Reviews by B9Scrambler
Greetings!
Today we're checking out the heavily refreshed Dorado 2020 from Campfire Audio.
Hailing from Portland, Oregon where their products are designed and hand-assembled, Campfire Audio has been bringing high end in-ear-monitors to the public since 2015. It all started with the Jupiter, Orion, and Lyra. Since then their lineup has been expanded and refined with popular releases like the Andromeda and Atlas. The Andromeda in particular has become a staple recommendation to audiophiles looking to step up into the realm of TOTL (top-of-the-line) gear thanks to a balanced and technically proficient yet entertaining sound. It looks pretty cool too.
The original Dorado was released in 2016 when hybrids were still relatively scarce and relegated mostly to premium products. The 2020 revision retains a hybrid design, however this time it has been simplified. No crossovers and a 1+1 configuration vs. the 2+1 configuration of the original. Like the Vega 2020, the new Dorado revives Campfire's use of ceramic for the main body of each shell. The new nozzle design shared with the Vega is machined brass instead of steel. Visible through the grills is the extremely compact balanced armature, nestled dead centre.
The Dorado 2020 has been part of my regular rotation over the last few months and has proven it is deserving of a place in every v-shaped lovers stable. Let's take a closer look, shall we?
What I Hear
Tips: Of the included tips, the Final Audio Type E are my favourite. They provide a stellar fit and slightly tame the treble. The included single flange wide bore tips are alright, but the reduced bass leaves the Dorado sounding just a little brighter than I'd prefer it to be. The stock Mushroom foams provide a similar experience to the Final tips, but with everything smoothed out a bit. Quite pleasant. Dipping into third party options, I like the Spinfit CP100 which again sounded similar to the Final tips. Unfortunately they lengthened the nozzle a bit too much making them less ideal. The CP145 had the same length issue while bumping up treble presence. Not bad, but again, not ideal. Lastly, Sony hybrids are a nice pairing. The soft silicone really bumps up comfort and the small bore helps tame treble, similar to the Final tips. Thanks to the slender nozzles, there weren't many other tips that worked, and nothing worth mentioning.
The Dorado 2020 isn't shy about it's hybrid status with exaggerated bass fighting a brilliant treble region for attention. Like the Vega 2020 in which it shares a dynamic driver, the Dorado 2020 provides outstanding sub-bass extension that handles the thundering opening of Kavinski's “ Solli” with aplomb. Mid-bass is punchy and clean with good control and next to no bloom that can cut into the lower mid-range to hinder clarity and coherence. This driver isn't super speedy, but it's certainly quick enough to handle rapid transitions without any loss of note definition. Texturing is also pretty good, though like the Vega 2020 you're in for a warm, smooth experience more than a hyper analytic one.
The midrange steps back in emphasis when compared to surrounding frequencies but is in no way overshadowed. Vocal coherence, clarity, and detail are all positives thanks to a fairly neutrally weighted presentation (ie. neither thick nor thin) that fits in well with the animated, sprightly experience the Dorado provides. Timbre is reasonably accurate, free of the dry edge I heard in the Vega. Instruments in King Crimson's live rendition of “Cat Food” sound nearly as correct here as they do through HiFiman's ex-halo product, the Susvara. I have no qualms with what Campfire Audio has achieved with the Dorado 2020's midrange considering the strong v-shaped tune.
Treble is just as exciting as the bass on the Dorado 2020. That tiny balanced armature certainly does a good job of bringing the heat, likely helped out by it's forward positioning right behind the nozzle grill. Don't think this results in a harsh sound. It's surprisingly refined and free of the glare and sizzle that you get from cheaper products with a similar driver placement. Attack and decay is also quite rapid which shouldn't be a surprise given the use of an armature. My main complaint with the treble is that is isn't quite as tight as I prefer. The bit of splash present slightly detracts from what is otherwise pretty outstanding detail and clarity.
Sound stage is where the Dorado 2020 impresses me least as it doesn't quite live up to the standards set by other products in Campfire Audio's lineup. I found it to be well-balanced in terms of width and depth, but overall fairly average in size. I suspect this is due to the vocals which are set fairly close to the ear resulting in a relatively intimate presentation. Thankfully the Dorado 2020 works with this adequate spacing well with nuanced imaging that allows you to easily track movement from channel-to-channel. It was particularly entertaining with psy-trance tracks from Infected Mushroom, and effectively allowed me to tracks sounds when gaming. Track layering and instrument separation were also not an issue with the dual driver setup keeping busy tracks from smearing or becoming congested. This was especially handy on one of my favorites, that being King Crimson's “Starless and Bible Black” which is pure chaos in the closing minutes.
Compared To A Peer (volumes matched with Dayton i MM-6)
Campfire Audio Vega 2020 (899.00 USD): The Vega and Dorado are certainly cut from the same cloth sharing their shell design and dynamic driver (updated for the Dorado since it no longer has to function as a full-range unit). The Dorado is it's own beast thanks to the addition of a compact balanced armature tucked snug-as-a-bug into a brass nozzle instead of the stainless steel nozzle used for the Vega. For the most part the two share their low end performance with the Dorado coming across slightly less bassy. I found this slight reduction to sound more extreme than it is thanks to the improvement in midrange and treble presence enabled by the inclusion of the balanced armature. Compared to the Vega, the Dorado's mids sound leaner, more forward, and notably more detailed. Their default vocal positioning is also slightly deeper in the ear which adds additional intimacy. I prefer the tonality of the Vega which to me comes across more natural. The treble presentation on the two is completely different. The Dorado is quite a bit brighter with a snappier attack and quicker decay. It does a better job layering and separating individual track elements, with the leaner presentation also helping in imaging accuracy. Where the Vega struggles on highly congested tracks, the Dorado has no problems. This may also be due to a mildly wider and deeper stage on which music and effects play.
