if you like technical acoustic bass as I do. Distorted overbloated bass lovers should never buy S6, period.

Transients are well managed here and while they stay in fast, precision-rendering territory as you expect from a planar, they are not overly snappy and do deliver some body and microdynamics.

Applying the aforementioned warmth correction (Peak 200Hz +2dB wide bandwidth) does exactly what it says: midbass (and not only) will heat up a good 20%, coming across as a bit more bodied and flowery.

Mids

Mids are spectacularly sculpted yet organic and detailed. Guitars and tenor sax benefit most of the situation delivering good nuances and microdynamics while staying precise and seprated (see Separation below).

Highmids is where the IE2017 – and S6 which follow that very closely – loses my personal approval and that’s why in my books S6 strictly require the EQ-based retuning I mentioned above.

Once that’s done however the magic happens in all its splendor: high mids are energetic, detailed, sparkly and controlled (!!), even when you pump the volume up significantly, which is indeed a way to open the presentation up and let S6 give its musical best

Male Vocals

Tenor vocal lovers will be those finding the Wamth correction (see above) most desireable. Without that there’s too much dryness to call delivery really organic.

Female Vocals

Female voices are natural and organic, although not flutey. Good texture available and good microdynamics for a planar.

Highs

On a corrected S6 trebles are integral part of the nice show. Well extended, quite airy, snappy without excesses, not zingy, not tizzy. Love them. Apply the “Extra Air” EQ correction to add further airiness. Don’t be scared nor shy: experiment. Try +3dB, +4dB, +8dB if you want. Only stop where you like the sound best : S6’s driver shall anyhow follow you like a doggie.

Technicalities

Soundstage

S6 cast a nice sized stage both accross and in depth – a bit more or a bit less depending on fit depth (the deeper the fit, the smaller the room).

Not the absolute widest projection I heard but very good anyway.

Imaging

Macrodynamics are beyond good. Intruments and voices are well scattered on the scene and there is nice air inbetween

Details

This is a point of excellence. S6’s detail retrieval smoothness is easily top rank for my experience on sub-500€ drivers. While I can name other “detail monsters” around, they all will “cost” some or a lot of fatigue and, before that, distraction from the music flow. S6 deliver fine and subtle details without slamming them onto your face nor covering you with “metallic noise dust” as other much leess refined drivers do.

Detail is also good from bass, although to a lesser extent: down there I guess planar-snappy transients do represent an apriori limitation to low frequency microdynamics. Something can be obtained with some light EQing but that’s it. Not “bad” however, just not so outstanding as to point it out as key plus. If you want special bass articulation and nuances get a high end DD.

Instrument separation

S6 execute separation very well. Crowded passages stay perfectly readable at all times, thanks to very controlled transient behaviour, and that glowing compromise mentioned above between snappyness and microdynamics.

Layering is top class: you can follow second or third voices with ease at all times and that’s not trivial to get – at any price, let alone with this small budget.

Driveability

In the “planar drivers” world S6 are probably the easiest to bias I found. You can even drive them from a phone, although you won’t have much headroom to compensate for low recorded materials (e.g. some vinyl digitisations, DSD conversions etc).

That said, their presentation opens up to more details and microdynamics when submitted to somewhat higher power. Once I apply my EQ corrections and the highmids excess goes for good, S6 offer a wonderfully smooth SPL progression. Indeed I find that even “dangerous” insofar as they cease any shouting, and you don’t get any “too high volume warning” so to say when pumping them up. Be careful… we all have only one hearing system you know that, once screwed you can’t fix it…

Like any bright/bright-neutral drivers S6 pair best with relatively warm sources, or at least with non-analythical ones. A special mention for Groove: the pairing with S6 is beyond spectacular.

Finally, a last important point of attention regards the equalisation requirements: your source need to be capable of at least “some” EQing.

Physicals

Build

The cylindrical part of the housings is in titanium alloy. The supersmooth outside finish is a titanium-oxyde based treatment. The backside is realised of a special polymer, in angled shapen, to properòy house the MMCX connector. Very stylish at least in my tastes, and covered by some patent too.

A red/blue colored ring helps easy identification of the right/left piece. Depending on fitting that ring might end up covered by the Earlock structure (see Fit below), however.

Lat but not least S6 housings are extremely lightweight: once selected the right size/type tips, and worn on with Earlocks etc they virtually “disappear” from your perception. Superb.

Fit

Stock silicon tips are not bad for the job. It’s not so easy to rotate others in as S6 nozzles are quite slim. In the end I settled for Final E (black) as they tend to tame trebles and bring mids forward a bit, which of course helps on re-estabilishing my preferred balance in this particular case.

Technically speaking a good alternative would be Spiraldots too, but their stem diameter is too wide so who wants to adopt them onto the S6 must be ready to apply a tight rubber ring onto the nozzles first, then the tips. Couldn’t be fussed personally, as I found Type-E’s more than good enough.

As you may reacall I am not in general a foamies lover but S6 is one of the few exceptions: here the typical foamies effect (“combing” thinnest treble notes and making bass a whiff “matte”) resolves in a very pleasant timbre nuance alternative.

Once again stock tips are of very good quality – very soft and quickly reactive material, classic cylindrical style – so you can easily go with those to begin with. My effing left canal is always creating problems though so in my particular case S stock tips is too small and M is too thick :-/ My best option is Comply TS200. YMMV needless to say.

Last but certainly not least in importance: the Earlocks. Those are totally brilliant. Think to the IEM version of those “comma shaped” rubber thingies you fit onto earbuds to help the stay put in your concha – and add twice the design accuracy.

These EarLock® silicon “rings” realise several contact points on the outer ear to (literally) lock the housings in place and fit the same way every time. The item comes from a company focusing on hearing protection aids for people involved in very loud noise situations (including law enforcement, army etc) aiming at guaranteeing that the noise attenuator/plug/intercom – whatever stays in-ear – won’t ever budge let alone pull out even in case of sudden hard movements, pullbacks, rush etc etc. And boy do they work!

Simply put: the Earlocks (provided in 3 sizes S-M-L) fit perfectly and “disappear” in/onto the outer ear, I don’t even perceive them as being there once worn, and S6 housings get a 100% firm stability in place, whatever I do however I move etc. This not only means that they won’t entirely slip off, but also and probably even most importantly that they won’t budge even as a consequence of mandibular movements while talking or eating which – in my case it does happen – may produce loss of seal and/or need to reposition.

Long story short: now that I tried them I want something similar for all my IEMs !

Comfort

Subjective differences apart, bullet shapes are normally considered “comfortable”. Amongst their downsides there’s typically stability which is totally fixed by the Earlocks in this case (read above). S6 are not particularly “long” in the bullet shaped category however they do support mid-deep fit, as a free choice user option.

As always: the deeper the fit the softer the trebles, the more relevant the bass, and the narrower the stage. Pick your poison

Isolation

Using foam tips and Earlocks to guarantee stable fit, S6 reach a whopping 34dB passive ambient noise reduction (NRR 28dB). That’s a lot! We are in professional NR aides territory indeed – these values are indicated for people working on tractors for example, or in some noisy industrial plants. Fantastic. Just be careful walking outside : you won’t hear traffic (!)

Cable

S6 stock cable is an unassuming-looking yet very sophysticated 16 core Oxygen Free Copper conductor. According to the manufacturer it is accuratly impedance-paired with the drivers. Be as it may, it sonically pairs spectacularly well with S6. I tried rotating some others – OFC is definitely the right choice, SP-OFC adds on edgyness which is not required here, Grafene does not pair well either.

As it often happens on low budget packages the cable has a fixed 3.5 termination only (the company is working on a multi-plug alternative to bundle on future versions but that’s on the drawing board yet).

Considering how well the cable pairs with S6 I recommend swapping only to those who are in dire need as all their sources sound best exclusively from their balanced otuputs. In such case a very inexpensive, decent option is the good ol’ ultracheap NiceHCK 16 core High Purity Copper (aka “Ugly Cable”). Alternatively a Linsoul HC08 will do well. Or, wait for Akoustyx to deliver their own

I guess something more is also worth saying about the cable.

One: the Kevlar sheath may easily be a love/hate thing. The material itself is beyond wonderful, super resistant etc. On the down side it’s badly microphonic (which is probably why the manufcturer strictly recommends over-ear cable install – RTFM…) and it’s quite springy at first. For the latter issue the good news is that the sheath gets obviously softer and malleable after a quite short time.

To quicken such “break-in” period you can frictionate harshly the cable in between your hands after coughly “coiling” it – don’t worry it won’t break – do it a few times and it will already get much better.

Two: the MMCX connectors offer a very firm “click-in-fit”. This may sound like a detail but for my experience it is not (!). Without going too far, this is one of the very few points of structural weakness I underlined on my Miyabi analisis (here). The down side on low quality MMCX options is of course micro-discharges resulting in subtle craclking noise while listening or worse.

Don’t take me wrong here, I’m not saying S6’s stock cable is the one and only good cable out there – I’m just saying don’t discard it quickly replacing it with “just any other one”, as – unlike what too often happens with cables bundled with budget-tier drivers – Akourstyx put a good one in here…

Specifications (declared)

Comparisons

7Hz Timeless ($ 199 Drop deal)

Simply put, S6 are miles better. Timeless have bloated, untextured midbass, a generally artificial timbre, scarce microdynamics (aka invasive “planar timbre”), very modest layering and separation. They also don’t seem to react particularly well to EQing, although some correction do make them a bit better. They do cast a wider stage compared to S6, there’s that. And they are more expensive.

TINHIFI P1 ($ 169)

P1 offer a smooth, nicely balanced and inoffensive tonality. Possibly a bit “too inoffensive” – one of their limitations for my tastes being that I find them a bit boring. S6 are obviously sparklier, much more engaging energetic and “brilliant” – they do require EQ correction ootb however, which is not an “absolute requirement” for P1 instead. Other major differences are the timbre – P1 being desperately “planar” vs S6’s much better microdynamics – and the driveability – P1 is much harder to bias.

Ikko OH1s ($ 74 promo on Amazon.com)

Recently price-repositioned by Ikko (I’d like to think: also after our suggestion), OH1S are based on different driver tech (1 DD + 1BA) but offer a general presentation and tonality similar to S6.

OH1S don’t require EQ corrections to deliver good bass, mids, vocals and some technicalities – all coming close to S6, which still has the edge on pretty much all counts, even if sometimes by not much. OH1S fall more evidently short of S6 in terms of imaging, and most of all energy. They are also very much tip dependent, and may not be so easy to fit.

final A3000 (€ 129,99 on Amazon.it)

By far my sub-300€ clear-timbre, bright-neutral tonality reference. A3000 are built on a custom-developed DD essentially sounding like a planar, and specially tuned prioritising equal clarity on sounds both closer and farther away from the listener position – which is particularly beneficial to acoustic music from large orchestras or groups.

As a direct consequence A3000 win big on sounstage drawing vs S6 – and pretty much any other sub 1K$ driver I heard tbh, solely bar their siblings A4000, which I find however less pleasant for my tastes on other counts (won’t digress here).

Tonal homogeneity, phenomenally nailed compromise on details vs musicality on trebles, layering proweness and well calibrated snappy transients are on par between the two. S6 offer higher note weight and whith that a more energetic, muscular, lively musicality while A3000 are obviously silkier. S6 sound if you wish… american, while A3000 so japanesely discrete-yet-deeply-sophisticated.

A3000 do not “require” EQ out of the box, their few shortcomings however can’t easily be fixed by EQing. Opposite situation on S6, which need to be put hands onto, but can be EQ-pushed/pulled/stirred in so many different sonic flavours, such argubaly being their most solid upper edge.

Considerations & conclusions

Building low priced, low quality products is not too complicated. Building equally low priced products carrying some more quality as to trigger a user’s attention on “price/performance compromise” grounds is already a bit less easy. Building, again, equally low priced products featuring however the same quality of a market-top product and just scaled-down features… this is a challenge. Taking and winning it requires serious, original industrial competence.

Some 2-3 years ago I auditioned my first planar IEM and I was kinda puzzled. Then I heard another. Then another. And I gave up. Most of all, they were drowning me into “planar timbre”, i.e. [almost] complete lack of microdynamics. A total turnoff for me. Simply put, I could see no reason why one would prefer one of those to a much more expressive and/or refined fast-transient DD or (quite rare, on low budgets) good BA.

Then in spite of my disappointment for the category last year a friend convinced me to audition a pair of RHA CL2, and that’s where I finally “got” planars: different beasts, indeed. And not at all “inexpressive” as the previous ones I tried.

Too bad that a) those CL2 babies cost a pretty penny, and what’s worse b) they are not in production anymore. “Alright too bad” – I said to myself. At least now I know “what” I look for “can” exist in a planar IEM, and that I was right on disregarding lower rank / quality alternatives.

Finally, in came Akoustyx.

Simply put, their S6 are truly hightech planar drivers built into a scaled-down, very modestly priced, stellar value package.

I sharply disagree on the apriori choice which as been made in favor of the IE2017 target. In my very modest personal opinion I don’t find it neither studio-neutral/reference, nor pleasantly musical. I was even more disappointed about stock CL2 tuning, however !

The outstanding things with S6 are their spot on native timbre, and their great elasticity vs EQ corrections.

No they do not deliver “precisely the same” technical proweness I heard on RHA CL2. They come seriously close however, with that indeed representing a credible, significant, differently flavored alternative to DD or BA technology budget drivers – that is, at a fraction of CL2’s price.

If you ask me, S6 are indeed worth their full 250$ MSRP, and then some. At their current deal price on Drop ($129) they are on “steal” category.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

The post Akoustyx S6 Review (2) – …This ! appeared first on Music For The Masses.

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

At-a-glance Card

Full Device Card

Test setup

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

Signature analysis

Tonality

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

Sub-Bass

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

Mid Bass

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

Mids

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

Male Vocals

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

Female Vocals

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

Highs

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

Technicalities

Soundstage

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

Imaging

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

Details

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

Instrument separation

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

Driveability

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

Physicals

Build

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

Fit

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

Comfort

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

Isolation

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

Cable

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

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

Specifications (declared)

Considerations and hints

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Comparisons

Final E4000 ($149)

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

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

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

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

Oriolus Isabellae ($500 street price)

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

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

Dunu ZEN ($699)

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

Conclusions

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

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

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

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

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

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

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

同社

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

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

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

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

キーテクノロジー

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

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

1 – “縦型スーパーツィーター”

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

基本的に、積層セラミックスは振動をよりコントロールしやすいとされています。

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

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

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

2 – グラフェンコーティング

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

3 – 真鍮製ハウジング

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

4 – HDSS

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

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

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

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

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

一目でわかるカード

フルデバイスカード

テストセットアップ

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

シグネチャー解析

トーナル

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

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

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

サブベース

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

中低音

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

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

ミッド

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

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

男性ヴォーカル

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

女性ボーカル

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

トレブル

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

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

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

技術的なこと

サウンドステージ

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

イメージング

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

詳細

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

機器分離

高音域と並んでMIYABIが得意とするのが、楽器分離です。

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

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

ドライバビリティ

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

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

物理的側面

ビルド

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

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

フィット感

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

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

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

快適性

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

アイソレーション

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

ケーブル

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

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

仕様

比較対象

Tanchjim Oxygen ($ 250)

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

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

Ikko OH1S ($ 159)

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

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

Ikko OH10 ($ 199)

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

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

Dunu Zen ($700)

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

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

考察と結論

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

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

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

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Tecnologie principali

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

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

1 – “Vertical Super Tweeter”

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

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

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

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

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

2 – Rivestimento in grafene

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

3 – Struttura esterna in ottone

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

4 – HDSS

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

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

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

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

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

A colpo d’occhio

Scheda completa

Ambienti di prova

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

Analisi della caratteristica sonora

Tonalità

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

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

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

Sub-Basso

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

Basso medio

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

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

Medi

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

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

Voci maschili

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

Voci femminili

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

Alti

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

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

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

Tecnicità

Palcoscenico

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

Immagine sonora

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

Dettagli

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

Separazione strumentale

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

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

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

Pilotabilità

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

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

Aspetti fisici

Struttura

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

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

Indossabilità

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

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

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

Comfort

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

Isolamento

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

Cavo

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

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

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

Specifiche (dichiarate dal costruttore)

Confronti

Tanchjim Oxygen (250 $)

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

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

Ikko OH1S (159 $)

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

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

Ikko OH10 (199 $)

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

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

Dunu Zen (700$)

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

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

Considerazioni e conclusioni

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

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

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

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

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Key technologies

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

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

1 – “Vertical Super Tweeter”

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

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

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

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

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

2 – Graphene coating

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

3 – Brass housings

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

4 – HDSS

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

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

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

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

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

At-a-glance Card

Full Device Card

Test setup

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

Signature analysis

Tonality

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

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

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

Sub-Bass

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

Mid Bass

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

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

Mids

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

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

Male Vocals

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

Female Vocals

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

Highs

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

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

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

Technicalities

Soundstage

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

Imaging

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

Details

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

Instrument separation

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

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

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

Driveability

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

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

Physicals

Build

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

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

Fit

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

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

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

Comfort

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

Isolation

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

Cable

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

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

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

Specifications (declared)

Comparisons

Tanchjim Oxygen ($ 250)

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

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

Ikko OH1S ($ 159)

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

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

Ikko OH10 ($ 199)

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

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

Dunu Zen ($700)

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

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

Considerations & conclusions

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

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

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

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

At-a-glance Card

Full Device Card

Test setup

Transports: Samsung smartphone and tablet, two different Windows 10 laptops, Sony NW-A55 DAP – Stock silicon eartips – 16/24bit-44.1/192KHz tracks

Physicals

Build

Sirius Pro TWS’ carry & battery recharge case is very, very nice design-wise, both in terms of aesthetics and of phyisical conception. The shell is fully metallic, with a sort of “unlockable cage” on the upper side safely keeping the buds down in their recharge position. The design follows a very well calibrated cyberpunk style, clearly clinging at such theme lovers but staying a small but decisive step “not too far” on that path, resulting in an item that can still stafely be taken out during an informal business meeting for example.

The metal case is complemented by fancy LED lighting – up to the user selecting their color by cycle-clicking on a button at the bottom, or disabling (!) them – and it’s very uncommon “open-body” shape indeed doubles as a bottlecap opener. Again: strong styles aesthetics design involved, but always with an eye at not really “overexceeding”, the result being still possibly compatible with the taste of an old somewhat conservative old european sole like myself for example. YMMV, needless to say.

I couldn’t devine what material are Sirius Pro TWS’ bud housings themselves made of – the manufacturer talks about zinc-alloy. Whatever, they are apparently very solid, and IPX5 certified which means they can bear moderate watering (like rain, or of course sweat) – no submersion or big water splashes tho so remember that when going to the beach or so.

Sliding the buds out of the battery case gets some… creativity, at least the first times you try. Their backsides are conic shaped and short, and they are almost impossible to safely grab with a fingertip pinch to pull them out both due to their shape & size and to the magnetic force applied between them and the case. The trick at least for me is to start pinching on the case (!) right below where the buds start emerging from it, and pull up while letting fingertips slide on the structure: this way they come out easilly and aergonomically as (I suppose) intended.

Access to the battery case is regulated by a metal “gate” which besides being aestheticall in-line with the overall style also serves the function of keeping the two buds safely into their case when pocketing them, and last but not least ensuring their bottomside contacts do fully match those on the receptacles, to initiate recharging when the buds are homed.

Fit

Sirius Pro TWS bud shells are very reasonably lightweight and their shape is quite anatomical. They fit easily into my ears but be warned: they need to be orientated the “right” way. Simply put, you have to make sure the “octopus legs” are pointing towards your lobe, and this for two reasons: one to get the best fit of course and two to avoid the mic hole being occluded. This is also properly mentioned on the manual (RTFM, FFS! )

Nozzles are oval shaped (à la Ikko OH1S, to give an idea) so are the bundled eartips. I must say this is one of those rare occasions where stock tips are perfect for the job. Caveat: it may be not so simple finding third party spares.

Comfort

Once properly fitted I found Sirius Pro TWS very comfy, also for prolonged usage timeframes – both listening and/or office calls. I presume this is another achievement coming from all the industrial design attention which was obviously applied to this project and product.

Tapping once on more on the housings allows the user to issue the usual commands e.g. track fwd, track backwards, play, pause, answer call, reject call, etc. Tunneling voice commands to Android assistant is also supported.

Connectivity and battery

Sirius Pro TWS support Bluetooth 5.2, but sadly only SBC and AAC codecs. No aptX, no LDAC. So forget hi-res audio in the first place with them, although as I will report more below that’s not their worse audio drawback.

Pairing with all the transports I tried them with was straightforward, no annoying bad surprises. Long-clicking the button at the bottom of the batterycase resets all BT pairing by the way.

The buds themselves turn ON when take off the battery case, and OFF when put back in. After pairing the two to a given source, they can be used together or one at a time as preferred – just leaving one of the two inside the case.

The battery-case on its turn has a USB-C port for recharging of course.

The small batteries inside the buds offer up to 4 hours of operation time, and the case can fully recharge them for 3 times, up to a theoretical autonomy of 16 hours. But : earbuds take 1.5/2h to recharge ! So if you imagine to use them continually until they are fully discharged you will have to bear a quite sizeable downtime every 3.5/4h. In more practical terms you can expect to use Sirius Pro TWS for more than a full working day (including even long commuting time) for calls, and for listening to music during free time, as long as you take them off into their case for a while every now and then to restore some juice up.

Sound analysis

As all TWS earphones/headphones, Sirius Pro of course carry their own small DAC-AMP which is in charge of analog reconstruction starting from the digital stream received via BT. Barred a few very high end (and expensive) cases, the overwhelming majority of budget-priced TWS drivers carry quite basic-quality DAC-AMP circuitry, from which of course we can’t reasonably expect top sonic results.