Overall I enjoy both quite a lot, but the way the Vega leans completely into a bass-heavy signature really sings to me. While it lacks the detail and technical competency of the Dorado, I can't help but smile and laugh at the low end which just doesn't shine the same way on the Dorado thanks to sharing the spotlight with other aspects of the signature. I'm sure most listeners will prefer the Dorado, but I'm smitten with the Vega.
Campfire Audio Atlas (1,299.00 USD): Note the Atlas was on sale for 899.00 USD at the time of writing. I'd almost call the Dorado 2020 the spiritual successor to the single dynamic Atlas thanks to both having energetic, unabashedly v-shaped signatures. There are some significant differences though. The first is in the treble where the Dorado's balanced armature has a notable brilliance region bias. The Atlas' upper range presentation is more balanced with the presence region seeing only a slight skew in emphasis. While notes from the Atlas are better controlled without the hint of splash heard in the Dorado, the newer 2020 model is less fatiguing thanks to a smoother, more refined sound. Airiness, detail, and clarity are similarly good with the Vega having an edge to my ears. Dipping into the midrange the two are similar until around 2k where the Dorado tapers off and the Atlas picks up quite a bit more emphasis. This gives vocals on the Atlas a more defined role at the expense of timbre quality which I found more natural and accurate on the Dorado 2020. The midrange out of the Dorado loses out slightly on detail and clarity, but adds warmth which really helps with female vocalists. The cooler tonality for the Atlas is better suited to male vocalists to my ear. Dipping into the low end neither shies away from a providing a bombastic experience. Bass digs deep into sub-bass regions with good control and speed. I'll give a very slight edge to the Atlas when it comes to texture, though this is at the expense of refinement and dynamism which the Dorado 2020 has the edge in. Bass performance is more similar than not, and I'd be happy with either. The Atlas has a wider and deeper stage than the Dorado 2020 with vocals being placed further from the inner ear. Although the Atlas offers more space between track elements, the Dorado 2020 is notably more nuanced with channel-to-channel transitions. The layering of individual effects and sounds is also more impressive through the Dorado.
Once again, I enjoy both quite a bit but the Dorado 2020 gets the nod from me for a couple reasons. I prefer it's smoother, less fatiguing sound but more importantly, the vastly improved fit and comfort. I can use the Dorado for fairly long periods without having to reseat them or fiddle with the fit. It is very easy to slot it into an ideal listening position. The Atlas, on the other hand, requires regular adjustments and ideal tips for me to get a decently reliable fit. I also have to wear it cable up to aid with the weight. Lastly, with the wrong tips drive flex can mute the sound output, though this has improved considerably with use and isn't nearly as much of an issue now as it was when I first reviewed it.
In The Ear The Dorado 2020 is styled the same as the Vega 2020 with a ceramic shell, though the stainless steel nozzle has been swapped out for a machined brass unit. Ceramic is an excellent material to use for this purpose as it helps control unwanted vibrations, and unlike steel or aluminum, is highly resistant to scratching and blemishes. Don't think these will be delicate either. The Dorado's shells go through the same rigorous sintering process as their Vega sibling, where the material is heated to 600 degrees for two days, and then for another three days at 1,200 degrees. This fuses the ceramic powders into a very dense shell with limited porosity. Once this is complete, they are polished for three days in a tumbler with small alumina stones and water. This results in their gleaming, high gloss finish. Along with the premium shell material, the Dorado utilizes Campfire's uber-reliable Beryllium Copper MMCX ports. The original Polaris I reviewed back in 2017 uses a less refined version of this same technology. Despite removing and plugging cables in dozens of times, the connection still feels just as good now as it did four years ago. I am pretty confident the Dorado will be exceptionally durable and will last a long, long time.
If the cable looks familiar I'm not surprised as it can be found included with a number of different Campfire Audio models. The 90 degree angled jack is smartly designed with an extension to permit compatibility with a wide variety of device cases, though strain relief is still stiffer than I find ideal. That said, I still have yet to experience any issues with it on the numerous cables I've used with it. My experiences with Campfire's cables have shown them to be plenty durable. Within the small, reliefless aluminum y-split, the cable divides sending two strands on each side to the ear pieces. Slotting into the top of the split is a small plastic chin cinch. It moves much more smoothly here than on earlier Campfire cables and as a result is much more useful. Also useful are the preformed ear guides that seem to now be the standard on Campfire's cables. While the memory wire used on earlier cables worked, I found the “memory” aspect of that title limited at best which led to the wire straightening out over time. Ditching it entirely and sticking with preformed guides has resulted in a much more pleasant experience since I'm not constantly rebending the wire to ensure it stays behind my ear. I am glad Campfire Audio has stuck with this cable and is using it with numerous models in their lineup. That said, since the Dorado 2020 bridges a 1,000 USD price tag, the beefier cable from the Solaris 2020 would have been a welcome inclusion instead.
When it comes to fitment the smooth, well-rounded Dorado 2020 should highlight the term 'universal' better than Campfire's larger, more angular housings. Even though it is quite small, the Dorado is fairly heavy. It has a long, brass nozzle which combined with the low-profile, over-ear design helps spread that weight evenly through the outer ear. As a result, it's a really comfortable earphone to wear for long periods. The long nozzle isn't ideal for me personally as I can't insert them deeply enough to make use of the design, but I know I'm in the minority when it comes to stuff like this. I suspect this shape and design will be a big win for the majority of users.