Sirius Pro TWS are no exception. Simply put, they offer some pleasant music rendering experience when evaluated under “non-audiophile” standards, while – like most of their peers – they fall way behind critical listening / audiophile quality standards offered by even more modestly priced wired options.

Sirius Pro TWS also carry some DSP capabilities offering the user 3 pre-set audio modes – Music, Gaming and Movie – each offering a different overall presentation which the user can switch onto on the fly by simply tapping on the buds’ housings.

Music Mode

Music Mode is probably the zero-DSP mode, i.e. the situation where I am direct listening to the unaltered Sirius Pro DAC voicing.

Tonality on Music Mode is V shaped, on a warm, dark-ish timbre.

Bass range is moderately extended, sub bass is hinted but does not deliver proper rumble. Midbass is pushed up, and too much proactive for acoustic music where it comes accross almost booming. May be liked by EDM and other non-acoustic music lovers.

Mids are evidently recessed and seriously overshadowed by the midbass. Highmids are also quite timid so even on female vocal prominent tracks the ryhtm section steals the scene to the leader. Trebles are inoffensive and unshrilling, at least that, but (quite coherently with the rest of the presentation) they clearly lack air thereby not succeeding in properly “counterbalancing” the overall experience.

Technicalities are very basic. Soundstage is intimate, with just a bit of depth. Imaging is hampered by the midbass. Microdynamics are nowhere near audiophile ballparks.

Gaming Mode

Gaming mode evidently expands the soundstage, a distributes imaging better on the X axis at least.

Midbass gets less invasive which makes at least female vocals come up more natural.

Movie Mode

Movie mode delivers a stage similar to the gaming one, and stretches (so to say) bass similarly too, so midbass is also less invasive, which is good of course.

The less good part is that mids are pushed forward and end up quite artificial from the sound fidelity perspective. Good for watching movies (as intended!), not for listening to folk singers nor jazz or most pop stuff of course.

Latency

Latency is very modest, and simply put it does not get in the way any seriously when watching movies. And that’s good.

While gaming… well, it depends on gaming levels. I expect an hardcore FPS gamer to underline the ever so slight delay Sirius Pro TWS deliver, but then again that individual would probably not choose a similar pair of TWS buds for his most engaging plays anyway.

Calls

I could quite successfully use Sirius Pro TWS for business calls, and I was very positively surprised by that.

As previously mentioned, it’s crucial to appropriately orientate the housings into the ears to get the best fit and properly expose the mic’s hole (again: RTFM). When that is taken care of, mic quality and Environment Noise Cancellation (ENC) is above decent at the very least – not comparable with professional vertical products of course, but way beyond usable.

On calls I ended up preferring Sirius Pro TWS on Gaming mode in terms of vocal quality.

Specifications (declared)

Considerations & conclusions

TWS earphones are no doubt a huge technical challenge in terms of achieving true audiophile results, comparable with wired alternatives.

Firstly, there ain’t such thing as “lossless BT communication” so that is an apriori negative bias no matter what technology or competence goes into the buds themselves.

Even more importantly, by definition TWS earphones must carry their own DAC-AMP. Think to how much did you spend for your DAC and your AMP, and/or for your DAP, add the cost of your preferred IEMs, then compare that with the budget you are investing into a pair of TWS IEMs : this will give you a rough measure of the expectations you may reasonably set in terms of output quality from TWS buds.

Indeed, it’s even worse than that: earbuds are small. The smaller the size, the more complicated (and sometimes impossible) it is to fit truly high quality DAC and especially AMP technology in.

With all the above in mind, looking at their asked price Gravastar Sirius Pro TWS are a wonderful piece of industrial design in terms of construction, ergonomics, features set and not least aesthetics (although carrying a definitely sided style at that). On the flip side they evidently lag behind in terms of pure hires sound reproduction quality – which I quite simply rate “no audiophile grade” – and make themselves more appreciated as a multipurpose music, office calls, gaming, movie watching audio gadget instead.

The Sirius Pro TWS set I assessed have been provided free of charge by Gravastar Europe, to whom my thanks goes for the consideration and the trust. They can be purchased from Gravastar web site, here. 16% off with discount code AUDIOREVIEWS.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

The post Gravastar Sirius Pro TWS Review – Wonderfully Industrial appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Cons — Deserves a tad more upper midrange and treble extension for a wider stage and more sparkle; not the fastest driver; limited applicability of third-party eartips.

Executive Summary

Introduction

IKKO is a Chinese manufacturer that has initially delighted us with their very few however innovative <$200 earphones (and accessories). Their first iem, the IKKO OH1 stood out by its metallic, unconventional shells with a great haptic. The “masterfully jazzy” well-dosed V-shaped IKKO OH10 made it onto our Wall of Excellence. They excel by their superb imaging and staging – and offer a sniff into the premium segment at a mid-tier price.

The – in contrast to the OH10 – brighter tuned IKKO OH1S is a highly underrated marvel, possibly because many influencers had their listening experience guided by the frequency response graph. The OH2 is physically very similar to the OH2. It appears that IKKO wants to appease those customers with there OH2 who found the OH1S too spicy. Will it work?

IKKO are currently expanding their product range into dongles such as the IKKO Zerda ITM01, microphones (for YouTubers), small speakers, and other desktop accessories.

Specifications

:

Physical Things and Usability

In the box are the earpieces, the cable, a set of IKKO I-Planet foam tips, a set of oval silicone tips, a storage wallet, an IKKO pin, an MMCX tool for safely disconnecting cable and earpieces, and the paperwork.

Just like the OH1S, IKKO OH2’s shells are premium built with mostly aluminum alloy and some resin, and they feature one of the companyʼs trademarks: oval nozzles, which help forming any eartip into the cross-sectional shape of your ear canals.

The shells are rather small and light compared to the OH10, they look and feel great, sit firmly in my ears and are very comfortable. The small size of the earpieces is certainly a huge asset. Isolation is not the greatest for me.

I find the haptic and ergonomics premium: 10/10.

I really like the included cable (same as with OH1S): spindly, wiry, light. Coated with hard pvc, it has the right stiffness for me and is not rubbery at all. Great in the days where cables are increasingly becoming ropes pulling our ears down. Less is more, also in this case.

Tonality and Technicalities

IKKO have tuned the OH2 differently from their other popular models. It is not V-shaped like the OH10 – and it is not as treble extended as the OH1S, although both share the relatively flat frequency response up to 1.5 kHz. As in so many cases, the OH2’s frequency response graph is literally misleading as it leads speculations into the wrong direction.

From a helicopter perspective, the IKKO OH2 is somewhat dry and slightly warm sounding iem. For me, the included IKKO I-Planet foam tips worked best. But foams in combination with my ears always generate a rather dry bass.

And it is rather dry indeed. Sub-bass extension is good, there is plenty of rumble down there, and there is no boomy mid-bass peak. Nevertheless could the bass be tighter – and it probably is with a different tips/ears combination. I’d call the bass typical for mid-price single dynamic-driver iems, but nothing special. It is certainly not the fastest around and can be somewhat blunt in some recordings.

The vocals have very good weight and decent definition, they are not set back, which is an asset at this price tag. There is a small congestion from the hesitant upper midrange (pinna gain is <10 dB) which compresses male and female voices a bit. A tad more energy at around 2 kHz would make them wider and airier. Higher piano and violin notes lack sparkle.

The top rolloff starts already in the upper midrange but becomes dramatic at above 5 kHz. Treble extension is audibly lacking and compromises stage width and overall sparkle/air.

And whilst stage is narrow, it has a good height and depth. Imaging and spatial cues are good and resolution, separation, and layering are average. The OH2’s biggest sonic assets are its note weight and its very natural timbre.

IKKO OH2 Compared

The $79 Hidizs MM2 with their exchangeable out vents are more versatile and may have slightly better imaging and staging (more headroom), but I find the OH2 have a better organic reproduction , note weight, and cohesion. Instant wow effect vs. slowly growing likability! I also prefer the OH2’s smaller earpieces for their small design and premium haptic whereas the light yet bulky MM2 shells are reminiscent of the budget KZ fare. I’d say the OH2 appeal more to the older, mature crowd (like me) and the MM2 preferably to teenagers.

The $79 Moondrop Aria, viewed as the dynamic-driver standard below $100, is much faster, brighter, and leaner than the OH2. It is technically cleaner with a better defined low end, a better extended treble, and more width. But it also has an upper midrange glare that may be unpleasant for some. The OH2 is less analytical, warmer, deeper, but also thicker in its performance, it has more “soul” and is more engaging to me. The Moondrop may be the “better” earphone, but the OH2 is more enjoyable to me.

The main question may be how the OH2 compares to the $159 IKKO OH1S? Well the OH1S may be brighter but they benefit from their treble extension, which results in a wider stage and better imaging. They provide more headroom. They also have better note definition and resolution. I’d say the price difference is justified – and I, quite frankly, prefer the OH1S as they are the better iem.

Concluding Remarks

IKKO iems are totally underrated in the internet’s echo chambers that cultivate herd mentality pushing überhyped yet short-lived products to promote compulsive buying habits. IKKO iems have a long shelf live for a reason.

The IKKO OH2 are the mellow alternative to all these brightish <$100 earphones such as the Moondrop Aria. They impress by their haptic and accessories, which are essentially identical to the OH1S at twice the price. They further have a decent tonality with an intimate midrange and an organic timbre.

The OH2 will appeal to the more mature budget “audiophile”, who cares about substance rather than gimmicks.

To give you my personal perspective: I really like the OH2 a lot – and not only for their sound but also for their handling (the importance of which for daily use is typically undervalued in reviews). But then again, I could say the same about the OH1S and OH10.

Until next time…keep on listening!

The post IKKO OH2 Review – A Purist’s Daydream appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Cons — V-shape; heavy earpieces, shoddy cable.

Executive Summary

Introduction

The OH10 “Obsidian” has been hanging on our Wall of Excellence for a while, mainly triggered by Alberto, who had written a glowing review. He characterizes the OH10 sensibly and exhaustively so that there is not much room for things to add.

I have tested the OH10 for 1/2 year with endless source combinations.

IKKO is a company that has excelled through excellent builds and a rather small quality rooster of iems (and lately other products), each of which has had a rather long shelf live. The company obviously designs sustainable quality, which is not easy to find in the Shenzhen environment.

The OKKO OH1, their first offering, may have been a bit bright for my taste, but it stuck out from the field because of its sturdy metal build and the unusual shape of their earpieces. It was recently superseded by the smaller OH1S, which is highly underrated because of anti-hype by the usual YouTube screamers. The OH10 was introduced between the two models. It has been on the market for a while, and it is still as relevant as on its first day.

Specifications

Physical Things and Usability

Please relieve me for once from describing the photo showing the content. Yes, the cable is crap and I use Final E tips.

The metal earpieces are super heavy and relatively big – and probably more suited for home use, but their haptic is great. The nozzles are long enough. Fit is good, comfort depends on how much I move, and isolation is average.

Tonality and Technicalities

I was for the longest time in the belief the OH10 featured a crisp single dynamic driver…but it is rather a 1+1 (dynamic driver and balanced armature driver) constellation…which speaks for its cohesion. Both drivers obviously harmonize well with each other.