In addition to fitting well, the Dorado has pretty impressive passive isolation. The single vent to the rear of the housing doesn't let in much noise, nor does much bleed through the dense ceramic shells. I'm sure the nozzle-mounted armature also helps block its fair share of noise. I have had no issues using these in loud areas with no need to increase the volume to counter the surrounding activities. Tossing Campfire's included Mushroom foams tips and the isolation shames most other vented, hybrid iems.
In The Box The Dorado 2020 continues on with the same outstanding unboxing experience introduced with their 2019 models. The front of the exterior sheath has a geometric theme going on with a number of circles, rectangles, and a grid laying the backdrop for a high quality image of the Dorado's reflective black shells. On the back a lovely foil sticker holds things together. Removing the sticker allows you to unfurl the sheath like a blossoming flower revealing another box within, one that is printed with the more traditional evening scene that has adorned their packaging in the past. Lifting the lid you're greeted with “Nicely Done” printed on the front flap. Inside, the pale orange moon-shaped case immediately draws your attention, while a smaller, elongated box containing most of the accessories fills in the remaining space. In all you get:
Final Thoughts The Dorado 2020 fits well into Campfire Audio's high end lineup. The Ara is their analytic masterpiece, the Andromeda 2020 an all-round workhorse with an addictive sound stage, and the Solaris 2020 a mix of the two but with the impactful bass of a dynamic driver. The Dorado 2020 fills in the remaining gap as the v-shaped entertainer that just so happens to be technically quite good, though admittedly its average sound stage isn't anything to brag about. The addition of the Dorado 2020 ensures that Campfire Audio offers something for pretty much anyone wanting to step up into the world of top-of-the-line (TOTL) earphones, and/or those wanting to move up from the Polaris II while sticking within the Campfire family.
For genres of music that typically rely heavily on a strong bassline to carry the beat, like EDM, hip hop, and pop, the Dorado 2020 is a fantastic fit. It has a musical, bold sound that can match the energy of the tunes you're listening to. On top of sounding good, you get premium materials that feel every bit the part of a TOTL earphone, solid comfort, excellent passive isolation, and a flushed out accessory kit that includes everything most buyers will need. As is common for the brand, you get a complete package out of the gate without the need to spend even more replacing useless or low quality add-ins.
Overall I find the Dorado 2020 to be a very entertaining earphone and well worth checking out if you're in the market for something with thundering bass and scintillating treble.
Thanks for reading!
- B9
Disclaimer A huge thanks to Caleb at Campfire Audio for reaching out to see if I would be interested in covering the Dorado, and for arranging a sample for review. The thoughts within this review are my subjective opinions and do not represent Campfire Audio or any other entity. At the time of writing the Dorado 2020 retailed for 1,099.00 USD: https://campfireaudio.com/shop/dorado-2020/
Specifications
Some Test Tunes
Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark's Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams
Today we're checking out the heavily refreshed Dorado 2020 from Campfire Audio.
Hailing from Portland, Oregon where their products are designed and hand-assembled, Campfire Audio has been bringing high end in-ear-monitors to the public since 2015. It all started with the Jupiter, Orion, and Lyra. Since then their lineup has been expanded and refined with popular releases like the Andromeda and Atlas. The Andromeda in particular has become a staple recommendation to audiophiles looking to step up into the realm of TOTL (top-of-the-line) gear thanks to a balanced and technically proficient yet entertaining sound. It looks pretty cool too.
The original Dorado was released in 2016 when hybrids were still relatively scarce and relegated mostly to premium products. The 2020 revision retains a hybrid design, however this time it has been simplified. No crossovers and a 1+1 configuration vs. the 2+1 configuration of the original. Like the Vega 2020, the new Dorado revives Campfire's use of ceramic for the main body of each shell. The new nozzle design shared with the Vega is machined brass instead of steel. Visible through the grills is the extremely compact balanced armature, nestled dead centre.
The Dorado 2020 has been part of my regular rotation over the last few months and has proven it is deserving of a place in every v-shaped lovers stable. Let's take a closer look, shall we?
What I Hear
Tips: Of the included tips, the Final Audio Type E are my favourite. They provide a stellar fit and slightly tame the treble. The included single flange wide bore tips are alright, but the reduced bass leaves the Dorado sounding just a little brighter than I'd prefer it to be. The stock Mushroom foams provide a similar experience to the Final tips, but with everything smoothed out a bit. Quite pleasant. Dipping into third party options, I like the Spinfit CP100 which again sounded similar to the Final tips. Unfortunately they lengthened the nozzle a bit too much making them less ideal. The CP145 had the same length issue while bumping up treble presence. Not bad, but again, not ideal. Lastly, Sony hybrids are a nice pairing. The soft silicone really bumps up comfort and the small bore helps tame treble, similar to the Final tips. Thanks to the slender nozzles, there weren't many other tips that worked, and nothing worth mentioning.
The Dorado 2020 isn't shy about it's hybrid status with exaggerated bass fighting a brilliant treble region for attention. Like the Vega 2020 in which it shares a dynamic driver, the Dorado 2020 provides outstanding sub-bass extension that handles the thundering opening of Kavinski's “ Solli” with aplomb. Mid-bass is punchy and clean with good control and next to no bloom that can cut into the lower mid-range to hinder clarity and coherence. This driver isn't super speedy, but it's certainly quick enough to handle rapid transitions without any loss of note definition. Texturing is also pretty good, though like the Vega 2020 you're in for a warm, smooth experience more than a hyper analytic one.
The midrange steps back in emphasis when compared to surrounding frequencies but is in no way overshadowed. Vocal coherence, clarity, and detail are all positives thanks to a fairly neutrally weighted presentation (ie. neither thick nor thin) that fits in well with the animated, sprightly experience the Dorado provides. Timbre is reasonably accurate, free of the dry edge I heard in the Vega. Instruments in King Crimson's live rendition of “Cat Food” sound nearly as correct here as they do through HiFiman's ex-halo product, the Susvara. I have no qualms with what Campfire Audio has achieved with the Dorado 2020's midrange considering the strong v-shaped tune.
Treble is just as exciting as the bass on the Dorado 2020. That tiny balanced armature certainly does a good job of bringing the heat, likely helped out by it's forward positioning right behind the nozzle grill. Don't think this results in a harsh sound. It's surprisingly refined and free of the glare and sizzle that you get from cheaper products with a similar driver placement. Attack and decay is also quite rapid which shouldn't be a surprise given the use of an armature. My main complaint with the treble is that is isn't quite as tight as I prefer. The bit of splash present slightly detracts from what is otherwise pretty outstanding detail and clarity.
Sound stage is where the Dorado 2020 impresses me least as it doesn't quite live up to the standards set by other products in Campfire Audio's lineup. I found it to be well-balanced in terms of width and depth, but overall fairly average in size. I suspect this is due to the vocals which are set fairly close to the ear resulting in a relatively intimate presentation. Thankfully the Dorado 2020 works with this adequate spacing well with nuanced imaging that allows you to easily track movement from channel-to-channel. It was particularly entertaining with psy-trance tracks from Infected Mushroom, and effectively allowed me to tracks sounds when gaming. Track layering and instrument separation were also not an issue with the dual driver setup keeping busy tracks from smearing or becoming congested. This was especially handy on one of my favorites, that being King Crimson's “Starless and Bible Black” which is pure chaos in the closing minutes.
Compared To A Peer (volumes matched with Dayton i MM-6)
Campfire Audio Vega 2020 (899.00 USD): The Vega and Dorado are certainly cut from the same cloth sharing their shell design and dynamic driver (updated for the Dorado since it no longer has to function as a full-range unit). The Dorado is it's own beast thanks to the addition of a compact balanced armature tucked snug-as-a-bug into a brass nozzle instead of the stainless steel nozzle used for the Vega. For the most part the two share their low end performance with the Dorado coming across slightly less bassy. I found this slight reduction to sound more extreme than it is thanks to the improvement in midrange and treble presence enabled by the inclusion of the balanced armature. Compared to the Vega, the Dorado's mids sound leaner, more forward, and notably more detailed. Their default vocal positioning is also slightly deeper in the ear which adds additional intimacy. I prefer the tonality of the Vega which to me comes across more natural. The treble presentation on the two is completely different. The Dorado is quite a bit brighter with a snappier attack and quicker decay. It does a better job layering and separating individual track elements, with the leaner presentation also helping in imaging accuracy. Where the Vega struggles on highly congested tracks, the Dorado has no problems. This may also be due to a mildly wider and deeper stage on which music and effects play.
Overall I enjoy both quite a lot, but the way the Vega leans completely into a bass-heavy signature really sings to me. While it lacks the detail and technical competency of the Dorado, I can't help but smile and laugh at the low end which just doesn't shine the same way on the Dorado thanks to sharing the spotlight with other aspects of the signature. I'm sure most listeners will prefer the Dorado, but I'm smitten with the Vega.
Campfire Audio Atlas (1,299.00 USD): Note the Atlas was on sale for 899.00 USD at the time of writing. I'd almost call the Dorado 2020 the spiritual successor to the single dynamic Atlas thanks to both having energetic, unabashedly v-shaped signatures. There are some significant differences though. The first is in the treble where the Dorado's balanced armature has a notable brilliance region bias. The Atlas' upper range presentation is more balanced with the presence region seeing only a slight skew in emphasis. While notes from the Atlas are better controlled without the hint of splash heard in the Dorado, the newer 2020 model is less fatiguing thanks to a smoother, more refined sound. Airiness, detail, and clarity are similarly good with the Vega having an edge to my ears. Dipping into the midrange the two are similar until around 2k where the Dorado tapers off and the Atlas picks up quite a bit more emphasis. This gives vocals on the Atlas a more defined role at the expense of timbre quality which I found more natural and accurate on the Dorado 2020. The midrange out of the Dorado loses out slightly on detail and clarity, but adds warmth which really helps with female vocalists. The cooler tonality for the Atlas is better suited to male vocalists to my ear. Dipping into the low end neither shies away from a providing a bombastic experience. Bass digs deep into sub-bass regions with good control and speed. I'll give a very slight edge to the Atlas when it comes to texture, though this is at the expense of refinement and dynamism which the Dorado 2020 has the edge in. Bass performance is more similar than not, and I'd be happy with either. The Atlas has a wider and deeper stage than the Dorado 2020 with vocals being placed further from the inner ear. Although the Atlas offers more space between track elements, the Dorado 2020 is notably more nuanced with channel-to-channel transitions. The layering of individual effects and sounds is also more impressive through the Dorado.