To give you the helicopter perspective: the OH10 excels by its fantastic bass slam and its excellent imaging. The price paid is recessed vocals and treble extension.

OK, ’nuff said already. Now you know what Alberto and I think of the OH10.

Co-blogger Kazi gave his snappy account on Facebook:

• Unique shell design and very dense shell material. 
• Too heavy for some, myself included. I find them to weigh down on my ears after a while.
• Isolation is lacking.
• Sub-bass is excellent. Punchy, agile, with good amount of rumble.
• Mid-bass is slightly thinner than expected but got good texture. 
• Vocals are recessed. Not gonna set the world alight with midrange performance.
• Upper-midrange can feel peaky at times. I found them to be too up-front on some hard rock tracks. 
• Treble is inoffensive, decent amount of sparkle but lacks the extension and air of upper-tier stuff. 
• Good staging, not as wide or deep as E5000 but fairly balanced across all three axes. 
• Imaging is decent, did not stand out to be as much as, say, the Falcon Pro. 

IKKO OH10 Compared

People keep asking for comparisons with the IKKO OH1S “Gems”, which is redundant as both sound totally different. The OH1S is more forward and brighter, and one cannot replace the other. That’s why companies run different models simultaneously…duh!

More interesting appears to be a comparison between the OH10 and the Unique Melody 3DT with its three dynamic drivers. As you can see, both have largely overlapping frequency responses. But I have to disappoint you again as both iems sound completely different. The UM 3DT is much more analytical and less engaging than the OH10.

But what this tells us the limitations of frequency response graphs for characterizing the sound of iems.

Concluding Remarks

The IKKO OH10 gives $$$ conscious audio enthusiasts access to premium quality at a mid-tear price. With its excellent imaging, it plays in the league with the big, expensive boys…not on top, but well above the bottom.

What you sacrifice is comfort through the large and heavy earpieces and some vocals intimacy through the V-shape. But the OH10 does full justice to high-quality sources way above a phone.

It is for good reason a standard staple on our Wall of Excellence…and will remain there for a long time…and im my collection. Kudos to IKKO for demonstrating sustainability in the short-lived world of Shenzhen consumerism.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

All Our 316 Earphone and Earbud Reviews (with Links)

Disclaimer

The Ikko Gems OH1S were provided by Ikko for my review and I thank them for that. I also thank Alberto and Kazi for discussion.

Get the Ikko Gems OH1s from ikkoaudio.com

Gallery

The post IKKO OH10 Review (2) – On Our Wall Of Excellence appeared first on Music For The Masses.

This is a visual intro to the IKKO OH2 Opal. IKKO have been a company offering a small but fine selection of iems. That has changed lately as they have expanded into electronics. We at audioreviews.org have followed their iems since their OH1. The $199 IKKO OH10 made it even onto our Wall of Excellence.

The OH10 have a very safe, likeable V-shaped tuning with no peaks or pierces and huge stage. They are a first taste of the premium segment at a mid-tier price…and therefore a rare example of justifying the otherwise hollow marketing term “entry level” (with respect to premium).

The smaller $159 IKKO OH1S shows a completely different tuning with a strictly linear bottom shelf and a rather “vivid” treble that caused some confusion with the reviewers. The rumour arose that the OH1S don’t have “enough” bass and to much spice in the upper registers. In fact, their bass response is just fine and the treble extension may be a matter of taste.

What was also unusual is their oval nozzles for which I had issues finding third-party tips suiting my ears. On the other hand, the included IKKO foams work well in that they provide a good seal and help with the bass.

IKKO responded to the criticism of the OH1S with the new IKKO OH2. They are a tad larger than the OH1S and have the same accessories – at a much lower price. The biggest difference is in the tuning: while the bass shelf was kept the same, upper OH2’s midrange was somewhat reduced, and much of that treble extension was shaved off. The result is a more generally appealing sound.

Specifications IKKO OH2

Images

Get these earphones from IKKO Audio.

The post PhotoGraphed: IKKO OH2 vs. IKKO OH1S 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.

The new version of iFi’s recently discontinued hip-dac, amongst the few low cost mobile dac-amps featured of our Wall of Excellence, is marketed at a very similar price (€ 189,00) compared to its precedessor.

At the end of the day, my opinion about hip-dac2 could be condensed in a simple one-liner: as good as Hip Dac, so very good for this price point, with the addition of a higher MQA reconstruction quality.

As I never published an article about original hip-dac I will take this opportunity to deliver an extended article on the “hip-dac franchise”, so to call it. I will clearly mark the differences between hip-dac2 and hip-dac within the text. Let’s go through it.

At-a-glance Card

Product analysis

Key features and general description

hip-dac2 (like its precedessor hip-dac) is a battery-equipped slim-bodied easily pocketable USB DAC-AMP.

Size-, weight- and shape-wise it’s just wonderful. The full metal shell is sturdy, greatly pocketable, and at the same time superbly stylish from the shape and finishing points of view. It “pairs” very well with an average smartphone when used in conjunction with that.

Sole audio input is the USB data port.  The input connector is the “usual” iFi USB-A recessed male plug. A USB-A(f) to USB-C and a USB-A(f) to USB-A(m) short cables are supplied free. No UBS-A(f) to micro-USB nor USB-A(f) to Apple Lightning are offered in the package.

No coax, optical nor analog input available. hip-dac2 (or hip-dac) can’t be used as a pure amplifier.

Two phone outputs are available: single ended (S-balanced, actually – more on this below) 3.5mm and balanced 4.4 mm.

No line-out analog output is available, which means that hip-dac2 (or hip-dac) can’t be used as a “pure DAC”, plugged into a downstream amp device. It still can be further amplified but the internal amp section will anyhow be involved as a “pre-amp”.

The internal battery cannot be charged via the digital input USB port. A separate charge-only USB-C port is dedicated to charging (a short USB-A to USB-C cable is included in the package). This is good as it cuts on much of the source-incoming noise typically carried by an active VBUS line. On the other hand it means that even when USB-connected to (say) a laptop the hip-dac2 / hip-dac will always only take power from its internal battery, and will eventually run out of juice.

Battery autonomy as always depends on usage (highres files and high volume listening consume more of course) but you can count on some good 6-7 hours of “common spec” listening. A full recharge takes like 3 hours.

When referring to similarly priced portable DAC-AMP devices, hip-dac2 / hip-dac’s power specifications are nominally impressively high vs high impedance loads (6.2V vs 600 ohm, just wow!) and a good step above average vs mid impedance loads (400mW vs 32 ohm).

iFi doesn’t table specs vs low impedance loads (< 16ohm) though, nor hip-dac2 / hip-dac’s output impedance on either of its phone out ports is declared.

Similar to what happens for most if not all of their devices, iFi offers a selection of easily user-installable firmware alternatives for Hip Dac 2 – ultimately yielding into alternative choices in terms of digital reconstruction filters.

Lastly, the device offers a manual High Gain button (labelled “Power Match”) and an XBass+ button. More on these later.

How does it sound: DAC performance

Considering hip-dac2 / hip-dac lack a proper Line Out, DAC performances are only partially assessable as some will be influenced by the integrated amp stage.

It is nevertheless quite evident that hip-dac2 / hip-dac’s voicing is very good when looking at pretty much any other similar portable DAC-AMP on this level of budget. Auditioned from its Balanced output port (more on why later) range is very well extended both towards the bass and the highs. Bass notes are well bodied, not particularly enhanced. Treble is smooth while more than nicely airy, and mids are quite evidently the best developed section.

There’s a quite evident warm tonality – difficult if not impossible to say which section (DAC and/or AMP) contributes to that most. But it’s there. If I have to compare with my experience with other iFi devices offering Line Out options (Nano iDSD Black Label, Micro iDSD Signature) I am ready to bet this is mostly AMP-related but again… it’s a guess.

Good DAC performance doesn’t come by chance. iFi adopts high-standard components even inside their budget products like hip-dac2 / hip-dac, and this is surely one good first step – but this often happens on many chi-fi devices, which on even or very similar “internal stuff list” condition in the end sound apparently much worse. The real key is engineering competence, really – and that can’t be so easily “cloned”.

One aspect: a fundamental requisite to obtain good performances from a DAC device is avoiding interferences on the incoming digital data. Not talking about human-audible interferences, of course. You might want to read this other article of mine to get a flavour of what I’m talking about. As already mentioned above, hip-dac2 / hip-dac don’t take power from the USB data cable, this way apriori cutting a lot in terms of noise “collection”.

Another aspect: unlike the overwhelming majority of the other budget mobile devices, hip-dac2 / hip-dac offer an analog volume control, not a digital one. The reason why this is way better for DAC performances is quite technical (check here for a good, reasonabe vulgarly-explained article) but putting it very simply: digital volume controls act upon the digital stream before it reaches the DAC, and deliver a “integral” digital data to the DAC only at their end-scale position (so at “100% volume” position); intermediate volume levels are realized by applying attenuatin to the digital data which de facto corresponds to reducing their digital resolution.

An analog-volume device like hip-dac2 / hip-dac always feeds its DAC chip at full digital resolution, and attenuates the analog output aposteriori only. Why not every device has this ? Quite simply because analogue volume controls are more expensive to implement and more complicated to design

Firmware options

Like most if not all other iFi DAC devices, hip-dac2 / hip-dac can run a range of firmware variants, each offering different features or optimisations. Firmware packages and the apps required to flash them are freely available on iFi’s web site, here.  The flashing process is really easy and straightforward, at least on Windows platform.

The 3 significant versions to choose from for hip-dac2 are:

For the original hip-dac a very similar option is available although it may be interesting to note here that there have been two hip-dac sub-versions, one tagged with serial numbers beginning with 54010 and the other with serial numbers beginning with 54040. The latter generation accepts the same 7-generation firmware packages as hip-dac2 (labelled respectively 7.2, 7.2c and 7.2b), while the former older generation accepts older versions of the same packages ( labelled respectively 5.3, 5.3c and 5.2).

DSD is a very interesting standard but I don’t de facto currently own nor plan to own music files sampled above DSD 256, so the two options which get my attention are 7.3 and 7.3c.

Their fundamental difference is one only but a significant one at that: with 7.3c iFi’s own GTO (Gibbs Transient Optimised) filter replaces Burr Brown’s native reconstruction filters.

I strongly recommend you read iFi’s whitepaper about why and how this may be technically desireable, or not.

The paper focuses on throughly illustrating GTO’s output features while leaving another important aspect in the background: with 7.3c hip-dac2 will systematically upsample all digital input coming from the USB port up to 32 bit / 384KHz resolution prior to feeding the DAC chips. For what I seem to have understood this is fundamentally required for the GTO filter itself to work as intended.

I already experienced iFi’s GTO implementation in conjunction with Micro iDSD Signature and Nano iDSD Black Label. Simply put: on Nano iDSD BL the GTO option “sounds worse” than the native ones – for my tastes at least. Oppositely, GTO performance on Micro iDSD Signature is very significant, offering important analog reconstruction improvements on redbook-standard (16bit / 44.1KHz) tracks compared to the non-GTO firmware option.