Once again, I enjoy both quite a bit but the Dorado 2020 gets the nod from me for a couple reasons. I prefer it's smoother, less fatiguing sound but more importantly, the vastly improved fit and comfort. I can use the Dorado for fairly long periods without having to reseat them or fiddle with the fit. It is very easy to slot it into an ideal listening position. The Atlas, on the other hand, requires regular adjustments and ideal tips for me to get a decently reliable fit. I also have to wear it cable up to aid with the weight. Lastly, with the wrong tips drive flex can mute the sound output, though this has improved considerably with use and isn't nearly as much of an issue now as it was when I first reviewed it.
In The Ear The Dorado 2020 is styled the same as the Vega 2020 with a ceramic shell, though the stainless steel nozzle has been swapped out for a machined brass unit. Ceramic is an excellent material to use for this purpose as it helps control unwanted vibrations, and unlike steel or aluminum, is highly resistant to scratching and blemishes. Don't think these will be delicate either. The Dorado's shells go through the same rigorous sintering process as their Vega sibling, where the material is heated to 600 degrees for two days, and then for another three days at 1,200 degrees. This fuses the ceramic powders into a very dense shell with limited porosity. Once this is complete, they are polished for three days in a tumbler with small alumina stones and water. This results in their gleaming, high gloss finish. Along with the premium shell material, the Dorado utilizes Campfire's uber-reliable Beryllium Copper MMCX ports. The original Polaris I reviewed back in 2017 uses a less refined version of this same technology. Despite removing and plugging cables in dozens of times, the connection still feels just as good now as it did four years ago. I am pretty confident the Dorado will be exceptionally durable and will last a long, long time.
If the cable looks familiar I'm not surprised as it can be found included with a number of different Campfire Audio models. The 90 degree angled jack is smartly designed with an extension to permit compatibility with a wide variety of device cases, though strain relief is still stiffer than I find ideal. That said, I still have yet to experience any issues with it on the numerous cables I've used with it. My experiences with Campfire's cables have shown them to be plenty durable. Within the small, reliefless aluminum y-split, the cable divides sending two strands on each side to the ear pieces. Slotting into the top of the split is a small plastic chin cinch. It moves much more smoothly here than on earlier Campfire cables and as a result is much more useful. Also useful are the preformed ear guides that seem to now be the standard on Campfire's cables. While the memory wire used on earlier cables worked, I found the “memory” aspect of that title limited at best which led to the wire straightening out over time. Ditching it entirely and sticking with preformed guides has resulted in a much more pleasant experience since I'm not constantly rebending the wire to ensure it stays behind my ear. I am glad Campfire Audio has stuck with this cable and is using it with numerous models in their lineup. That said, since the Dorado 2020 bridges a 1,000 USD price tag, the beefier cable from the Solaris 2020 would have been a welcome inclusion instead.
When it comes to fitment the smooth, well-rounded Dorado 2020 should highlight the term 'universal' better than Campfire's larger, more angular housings. Even though it is quite small, the Dorado is fairly heavy. It has a long, brass nozzle which combined with the low-profile, over-ear design helps spread that weight evenly through the outer ear. As a result, it's a really comfortable earphone to wear for long periods. The long nozzle isn't ideal for me personally as I can't insert them deeply enough to make use of the design, but I know I'm in the minority when it comes to stuff like this. I suspect this shape and design will be a big win for the majority of users.
In addition to fitting well, the Dorado has pretty impressive passive isolation. The single vent to the rear of the housing doesn't let in much noise, nor does much bleed through the dense ceramic shells. I'm sure the nozzle-mounted armature also helps block its fair share of noise. I have had no issues using these in loud areas with no need to increase the volume to counter the surrounding activities. Tossing Campfire's included Mushroom foams tips and the isolation shames most other vented, hybrid iems.
In The Box The Dorado 2020 continues on with the same outstanding unboxing experience introduced with their 2019 models. The front of the exterior sheath has a geometric theme going on with a number of circles, rectangles, and a grid laying the backdrop for a high quality image of the Dorado's reflective black shells. On the back a lovely foil sticker holds things together. Removing the sticker allows you to unfurl the sheath like a blossoming flower revealing another box within, one that is printed with the more traditional evening scene that has adorned their packaging in the past. Lifting the lid you're greeted with “Nicely Done” printed on the front flap. Inside, the pale orange moon-shaped case immediately draws your attention, while a smaller, elongated box containing most of the accessories fills in the remaining space. In all you get:
- Campfire Audio Dorado 2020 earphones
- ‘Diver Orange' upcycled marine plastic case
- Smoky Jacket Silver Plated Copper Litz Cable
- Final Audio tips (xs/s/m/l/xl)
- Campfire Audio Marshmallow tips (s/m/l)
- Wide bore single flange silicone tips (s/m/l)
- Campfire Audio lapel pin
- Cleaning tool
- Mesh accessory case (x3)
Final Thoughts The Dorado 2020 fits well into Campfire Audio's high end lineup. The Ara is their analytic masterpiece, the Andromeda 2020 an all-round workhorse with an addictive sound stage, and the Solaris 2020 a mix of the two but with the impactful bass of a dynamic driver. The Dorado 2020 fills in the remaining gap as the v-shaped entertainer that just so happens to be technically quite good, though admittedly its average sound stage isn't anything to brag about. The addition of the Dorado 2020 ensures that Campfire Audio offers something for pretty much anyone wanting to step up into the world of top-of-the-line (TOTL) earphones, and/or those wanting to move up from the Polaris II while sticking within the Campfire family.
For genres of music that typically rely heavily on a strong bassline to carry the beat, like EDM, hip hop, and pop, the Dorado 2020 is a fantastic fit. It has a musical, bold sound that can match the energy of the tunes you're listening to. On top of sounding good, you get premium materials that feel every bit the part of a TOTL earphone, solid comfort, excellent passive isolation, and a flushed out accessory kit that includes everything most buyers will need. As is common for the brand, you get a complete package out of the gate without the need to spend even more replacing useless or low quality add-ins.
Overall I find the Dorado 2020 to be a very entertaining earphone and well worth checking out if you're in the market for something with thundering bass and scintillating treble.
Thanks for reading!
- B9
Disclaimer A huge thanks to Caleb at Campfire Audio for reaching out to see if I would be interested in covering the Dorado, and for arranging a sample for review. The thoughts within this review are my subjective opinions and do not represent Campfire Audio or any other entity. At the time of writing the Dorado 2020 retailed for 1,099.00 USD: https://campfireaudio.com/shop/dorado-2020/
Specifications
- Frequency Response: 5Hz – 22kHz
- Sensitivity: 94dB SPL @ 1kHz 18.52 mVrs
- Impedance: 10ohms @ 1kHz
Some Test Tunes
Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark's Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams
Greetings!
Today we're checking out one of Campfire Audio's final releases of 2020, the Vega.
Hailing from Portland, Oregon where their products are designed and hand-assembled, Campfire Audio has been bringing high end in-ear-monitors to the public since 2015. It all started with the Jupiter, Orion, and Lyra. Since then their lineup has been expanded and refined with popular releases like the Andromeda and Atlas. The Andromeda in particular has become a staple recommendation to audiophiles looking to step up into the realm of TOTL (top-of-the-line) gear thanks to a balanced and technically proficient yet entertaining sound. It looks pretty cool too.
The 2020 Vega we're checking out today is the second iteration of the original Vega, originally released in 2016. The 2020 model completely revamps the Vega with a new housing material and updated driver. Inside the original Vega's 8.5mm dynamic driver has been swapped out for a 10mm amorphous, diamond-like carbon coated unit. Containing this is an all-new ceramic housing. Ceramic isn't a new material for the brand as 2015's Lyra was the first earphone to utilize a fully ceramic shell.
I have been using the Vega 2020 extensively over the last few months and while I understand this isn't going to be an earphone for everyone, have come to appreciate the gung-ho, bass forward tune on hand. Let's take a closer look, shall we?
What I Hear
Tips: The included Final Type E tips are a great match with the Vega providing a good fit. They also emphasize it's party piece, that massive low end, thanks to the smaller bore. That said, should you want to bring up the mids and treble you have options. First is the included wide bore tips which do a good job of reducing the mid-bass focus to let other areas shine. Heading into third party alternatives, the Spinfit CP145 function similarly to the stock wide bore tips, but with a deeper insertion. I like the sound, but I already have enough issues with the long nozzles so they weren't an ideal fit for me. The same could be said for CP100s which provide a similar experience to the included Final Audio tips, but again, with a deeper fit. Lastly, if you reallllllly want to lean into that low end, Sony Hybrids kick things up another notch while offering a very comfortable fit. Generally I find foam tips to soften treble and boost bass, but in this instance Campfire's own Mushroom tips sounded more akin to the included wide bore silicones. Very nice.
The Vega 2020 is a bass cannon through and through. That's the main focus, and Campfire Audio went all in with this sound which provides a somewhat unique experience in a high end product. On a seriously bassy track like “eXplosion” by Black Eyed Peas & Anitta, the Vega's mega-low end provides a club-like experience. I can imagine that pairing the Vega with a wearable haptic bass vest like the SubPac or Woojer would be a pretty sick, one-of-a-kind experience. Bass is not the quickest leaving deep notes to rumble endlessly, yet individual bass notes don't blend or get lost to provide a one-note sound. It's oddly articulate given the bass quantity on offer, both in mid- and sub-bass regions. Texturing is also good with grungy notes like those on The Prodigy's “Roadblox” being adequately replicated, though you will find some competitors like the Dunu Zen providing more growl. If you like bass and lots of it, you owe it to yourself to give the Vega 2020 a listen.
The midrange certainly plays second fiddle to the low end, just like everything else, yet it remains clear and coherent with only mild mid-bass bleed acting combative towards deeper male vocals. Despite the abundance of mid-bass present, the mid-range sounds comparatively lean. This contributes greatly in shedding light on the clarity and detail the Vega can provide. These aspects are not class leading by any means, which is to be expected given the main focus of the tuning, but instead are perfectly competent and functional providing a strong supporting role to the main attraction. Timbre is reasonably accurate with instruments having a lightly wooden or dry edge to them. I don't find it enough to be distracting, but purists might. That said, I can't imagine that someone wanting complete accuracy would be considering purchasing the Vega 2020 given the style of tune on hand.
The Vega's treble has a laid back presentation. Minor peaks are present around 5k, 7k, and 11k, keeping the upper ranges from being overshadowed by the abundant low end. Detail and clarity is perfectly fine and does the job, but if you're coming in expecting to intimately analyze tracks, you should be looking elsewhere. I find it works perfectly on electronic tracks like Gramatik's “Bluestep” which is loaded with hi-hats and other bright sounds which dance about through most of the track. Unlike the low end which acts fairly leisurely when it comes to attack and decay, the upper ranges are notably more snappy which leaves the Vega 2020 in a good place when tackling chaotic pieces, like the closing moments of King Crimson's “Starless and Bible Black”. Overall a good showing in the treble region.