Very similar is my experience on hip-dac2 / hip-dac, and this is one of the few notable differences between the two generations.

hip-dac2 GTO implementation (fw 7.3c) offers a very good alternative option compared to non-GTO (fw 7.3).

Oppositely, when I tested this on a first-version (ser# 54010xxxxx) original hip-dac I got a very similar result as the one I got with the Nano iDSD BL: GTO firmware is basically not worth for me. I didn’t have an opportunity to test a latter-generation hip-dac (ser# 54040xxxxx).

MQA

This is quite evidently the most important aspect about which hip-dac2 represents a significant upgrade from hip-dac: MQA reconstruction performance is evidently better.

MQA royalties and consulting fees apart, as one may easily imagine different enabling hardware makes a big difference on such a computing intensive process as MQA unfolding. Newer generation iFi models (hip-dac2, Diablo, ZEN DAC v2 etc) carry a 16 core XMOS chip with a much higher capacity and computing power (2X the clock speed, 4X the internal memory, latest USB standards compliance) so – simply put – it can “do more at the same time” than the predecessor model.

The improvement in the audible result is quite evident, and totally in line with theory. When applied to MQA-authenticated tracks hip-dac2 reconstructs a much airier, defined and detailed sound compared to the job done by hip-dac as mere Renderer on the very same tracks.

On the other hand, though, I think it’s worthwhile here to remember that – like it or not – MQA is not any sort of magical way to make a DAC sound better then it technically could when applied to a non-MQA, full resolution version of the same track.

A very easy comparison example for me is with Apogee Groove. While of course hip-dac2 will reconstruct/reproduce an MQA-master track at a higher level of audible detail and resolution compared to what Groove will do when connected as a non-MQA DAC on the same track, on the other hand Groove’s range extension, dynamic range, bass and treble control stay on a superior level even in such an “handicap-started” race. Even more evident is the DAC reconstruction quality difference of course when applying hip-dac2 to a given MQA-authenticated track, and Groove to a high-res non-MQA version of the very same track.

Long story short, I guess it all boils down to a quite trivial conclusion: MQA is no magic wand, it’s got no “hardware upgrade power”. Of course.

How does it sound: AMP performance

Based on experience I stopped expecting that low budget devices offer similar amping quality results from both their single and balanced ended outputs. It fundamentally never happens.

The fact is that in these cases balanced amping architecture is primarily adopted as an inexpensive, easy-implementable way for many manufacturers to offer a decent or above-decent output quality (cleanness, transparency, dynamic range) off of apriori difficult situations such as small / ultrasmall and low price tier pocketable devices.

Clean amping is mostly dependent on high quality power management, and in a small and/or relatively inexpensive “box” there is little “room” (physical and virtual) to fit appropriate power management circuitry. Clean power is a challange on amps of any size, and a very steep one the smaller the form factor and the budget get.

As size & cost go up it starts to be possible to encounter devices e.g. the Micro iDSD Signature whereon Single Ended and Balanced phone outs present a power difference, but negligible quality differences. Below that size and budget, I just encountered white flys. Groove, to name one, which Single Ended output is a few times over cleaner, more transparent and dynamic-extended than any other Balanced-equipped device below $300 I happened to hear. Another good case is Sony NW-A55. I have a serious hard time naming a third.

From this point of view, hip-dac2 / hip-dac follow the mainstream. Do not expect wonders from their Single Ended outputs, as in facts you won’t get any. The other way around is rather true: hip-dac2 / hip-dac’s Single Ended output is unimpressive – dull, compressed, closed-in. This, in spite of the good deeds of their S-Balanced tech.

Different story for the Balanced Ended 4.4mm output, which comes accross evidently airier, better bilaterally extended, with a very good level of control on bass and smooth trebles, and most of all a quite nice dynamic range and good microdynamic rendering. In a word, the solid impression is that on hip-dac2 / hip-dac BE out is the sole one with enough cleanness and transparency as to offer some justice to the preceding DAC stage.

As I already mentioned above, there’s a distinct warm coloration. Is this coming from the DAC or the AMP? Difficult to determine as hip-dac2 / hip-dac don’t offer a pure Line Out option, and thus a chance to use a third-party amp like it happens on other iFi models like Nano iDSD BL or Micro iDSD Signature is precluded.

A small difference can also be identified between hip-dac2 and hip-dac’s overall output quality, namely the former being a bit more sparkly in the highs, and just a whiff less intimate as far as soundstage goes.

I didn’t mention soundstage yet, which is definitely not a shiny aspect for hip-dac2 nor hip-dac. Quite narrow, really. Is this due to scarce spatial reconstruction skills at the DAC level or due to unclean AMPing? Again, impossible to say due to the lack of a Line Out option – and after all useless to know either, as it’s not something the user can do anything about.

Lastly, I think it’s worth noting that some hiss is picked by very sensitive loads (CA Andromeda, anyone? ). While definitely an imperfection taken per se, I guess it should be conceded to hip-dac2 / hip-dac that it’s a very common one, almost irregardlessly of the device budget.

Extra features

There are two toggle-buttons beside hip-dac2 / hip-dac’s volume knob, named Power Match and XBass.

Power Match is nice attempt at a layman-friendly naming for a Gain switch. Activating Power Match puts hip-dac2 / hip-dac in High Gain mode, which is of course recommended (only) when a low-sensitivity driver is connected. Attention though: on low-sensitivity and low-impedance devices the suggestion is flipped – Low Gain is typically a much better option.

XBass behaves like what an EQ expert would call a low shelf positive filter. By ear it pushes lows up by 2dB-ish from 100Hz down. Might occasionally turn out to be handy to help some bass-shy drivers, or as a compromise to compensate for some drivers requiring a higher level of current delivery than what hip-dac2 / hip-dac can deliver to express their best on their bass lines.

Notable pairings

You find some significant pairing impressions reported in Kazi’s article, which I already mentioned above.

I find myself totally in line with what Kazi wrote when referring to final Sonorous-III and Dunu ZEN / ZEN Pro which I also had a chance to directly test with hip-dac2 and hip-dac. Ditto for my experience with a pair of high-impedance cans, which is HD600 in my case – ultimately showing that hip-dac2 / hip-dac’s nominal 6V @ 600ohm spec is less effective than it may seem when put to the real work.

Let me just add a few other experiences here.

final E3000

Biasing-wise the pair is technically good, insofar as hip-dac2 and hip-dac both definitely deliver enough current to E3000 to open them up properly, keeping their bass transients controlled and delivering a good sense of space. The unavoidable down side is that due to E3000’s fixed cable it’s impossible to exploit hip-dac2 / hip-dac’s best amping output (the Balanced one) so the forced-single-ended pair is bound to unavoidably suffer from some dullness and lack of dynamics.

final E5000

Even when paired on the Balanced output hip-dac2 and hip-dac don’t seem to deliver enough current soon enough to brighten-up E5000’s bass line. The result is an overly thick presentation which is what very commonly one gets on E5000 from budget-tier sources.

Ikko OH-1S and Tanchjim Oxygen

Although different, the two IEMs react very similarly to hip-dac2 / hip-dac pair. Both get turned on very nicely by the balanced output, delivering much of their competence in terms of technicality. Both get “warmed up” by hip-dac2 / hip-dac’s coloration, which may be a welcome variation to many in comparison to their otherwise slightly-bright/neutral tonality. Hip-dac2 pushes both’s highmids up, luckily without passing the glare limit. Nice ones.

final Sonorous-II

Similarly to what happens on Sonorous-III, the pair has lights and shadows. Good is bass (a case where the XBass switch delivers a pleasant alternative at the user’s fingertip), and microdynamics. Less good is high-mids which get a bit too hot.

Shure SRH-1840

This is a really good pair. Power available on Low Gain is already more than enough to make SRH-1840 sing pretty well, and there’s no overdoing on the high-mids. Some treble extension is lacking. General warmth may be considered bearable in this case due to the fundamental pure neutrality of the phones taken on their own. Too bad for the narrow stage, but at this price level I’ve yet to find a better pair for SRH-1840 if I exclude Groove.

Notable comparisons

Again, some notable comparisons are already mentioned on Kazi’s article, which I once again encourage you to read. I do share his opinion about hip-dac2 vs hip-dac entirely.

vs Apogee Groove

The comparison is apriori dishomogeneous as Groove is a high-power-demanding dongle with a unique, not-general-purpose amping architecture while hip-dac2 and hip-dac are designed with full-horizontal applicability in mind. Performance differences found between the two devices should be put in the correct perspective.

That said, Groove’s DAC and AMP refinements, where applicable, are significantly better compared to hip-dac2 / hip-dac.

Hip-dac2’s DAC reconstruction prowess does challenge Groove’s resolving power exclusively when applied to MQA-authenticated tracks. On such very tracks, hip-dac2’s Full Decoder capabilities deliver superior resolution and air, while on the other hand still falling short vs Groove on range extension, bass control and treble vividness. On non-MQA material there’s no game instead.

vs Hidizs S9 Pro

Another dishomogeneous therefore “unfair” comparison, which I’m mentioning basically only due to S9 Pro’s popularity. Similarly to Groove, Hidizs S9 Pro is a battery-less dongle featuring a high host-power demand. Different from Groove, it carries a general-purpose amping architecture free from apriori pairing limitations.

Like hip-dac2 / hip-dac, S9 Pro also comes with dual phone outputs (Single Ended and Balanced Ended), and again similarly in both cases the Single Ended option, well, might also be omitted, for how underwhelming they are compared to their Balanced Ended alternatives.

That said, the sound quality difference between the two devices is nothing short of dramatic. Hip-dac2 / hip-dac are better resolving, have better estension, better dynamics and better features. Last but not least, when connected to a “noisy” host (e.g a laptop) S9 Pro degrades its cleanness and spatial reconstruction performance quite evidently, and benefits of a noise filter adoption (e.g. an iFi iSilencer or an AudioQuest Jitter Bug), while hip-dac2 / hip-dac is much more resilient off the bat.

S9 Pro costs 35% less than hip-dac2, that must be noted, too.

vs iFi Nano iDSD Black Label

Similarly priced and after all not so differently-sized, the two devices do behave similarly.

Overall, hip-dac2 comes out ahead when used as a complete (DAC+AMP) system, even more so if applied to MQA material as Nano iDSD Black label is a mere Renderer not a Full Decoder. On the flip side, Nano iDSD Black Label offers a pure Line Out option which is the big “missing bit” from hip-dac2 / hip-dac, which allows the user to “upgrade” the device with an external amp – possibly a desktop one? – and fully exploit the really nice quality of its internal DAC.

Considerations & conclusions

Hip-dac2 is an outstanding device, quite evidently the best sub-200$ battery powered pocketable DAC-AMP on the market today. It delivers very good DAC reconstruction capabilities, significant amping power, and remarkable cleannes, dynamics and air from its Balanced Ended headphone output.

Compared to its preceding version, hip-dac2 offers MQA Full Decoding which represent a solid further improvement for Tidal fans. Apart from that, its features are identical and its sound quality are so close to the preceding version that a current hip-dac owner may safely hold on to his existing investment in case Tidal Master is not his streaming service of choice.