You might expect the Vega's sound stage to suffer as a result of the lack of treble emphasis which typically aids in space and airiness. Thankfully, the Vega follows in the footsteps of other Campfire products and does a great job by providing a spacious presentation, this time carried by that thundering low end. I find the presentation wider than it is deep with sounds consistently sailing well off into the distance. Default positioning for vocals sounds like it starts just slightly inside the ear. This gives the Vega a satisfying intimacy without coming across stuffy or invasive. Channel-to-channel movement is smooth and nuanced with fine movements being replicated properly. It's not hard to track sweeping sounds. The Vega layers well enough with tracks having adequate depth. Each element plays in it's own space, but it isn't class leading by any means. The same can be said for instrument separation, although when a track gets crazy, such as on King Crimson's “21st Century Schizoid Man”, the bass gets in the way and can leave the Vega sounding congested.
Compared To A Peer (volumes matched with Dayton i MM-6)
Astrotec Phoenix (799.00 USD): The Phoenix and Vega approach a bass heavy signature in completely different ways. Where the Vega boosts both mid- and sub-bass in somewhat equal aplomb, the Phoenix skews heavily towards sub-bass. As a result, it provides even more visceral feedback from the deepest notes. Mid-bass is much leaner, cooler, and overall more subtle than it is on the Vega. The Phoenix also shoves forward more detail and texture than the Vega. This gives it a more technical edge that continues through to the rest of the signature. Such as the midrange where the Astrotec's impressive dynamic provides a much more forward presentation alongside gobs of detail and improved vocal coherence. The Phoenix doesn't sound as natural though thanks to a dry, breathy edge which is heard particularly in the upper ranges where things begin to transition to the dual electrostats. I have enjoyed this presentation which can also found within in-house designed and built balanced armatures from Sony and EarNiNE, but in terms of pure sonic accuracy it's not technically desirable. Where the Vega's treble is subdued and relaxed, the twin super-tweeters in the Phoenix aim to show off the unique electrostat tech with wide peaks at 4k and 7k. Compared to Campfire's entry, treble on the Astrotec is less dense and weighty with significantly faster attack and decay. Detail is more comparable to the Dorado 2020, but with an added layer of urgency. While the Vega is no sound stage slouch, a properly driven Phoenix will best it every time. Wider, much deeper, and with improved layering and separation along with similar imaging competency, the Phoenix nips at the heels of a good closed back, on-ear headphone.
While I'd consider both the Vega and Phoenix basshead earphones, it feels like they target different crowds. The Phoenix's focus on sub-bass, detail, and clarity makes it an audiophile guilty pleasure whereas the Vega's bass led sound and more natural tonality make it better as a daily driver and casual listening earphone. That and the fact that it is also a million times easier to drive than the Phoenix.
I don't normally recommend a separate amplifier as a mandatory accessory for an iem, but with the Phoenix that's the case. The Vega can be powered adequately with a potato yet scales well with higher end gear. The Phoenix needs at minimum a chonky portable amp like the EarMen Tr-Amp, or preferably a desktop headphone amp. It truly is that demanding, and is the main reason why I feel these two iems compliment each other perfectly. In an ideal world I'd own both, but if I had to pick just one I'd go for the Vega because it's something I could use all the time. I'd rather not lug around a clumsy portable amp, and I rarely sit still long enough for the lengthily listening sessions necessary to warrant using an 800 USD earphone mostly for in-home listening.
Campfire Audio Dorado 2020 (1,099 USD): The Vega and Dorado are certainly cut from the same cloth sharing their shell design and dynamic driver (updated for the Dorado since it no longer has to function as a full-range unit). The Dorado is it's own beast thanks to the addition of a compact balanced armature tucked snug-as-a-bug into a brass nozzle instead of the stainless steel nozzle used for the Vega. For the most part the two share their low end performance with the Dorado coming across slightly less bassy. I found this slight reduction to sound more extreme than it is thanks to the improvement in midrange and treble presence enabled by the inclusion of the balanced armature. Compared to the Vega, the Dorado's mids sound leaner, more forward, and notably more detailed. Their default vocal positioning is also slightly deeper in the ear which adds additional intimacy. I prefer the tonality of the Vega which to me comes across more natural. The treble presentation on the two is completely different. The Dorado is quite a bit brighter with a snappier attack and quicker decay. It does a better job layering and separating individual track elements, with the leaner presentation also helping in imaging accuracy. Where the Vega struggles on highly congested tracks, the Dorado has no problems. This may also be due to a mildly wider and deeper stage on which music and effects play.
Overall I enjoy both quite a lot, but the way the Vega leans completely into a bass-heavy signature really sings to me. While it lacks the detail and technical competency of the Dorado, I can't help but smile and laugh at the low end which just doesn't shine the same way on the Dorado thanks to sharing the spotlight with other aspects of the signature. I'm sure most listeners will prefer the Dorado, but I'm smitten with the Vega.
In The Ear The Vega 2020 refines the design of the original 2016 model with a new ceramic shell and stainless steel nozzle. Ceramic is an excellent material to use for this purpose as it helps control unwanted vibrations, and unlike steel or aluminum, is highly resistant to scratching and blemishes. Don't think these will be delicate either. The Vega's shells go through a rigorous sintering process where the material is heated to 600 degrees for two days, and then for another three days at 1,200 degrees. This fuses the ceramic powders into a very dense shell with limited porosity. Once this is complete, they are polished for three days in a tumbler with small alumina stones and water. This results in their gleaming, high gloss finish. Along with the premium shell material, the Vega utilizes Campfire's uber-reliable Beryllium Copper MMCX ports. The original Polaris I reviewed back in 2017 uses a less refined version of this same technology. Despite removing and plugging cables in dozens of times, the connection still feels just as good now as it did four years ago. I am pretty confident the Vega will be exceptionally durable and will last a long, long time.