Disclaimer

As always, a big thank you to iFi for the continued opportunity they offer me to keep assessing their products.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

The post iFi hip-dac2 Review (2) – Still The Best appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Gear of the Year: 2021 marks the blog’s third year and the second with 8 contributors. We collectively published almost 200 articles, mainly product reviews, but also technical information. Apart from receiving review units from manufacturers and sellers, we also purchased a lot…and we borrowed from audiophile friends and colleagues.

We are a heterogeneous bunch not pressed into templates by commercialism. Each of us enjoys maximum freedom. None of us gets paid. And it is this variety that makes this blog interesting. Two of us, Baskingshark and Kazi, have been drafted to also write for Headphonesty, which gives them more exposure and also access to very interesting gear.

Our main focus has traditionally been on earphones – we have reviewed almost 300 – but particularly DACs and amps also caught our attention this year.

As at the end of the previous years, we list our our personal favourites of 2021 – the portable audio we personally enjoyed most. There are no rules, we just tell you what we like. After all, the gear we use most is our best. And we attached some of this gear to our newly created Wall of Excellence, which averages all our opinions.

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

We thank

Most of our reviews would have not been possible without our 2021 cooperating partners. We thank:

ADV, Allo, Apos Audio, Astell & Kern, AudioQuest, Azla, Blon, BQEYZ, Burson Audio, Campfire Audio, Cayin, CCA, Dekoni, Dunu, ddHiFi, EarMen, Easy Earphones, Fiil, Helm Audio, Hidizs, HifiGo, ifi Audio, IKKO Audio, KBEAR/TRI Audio, Keephifi, Khadas, Knowledge Zenith, Meze, Moondrop, Musicteck, NiceHCK, OneOdio, Penon Official Store, Pergear, Sennheiser, Shanling, Shenzhenaudio, Smabat, Snake Oil Sound, SpinFit, Tempotec, Tin Hifi, TRN Official Store, Unique Melody, Venture Electronics, Whizzer Official Store, Yaotiger Hifi Audio Store. Don’tkillusifweforgotyoujustsendusanotandwefixit. 

For the companies: you can check for your products/yourself in the search field on the right-hand side.

We also thank the private sources that supplied us with loaners.

And here we go…that’s what we enjoyed in 2021…

Alberto Pittaluga…Bologna, ITALY

I’ve come accross quite a few interesting pieces of gear in 2021, mixed / hidden amongst piles of shameful crap. Nothing new, is it ? I’ll try to make a succint list of the most significant stuff I auditioned here. Most of these devices are also now part of my operative audio gear.

IEMS

Dunu ZEN (discountinued, was $ 699,00) : beyond spectacular microdynamics, resolution, layering and technicalities in general. A masterpiece.

iBasso IT07 ($899) : the sole real “direct upgrade” to Ikko OH10 I encountered as of yet. Same presentation, twice the refinement, at more than four times the price.

Oriolus Isabellae ($ 599) : somewhat “more V-shaped” alternative to Zen, delivering very similar technical prowess.

Ikko OH1S ($143) : a potential new join into the our World of Excellence roster as a sub-200$ allrounder

Headphones

Final Sonorous-II  (€ 300) : arguably by far the best neutral-tuned closebacks in their price category, staging and imaging easily compete with many lower tier openback alternatives.

Sennheiser HD600 (€ 310) : not a novelty for anybody but me, I’m sure. Quite simply: I got my first HD600 pair in 2021 and that’s why I’m listing it here. I presume no one needs a description. Do you?

Earbuds

Rose Mojito ($259) : superbly neutral-tuned high end earbuds with strong bilateral extention, beyond spectacular mids and vivid, refined highs in a fully holographic stage, with plenty of resolution and dynamics.

K’s Earphone Bell-LBS (€ 59,25) : mid centric buds delivering superbly organic vocals – both male and female – and very good trebles

K’s Earphone K300 (€ 28,59) : unreal sub-bass extension for an earbud, they deliver a very nice V shaped presentation while drawing an incredibly sizeable 3D stage. Presentation remembers a bit Ikko OH10, but in earbud form.

DAC/AMPs

Ifi Micro iDSD Signature (€ 749) : top sub-$1K mobile dac-amp. Very high quality DAC reconstruction paired with superbly transparent amping stage with power to spare for the most demanding planars and power deflation options to optimise low impedance IEM biasing. Truly a full step ahead of the competitors’ pack.

DAPs

Cowon Plenue 2 MK-I (€ 835) : hopped on this recently when I found a impossible to turndown openbox deal. Starting from my direct experience proving that there’s pretty much no game between proprietary-OS DAPs vs commercial-OS (read Android) DAPs, the former being in by far better position to achieve superior output sound quality, Plenue 2 represents a great companion to my QP1R offering a different / alternative optimal pairing opportunity for a few of my preferred IEM drivers.

DAC/AMP Dongles

This year’s experience proved to me that exclusively higher-tier (and price) dongles are able to deliver sound qualities worth the comparison with battery-equipped alternatives. Simply put: pretty much nothing until an Apogee Groove ($200) is really worth the price difference compared to the super-cheap Apple Dongle ($9), and even on the Groove some caveats apply (power needs, amp stage competibility).  That said, I really had pick one device “in the midfield” I’d pick the :

Questyle M12 ($139,99): while still not worth an inclusion on our Wall of Excellence, yet M12 runs circles around pretty much all similar or lower priced competitors I assessed in terms of extension, note weight, clarity and technicalities.

Biodegraded…Vancouver, CANADA

Doesn’t have anything to report this year.

Durwood…Chicago, USA

Shozy Form 1.4 has still been my go to earphone due to it’s warm inviting nature, great technical abilities and it feels great in my ears.

7Hz Timeless is another good buy late in the year for me, it’s a little more sub-bass plus analytical counterpart to the Shozy that has nudged the BQEYZ Spring 2 out of the way. A more detailed review is coming.

I rediscovered the Senfer UES for a quick throw around set, was hoping the Senfer DT9 was a slight improvement, but alas the Senfer UES sticks around instead. Sony MH755 is also perfect for quick on the go usage where I don’t need the universal fit in-ears.

Tempotec impressed me enough to consider the Sonata E35 for when good phone DAP’s are finally dead. Other than that, dongles are not my thing, and I have issues with some of Sony’s GUI decisions on the NW-A55 mainly related to playlist creation and long text support.

Lastly, the Questyle CMA Twelve would be an awesome DAC/amp combo to have, but my needs are more mobile. Perhaps when life slows down, but there are other bucket list items such as the Burson Playmate 2, RebelAmp, the Ruebert Neve RNHP, or RME ADI-2 that look interesting as well. Maybe someone will loan me one in 2022?

Jürgen Kraus…Calgary, CANADA

Earphones have traditionally been our main trade and there’s not many that stuck with me this year. First and foremost, I was impressed by the immersive and engaging sound of the single DD Dunu Zen that further excel in microdynamics. They are still very popular within our team.

Moondrop finally got it right with their tuning in the smooth and very pleasant sounding Moondrop KATO single dynamic driver. This model is generally well received. The JVC HA-FDX1 are still my standard iems for equipment testing, and an honourable mention goes to the Unique Melody 3DT for the clean implementation of 3 (!) dynamic drivers.

Another iem that fascinated me is the Japanese Final E5000. On the market since 2018, and very source demanding, this iem can produce a bass texture beyond belief. I have become a bit of a Final fanboy, as their products are unpretentious and natural sounding…and they fit my ears very well. I also purchased the Final E1000, E3000, and A3000…which get a lot of usage. No surprise that our Wall of Excellence is decorated like a Christmas tree by quite a few of these Japanese earphones and headphones.

Expanding my horizon into other devices, the Sony NW-A55 is a user-friendly digital audio player with great sonic characteristics and signature-altering 3rd party firmware options. But, most of all, it updates its music library within a minute or two. For the ultimate portable enjoyment, I discovered the Questyle QP1R dap...sounds simply amazing with the Final E5000. Found the dap on Canuck Audio Mart.

Dongles, battery-less headphone DAC/amps that turn any cheap phone into a decent music player, were big in 2021. Around since 2016, the market caught on to these devices. But out of the mass of dongles tested, the 2019 AudioQuest DragonFly Cobalt was the most musical to my ears. I also like the AudioQuest DragonFly Red and the EarMen Eagle (replacing the EarMen Sparrow which I sent to Biodegraded). For earphone testing (and bigger cans), I still use the excellent Earstudio HUD100.

For my full-sized headphone needs with my notebook, I discovered the powerful Apogee Groove, a current-hungry dongle DAC/amp that has been around since 2015. I am even portable around the house. As to headphones themselves, I am still happy with the Sennheiser HD 600 and HD 25, but also with the Koss Porta Pro.

For my desktop setup, I identified the EarMen Tradutto as being a fantastic DAC in combination with the Burson Funk amp. Currently testing the Tradutto with my big stereo system.

In summary, I learnt a lot in 2021…

My Take Home this Year

• The latest is barely the greatest…many old brooms get better into the corners
• Influencers are not always right (…to say it nicely)
• Measurements are overrated
• Timbre (degree of naturalness of sound) is underrated
• Source is super important and also underrated
• Group pressure through hype may become a sobering experience
• That groomed YouTube stuff is boring

Kazi Mahbub Mutakabbir…Munich, GERMANY

This year was very educational for me when it came to audiophilia. I got the chance to try out truly summit-fi setups and realized how good a system can sound. This also resulted in a sense of yearning where you keep comparing the gears you own with the ones you cannot own, at least not yet. Nonetheless, without further ado.

Headphones: The one headphone that has stuck with me throughout the year is the Hifiman Susvara. They won’t flatter anyone with the build quality but when paired with the right amp they sound astonishing. One of the most natural sounding headphones out there with exceptional timbre. A must listen.

Honorable mention goes to the Final D8000. Supreme bass that’s pretty much unmatched. On the budget side, I really liked the Final Sonorous-III. They are underrated and under-appreciated.

IEMs: When it comes to in-ear monitors, I have a hard time picking any single one of them as all of them fall short in one area or another. Nonetheless, the one IEM I’ve used the most throughout the year is the Dunu Zen. There is something truly addicting about their sound that makes me come back to them time and again.

However, the Zen is not the best IEM that I have heard throughout the year. That would probably be the Sony IER-Z1R or the 64Audio U12t. In the relatively budget realm, the 7Hz Timeless took me by surprise with their planar speed and excellent bass slam.

Source: Instead of going with separate sections for amps, DACs and such, I will just consolidate them into one.

Best desktop amp I’ve tried: Accuphase E380. One of those rare speaker amps that sound great with headphones.

Best portable amp I’ve tried: Cayin C9. It is the only review loaner in the past year that I have wanted to buy with my own money. I probably will, soon, budget permitting.

Best DAP: Lotoo PAW 6000, even though it can’t power difficult loads.

Best dongle: L&P W2. The only dongle that I found to be good enough to replace some DAPs.

Best DAC: Holo May L2. The price is extremely high but so is the sound quality. Exceptionally natural and neutral tuning. Another must listen.

And that’s a wrap. Have a great Christmas, and see you on the other side!

KopiOkaya…SINGAPORE

Too many lists…I focus on eartips…

Best EARTIPS of 2021

Most versatile eartips: SpinFit CP-100+
Best budget eartips: Audiosense S400
Best eartips for bass: FAudio “Instrument” Premium Silicone Earphone Tips
Best eartips for vocal: Azla SednaEarFit Crystal (Standard)
Best eartips for treble: BGVP S01
Best eartips for soundstage: Whizzer Easytips SS20
Most comfortable eartips: EarrBond New Hybrid Design

Loomis Johnson…Chicago, USA

Gear of the Year (and other Favorite Things)

SMSL SU-9 DAC/Preamp—one of those pieces that makes you seriously question why anyone would spend more. A seriously good DAC which is even better as digital preamp.

Hidisz S3 Pro DAC/Dongle—lacks the juice to power challenging loads, but has an uncanny knack for enlivening and improving more efficient phones. Very refined, with impeccable bass control.

Cambridge Melomania TWS—ancient by TWS standards, and its rivals have more features and tech, but this may still be the best-sounding TWS you can buy.

Shozy Rouge IEM—like a really hot girl you get smitten by the beauty before you even delve into the substance. Properly driven, however, these sound just as good as they look, with estimable staging and clarity.

The Beatles, “Get Back” Documentary—as probably the only person on earth who hasn’t seen Lord of the Rings I was gobsmacked by how brilliant this film looked and sounded. The real surprise for me, however, was how natural  a musician John was—unburdened by technique, but soulful and  exploratory.  Poor George invokes your pity—a good writer forced to compete with two great ones– while Ringo wins the award for Best Attitude.

Bob Dylan, “Desolation Row”—I always found the lyrics impenetrable and a bit sophomoric, but the Spanish-influenced lead guitar part is incredible, with scarcely a phrase repeated throughout the full 11 minutes. I’d always assumed it was Mike Bloomfield, but it’s actually the harmonica virtuoso Charlie McCoy, who also plays the trumpet part of “Rainy Day Women”.

Reds, Pinks and Purples, “Uncommon Weather” In hope of finding something genuinely fresh I dutifully listened to the most-touted 2021 releases before fixating on this one, which (predictably) sounds exactly like 80s Flying Nun and Sarah bands.

And This Was The Previous Year:

The post Gear Of The Year 2021 – Our Personal Favourites appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Cons — Voices rather lean (easily fixable).

Executive Summary

The ddHifi Janus2 (model 2020B) is a moderately warm and technically very capable single DD earphone with a bright tilt in the midrange. It is sonically completely different from the Janus1 (2020A).

Introduction

In the previous article we had a look at ddHifi’s first earphone, the Janus (2020A or Janus1). This is my analysis of the Janus2 (2020B) which replaces it. As it appears, some early adopters of the 2020A may have decried a lack of sub-bass extension so that ddHifi modelled their follow-up according to some frequency response model curve (I speculate).

Janus1 sound(ed) great to me as the tuning is matching the driver. Other examples of great-sounding iems with “unusual” frequency responses are the Dunu Zen, the Final Audio E3000/E5000, and Meze RAI Solo, to name just a few. There are, on the other hand, iems that sound meh because they were squeezed into a model curve. The SeeAudio Yume comes to mind.

What this tells us is that quantity (“frequency responses”) does not always translate to quality (“sound”). In fact, it never really does, but some frequency responses may ring alarm bells.

One thing up front, the newly designed Janus2 has sonically little in common with the Janus1: it is bassier, brighter, and faster. Whether this means is it more balanced than the Janus1, we will work out as follows.

Optically, not much has changed, there is more steel (and less “transparency”) in the earpieces, but there is a new, “faster” driver with high-speed tweeter inside.

Specifications

Physical Things and Usability

In the box are the two earpieces, the C80A PU leather storage case ($25) with magnetic lock, the BC110A silver plated ofc cable with MMCX connectors ($46) and the C10A magnetic cable clip ($8), 2 sets of silicone eartips (red-stemmed “bass type” bulbous narrow-bores, and black-stemmed “treble type” short wide-bores), 10 MMCX hole dust covers, and the usual paperwork. As you see, you can purchase some of the included accessories individually, and they add up to almost $80.

The earpieces preserve the Janus1′ innovative shape and still feature the dual connectors (2 pin, 0.78 mm and MMCX).

The cable’s wires are a combination of OFC (oxygen-free copper, for grounding) and silver-plated OFC (for data transmission) that comes with MMCX connectors and a 3.5 mm plug. The MMCX connection is the tighest fitting I have experienced. Cable’s outer material is medium hard PVC, which gives the cable just the right elasticity and keeps it free from microphonics.

The cable is devoid of (constricting) earhooks so that the earpieces can be worn over and under ear. In summary, an excellent one.

The case is still stain and fading resistant, lined with microfibre, and with a magnetic lock, but the material is now PU leather, which is smoother than the Janus1’s cowhide leather (but lacks that natural smell).

The reversible magnetic cable clips is strong enough to hold the Janus2 on the fridge door (a first step to our Wall of Excellence?) and on my jacket.

And like the Janus1, the Janus2 are very comfortable whilst isolation is soso. The included wide-bores worked again best for me. With its higher sensitivity, the Janus2 is easier to drive than the Janus1.

As with the Janus1, the whole assembly, that is earpieces and cable, is extremely light and small, and fit in the smallest shirt pocket.

Tonality and Technicalities

Equipment used: MacBook Air, iPhone SE (1st gen.); AudioQuest Dragonfly Red/Earstudio HUD100 w. JitterBug FMJ, AudioQuest DragonFly Cobalt, EarMen Eagle; Astell & Kern PEE51; both sets of stock tips (red-stemmed “bass type” bulbous narrow-bore, and black-stemmed “treble type” short wide-bores); 200 hours of break in.

ddHifi have tuned the new 10 mm high-speed driver of the Janus2 completely differently compared to the original Janus1 by adding bass and upper midrange (for balance) but the treble (rolloff) remains approximately the same.

In the big picture, this results in a well-tempered DD sound, big staging, lushious spatial cues, good dynamics and excellent note definition, but a leaner midrange (compared to the Janus1) with grain at higher volumes and the occasional sibilance. In my testing, the Janus2 sounded best with a warm, organic source such as the two DragonFlys or the slightly cooler EarMen Eagle.

Sub-bass extension is (now) adequate, you get a good rumble at the low end, but it is still not record breaking deeply rooted. Mid bass is punchy and dynamic with a satisfying kick. There is good speed and texturing…it is on the faster side of the dynamic drivers I have tested. And yes, there are more than enough bass and impact, way more than in the Janus1.

Male and female are natural and well sculptured, with very good note definition and articulation, but they are also lean and frequently sharp, which can get fatiguing. A bit more body would have done them well. Read on…

That boosted upper midrange may help with the perceived technicalities and provide for a clean and transparent midrange, but it makes the lower midrange thin and breathy. And yes, the midrange is shouty at higher volumes and high violin notes can be grainy, but it is well resolving and clean at lower volumes. But…

As always with peaky iems, I put a strip of micropore tape over the nozzles (80-90% of the screens covered), which calms the upper midrange down (results vary between earphones). In this case, it removes most of the shoutiness and adds body to the vocals – and brings the bass out.

After this reversible fix, voices are not aggressive anymore and the richness of the vocals are now acceptable. Problem solved. ddHifi should have not boosted the 4-6 kHz that much, and they should have implemented the pinna gain between 1 and 2 kHz (instead of 3 kHz).

Note definition is very good across the midrange right into the well-resolving lower treble: high piano notes are well defined with cymbals, although somewhat back, are crisp. The recession in the lower midrange from 6 kHz progresses right into the upper midrange above 10 kHz which moves the vocals ahead of the high notes.

Some of the very high notes are tizzy, probably related to the 15 kHz spike, which definitely adds fake resolution, air, and sparkle to the midrange. The lower treble is largely similar to the Janus1’s, that is sweet and polite – and therefore pleasant on the ear.

Soundstage is rather wide with decent depth and height. Imagining, spatial cues, and 3D transparency are very good and so is separation. All better than in Janus1. The driver speed makes this possible and is also responsible for the excellent dynamics and attack. There is no smearing going on.

Timbre is organic with that bit of brightness added. Get yourself some micropore tape and make it darker…

Janus2 Compared

The $199 IKKO Gems OH1S 1 DD +1 BA has a much lesser bass and treble extension and is therefore less V-shaped. OH1S’s vocals are more forward and richer, but also with a tendency toward brightness.

The original Janus1 lacks the low-end extension, and vocals sound thicker owing to the more contained upper midrange. To me the Janus1 has a tad too little upper midrange and the Janus2 has too much. This also results in a narrower stage in the Janus1. The midrange of the Janus1 is somewhat reminiscent of the Sennheiser IE 500 PRO. It can also not compete with Janus2 in terms of dynamics.

The frequency responses of the Janus2 and the very well resolving NF NM2+ look similar, but the latter is much hotter in my perception – and way more analytical. Too hot to handle for me.

Concluding Remarks

ddHifi have produced a very good sophomore iem, but with a caveat: 2 steps forward and 1 step back. They implemented a faster dynamic driver and tuned it according a model curve as it seems. Out came a more dynamic, better resolving, better imaging, better staging iem (than Janus1 2020A).

However, the Janus2 falls short in the vocals department by an overdone upper midrange boost. Luckily, this can be fixed by very simple means. If ddHifi had tuned it slightly better, the Janus2 could be considered being fantastic.

If you own the Janus1, should you…? Erm…I don’t know but the Janus2 is a completely different beast.

The Janus2 is as innovative and classy as the rest of ddHifi’s offerings, it truly is a good sounding work of art and deserves a design award.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

All Our 280 Earphone and Earbud Reviews (with Links)

Disclaimer

The Janus2 was provided by ddHifi for my analysis. Thank you very much.

Get the ddHifi from the DD Official Store

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

Gallery

The post ddHiFi Janus2 (E2020B) Review – Second Coming appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Cons — Not bassy enough for some; some upper midrange glare; not cheap.

Executive Summary

The Ikko Gems OH1S are slightly warm, organic sounding 1+1 earphones with good midrange resolution and note definition that, in the opinion of some, deserve a bit more slam and sub-bass extension.

Introduction

First was the $139 IKKO OH1, which I analyzed. It had premium build, a healthy bass, but also an upper midrange glare that made me give it away to a Head-Fier over a coffee.

Next came the $199 OH10 with a V-shaped signature so well done that it pushed the model onto some best-of lists, including our own Wall of Excellence.

And now there is the $199 IKKO Gems OH1S, which according to some forums, early adopters are selling off in panic over a lack of bass.

Hey, wait before you make yourself unhappy – and read the whole article. The IKKO OH1S is a keeper. And that despite the different tunings of these three models which feature a 1+1 configuration, that is 1 dynamic driver and 1 balanced armature driver. The first two had large shells and the IKKO Gems OH1S has very small ones. Here you have your first huge bonus points (unless you fancy big plugs in your ears).

Specifications

Physical Things and Usability

In the box are the earpieces, the cable, a set of IKKO I-Planet foam tips, a set of oval silicone tips, a storage wallet, an IKKO pin, and the paperwork.

The IKKO Gems OH1S shells are premium built with mostly aluminum alloy and some resin, and they feature one of the companyʼs trademarks: oval nozzles, which help forming any eartip into the cross-sectional shape of your ear canals.

The shells are rather small and light compared to the original OH1, look and feel great, sit firmly in my ears and are very comfortable. The small size of the earpieces is certainly a huge asset. Isolation is not the greatest for me.

I typically do not write much about cables, but the included one is great for me: spindly, wiry, light. Coated with hard pvc, it has the right stiffness for me and is not rubbery at all. Great in the days where cables are more and more becoming ropes pulling our ears down. Less is more, also in this case.

Tonality and Technicalities

Equipment used: iPhone SE (first gen.), MacBook Air; ifi Audio nano iDSD Black Label with IEMatch, Hidizs S9 Pro, AudioQuest Dragonfly Red/Earstudio HUD100 w. JitterBug FMJ, AudioQuest DragonFly Cobalt, Astell & Kern PEE51; grey stock tips, IKKO I-Planet foam tips. 75 hours of break-in.

Co-blogger Alberto already gave you his thorough account of the IKKO Gems OH1S, and I principally agree with him. In contrast, the internet was full of criticism such as “no bass”, “narrow stage”, “thin vocals”, “peaky”…people who had purchased the OH1S based on their experience with the V-shaped OH10 put their set up for sale.

My rec: buy one off them for cheap.

First, the IKKO Gems OH1S is NOT the OH10, both are tuned completely differently, and one is not meant to replace the other. In fact, it is worth having both. The OH1S is the evolution of the larger and really peaky OH1. There is obviously confusion in the naming convention and IKKO could have avoided this by attributing easily distinguishable names to their different series.

To my ears, the IKKO Gems OH1S is a slightly off neutral, marginally warm sounding iem with a slightly bright tilt. As you can see in the graph, that pinna gain is <10 dB (“screamers” typically have 13-15 dB), and the bass looks very linear with a bottom roll-off…but most of that rolloff is an artifact of my coupler and it appears at every one of my measurements. It is just that the low end is not exaggerated, unlike in most other iems.

And yes, there is sub-bass extension, it is not the world’s biggest but it is there and enough (and maximized with the foams). We are used to strong kicks that are pleasing but not natural. The IKKO offer a good punch, too. Bass is not the fastest or tightest, but it is clean. Classic dynamic driver.

As to midrange, it is not thin but lean, and in a positive way. Think of floorstanders and their lack of “fatness”. Vocals are lean and somewhat dry – but they are not pushed back as in a V-shape. They are forward and intimate, which gives you a listening sensation that is rather rare.

Treble is a mixed bag. Lower treble is held back a bit so that cymbals, although being crisp, sit behind in the 7 kHz region. That narrow peak at the transition lower/upper treble compensates for that but can be a bit strident for some; it comes out, for example, in very high violin notes. But that also adds good air.

You shuffle all of the above around when using the included I-Planet foam tips. These little cannonballs (look like such) fill my ears completely. In my perception, they increase bass and move the vocals back, which results in increased depth and deeper staging.

Apropos staging, I cannot confirm the reported lack of width. It is perfectly average to my ears. Spatial cues is great, particularly with the foams. Resolution and separation are also average for this class. Stage can become crowded with many musicians or when much is going on. Another big strength of the OH1S are the crisp attack.

Timbre wise, the IKKO Gems OH1S is sonically closer to a single DD than to a BA multi. It offers a rather organic sound, which is one of its biggest traits.

So, why would you not like the IKKO Gems OH1S? If you need a (really) strong bass and if you cannot handle the bit of midrange glare resulting from the relatively flat low end.

IKKO Gems OH1s and OH1 Compared

You can guess the differences between the original OH1 and the OH1S when looking at the graphs. The original had a more boosted low and but also a higher midrange including that grainy upper part. The OH1 did not sound bassier as the human ear hears the whole frequency spectrum in context. But it was strident in the upper midrange to my ear. The OH1S has a more civilized upper midrange may still have some occasional glare triggered by the neutral low end.

For those who want to see a comparison between the OH1S and OH10…nope that’s pointless as both are different iems. The OH10 are V-shaped in sound, and the earpieces are huge and heavy. Complementary designs in all aspects.

Concluding Remarks

Admittedly, I was lukewarm about the original OH1over its hot upper midrange. And I was initially sceptical about the IKKO Gems OH1S because of that flat bass tuning. But, bass is plenty imo, balance is there, only that sub-bass rumble may not be enough for some. Nevertheless, if you are looking for a bass bomb, this iem is not for you.

My ears really got used to that signature very fast and started enjoying it. And what adds to the pleasure is the small size of the shells which provide comfort, as well as that minimalistic, attractive cable. So yeah, no reason to sell yours.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

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

Disclaimer

The Ikko Gems OH1S were provided by Ikko for my review and I thank them for that.

Get the Ikko Gems OH1s from ikkoaudio.com

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

Gallery

The post IKKO Gems OH1S Review (2) – SlimFit Finesse appeared first on Music For The Masses.

This new OH1S model is presented as an evolution of its previous siblings in terms of technology, and carrying a quite different intended tuning compared to OH10. Formally positioned at $199,00 list price, same as OH10, it benefits of an introductory price of $139,00 (more on this later) which makes it very appealing for a quick grab. And you can bet it’s currently being hyped around. Which is more then enough to move my critical curiosity and spend quite some time with it to see if I agree with the hype (which, you know, is quite seldom the case ) .

At-a-glance Card

Full Device Card

Test setup

Sources: Apogee Groove + Burson FUN + IEMatch / Apogee Groove + iBasso T3 / Sony NW-A55 mrWalkman – JVC SpiralDot and Ikko i-Planet foam tips – Linsoul LSC08 cable – lossless 16-24/44.1-192 FLAC tracks.

Signature analysis

Technicalities

Physicals

Specifications (declared)

Some important notes and caveats

Burn in

For my personal experience, burn-in is way more rarely required than what I read around on a daily basis. That said, this is one of those times when it is compulsory. When I first put OH1S into my ears I appreciated them nowhere near how I appreciated them after a) a couple of days of free burn-in and b) optimising the fit aspect (see below).

So if you do get them, let them play a bit on their own.

Fit

Fit is probably “the” critical point with OH1S.

Not in the sense of difficulty. Wearing them is not problematic nor uncomfortable at all per se – the other way around, actually! – but it just takes a brief audition to realise sound, with particular regards to highmids and presence trebles, do change depending on how you position the housings into your external ear.

Given a bit of acquired experience with other equivalently capricious IEMs it took me relatively short to realise I better adopted a pair of shortstemmed, wide nozzle tips (e.g. JVC Spiraldots) and manage to push the drivers as much as possible into my canal: with that done, trebles get “combed”, less hot, the presentation gets less aggressive, definitely more elegant indeed. Thanks to OH1S design the housings are small enough that gently pushing them towards the inside of the concha does not result in an uncomfortable fit. At least for my ears!…

A solid alternative to obtain a very pleasant sound result, however, is using Ikko’s i-Planet foam tips, those bundled inside the box.

I am not a foam lover at all, and that’s possibly the reason why I was so surprised on how well these foams apply to these drivers: trebles are “combed” like it happens with short-stem silicons and deep push, bass gets a bit less edgy, but both extremes do not lose detail in the process. Furthermore, i-Planet foams significantly improve in passive isolation !

Cable

OH1S comes bundle with a very nice-quality “high-purity single crystal copper silver plated magnetic core” cable. Yeah almost a tongue twister I know, still, a good cable product, really. Build quality and sound transmission are very good, and way above what in the average you can find bundled with IEMs on this price range.

…Too bad that it does not pair ideally with OH1S.

The stock cable is what I would call a “bright” cable, i.e. a cable facilitating high mids and treble crystalline notes – which is the opposite I would personally choose as a good pair for the OH1S.

As a matter of fact, pairing OH1S with a (equivalently high quality) full-copper cable helps adding a bit of note weight and furtherly helps “combing” treble thinner peaks a little bit. I’m using a Linsoul LSC08 (2*44core 6N OCC single-crystal copper), which is by the way the same I’ve adopted on the OH10 – of course a different sample, with 2p connectors in that case. A less expensive but still very good alternative is the NiceHCK 16 core High Purity Copper cable.

One key comparison : Final A3000

Final A3000 ($130) is the single IEM that we deemed deserving to be stuck onto our Wall of Excellence in the $80-$200 bracket, and – to my experience – the champ of bright-neutral tonality drivers up until switching over to Oxygen, for twice its price tag. So I find it quite natural to bench the OH1S vs the A3000 and see hear how they fare.

Sub-bass is much more present on A3000, not tamed let alone rolled off. Mid-bass is also definitely more elevated on A3000, while keeping equivalent speed and definition compared to OH1S.

Mid tones and especially highmids are significantly more recessed on A3000, which brings them to appear “behind” the midbass – exactly the opposite of what happens on OH1S. Mid frequencies with particular regards to vocals have a leaner note weight on A3000 but the overall timbre is less dry on A3000 nonetheless, and the tonality is warmer in comparison to OH1S.

Trebles are a tad airier on OH1S but note definition is more organic on A3000, whereby OH1S sometimes comes accoss a bit thin on some details.

On soundstage and imaging there’s no game: A3000 is holographic and extremely precise. Layering and separation are I would say on par though.

A3000 are way more capricious to bias due to their much lower sensitivity, and higher altogether amping quality demand. On the other hand A3000 are way less tip / fit dependent – they deliver their best result with much lesser effort on that front.

Conclusions

At the bottomline I would say that OH1S – at its current introductory smart price – is 100% a fair contender onto the $100-$150 market bracket. I would surely recommend OH1S for vocal tracks, for example. And in general to get a different flavour of a very well tuned, coherent, affordable driver for jazz and other acoustic / unplugged musical genres.

On the flip side I do humbly suggest Ikko to convert its current discounted price into the regular list price. Raising it to $199 or thereabouts would in fact bring OH1S into direct or close to direct competition with higher tier alternatives, and that I’m afraid would be a pity.

This sample of Ikko OH1S has been provided by the manufacturer free of charge for this review.

You can buy them if you like from their own website, at this link. Importantly enough: if you decide to buy these “soon”, you might still benefit from the introductory special discount by making use of the “IKKOOH1S” discount code.

Disclaimer

I am not, nor Audioreviews is, commercially affiliated with Ikko, and I/we are not getting commission for any sales happening from the link above, or exploiting the mentioned discount code.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

The post Ikko Gems OH1S Review (1) – A Contender appeared first on Music For The Masses.

All Our Earphone-related Articles: here

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

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

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

March additions: TRN Conch, Simgot EA1000.

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

Reviews in Alphabetical Order:

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

Also check out our HEADPHONE REVIEWS

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