If the cable looks familiar I'm not surprised as it can be found included with a number of different Campfire Audio models. The 90 degree angled jack is smartly designed with an extension to permit compatibility with a wide variety of device cases, though strain relief is still stiffer than I find ideal. That said, I still have yet to experience any issues with it on the numerous cables I've used with it. My experiences with Campfire's cables have shown them to be plenty durable. Within the small, reliefless aluminum y-split, the cable divides sending two strands on each side to the ear pieces. Slotting into the top of the split is a small plastic chin cinch. It moves much more smoothly here than on earlier Campfire cables and as a result is much more useful. Also useful are the preformed ear guides that seem to now be the standard on Campfire's cables. While the memory wire used on earlier cables worked, I found the “memory” aspect of that title limited at best which led to the wire straightening out over time. Ditching it entirely and sticking with preformed guides has resulted in a much more pleasant experience since I'm not constantly rebending the wire to ensure it stays behind my ear. I am glad Campfire Audio has stuck with this cable and is using it with numerous models in their lineup.
When it comes to fitment the smooth, well-rounded Vega 2020 should highlight the term 'universal' better than Campfire's larger, more angular housings. Even though it is quite small, the Vega is fairly heavy. It has a long, stainless steel nozzle which combined with the low-profile, over-ear design helps spread that weight evenly through the outer ear. As a result, it's a really comfortable earphone to wear for long periods. The long nozzle isn't ideal for me personally as I can't insert them deeply enough to make use of the design, but I know I'm in the minority when it comes to stuff like this. I suspect this shape and design will be a big win for the majority of users.
In addition to fitting well, the Vega has pretty impressive passive isolation. The single vent to the rear of the housing doesn't let in much noise, nor does much bleed through the dense ceramic shells. I have had no issues using these in loud areas with no need to increase the volume to counter the surrounding activities. Tossing Campfire's included Mushroom foams tips and the isolation shames most other vented, dynamic driver-based iems.
In The Box The Vega 2020 continues on with the same outstanding unboxing experience introduced with their 2019 models. The front of the exterior sheath has a geometric theme going on with a number of circles, rectangles, and a grid laying the backdrop for a high quality image of the Vega's gleaming white shells. On the back a lovely foil sticker holds things together. Removing the sticker allows you to unfurl the sheath like a blossoming flower revealing another box within, one that is printed with the more traditional evening scene that has adorned their packaging in the past. Lifting the lid you're greeted with “Nicely Done” printed on the front flap. Inside, the pale green moon-shaped case immediately draws your attention, while a smaller, elongated box containing most of the accessories fills in the remaining space. In all you get:
Final Thoughts As I've said in the past, I appreciate the risks Campfire Audio takes with their releases and tuning decisions. Instead of a lineup full of iterative products, almost every mainline model in their catalogue offers something different and unique. The Vega continues this trend with a tune that to my ears, is almost completely bass-oriented. Free of the treble bump of other bassy models like the Polaris II, Atlas, and Dorado 2020, the Vega provides a warm, smooth, hella bassy sound that is as entertaining as it is soothing. While I recognize the Vega is not for everyone, I think it's great.
Also great is the rest of the package. The build quality of the ceramic shells is top notch without a blemish in sight. Passive isolation is excellent and ergonomics are quite good, though keep in mind the long nozzles if you prefer shallow fit products. And lastly, the Vega is equipped with Campfire Audio's usual stable of plentiful and high quality accessories, so you're unlike to need to spend more on any third party extras to complete the package.
If you live for mass quantities of bass alongside a more mellow treble response, or simply enjoy experiencing tuning variety, it'd be a shame to overlook the Vega. The entertainment value it provides is off the charts.
Thanks for reading!
- B9
Disclaimer A huge thanks to Caleb at Campfire Audio for reaching out to see if I would be interested in covering the Vega, and for arranging a sample for review. The thoughts within this review are my subjective opinions and do not represent Campfire Audio or any other entity. At the time of writing the Vega 2020 retailed for 899.00 USD: https://campfireaudio.com/shop/vega-2020/
Specifications
Some Test Tunes
Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark's Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams
Today we're checking out one of Campfire Audio's final releases of 2020, the Vega.
Hailing from Portland, Oregon where their products are designed and hand-assembled, Campfire Audio has been bringing high end in-ear-monitors to the public since 2015. It all started with the Jupiter, Orion, and Lyra. Since then their lineup has been expanded and refined with popular releases like the Andromeda and Atlas. The Andromeda in particular has become a staple recommendation to audiophiles looking to step up into the realm of TOTL (top-of-the-line) gear thanks to a balanced and technically proficient yet entertaining sound. It looks pretty cool too.
The 2020 Vega we're checking out today is the second iteration of the original Vega, originally released in 2016. The 2020 model completely revamps the Vega with a new housing material and updated driver. Inside the original Vega's 8.5mm dynamic driver has been swapped out for a 10mm amorphous, diamond-like carbon coated unit. Containing this is an all-new ceramic housing. Ceramic isn't a new material for the brand as 2015's Lyra was the first earphone to utilize a fully ceramic shell.
I have been using the Vega 2020 extensively over the last few months and while I understand this isn't going to be an earphone for everyone, have come to appreciate the gung-ho, bass forward tune on hand. Let's take a closer look, shall we?
What I Hear
Tips: The included Final Type E tips are a great match with the Vega providing a good fit. They also emphasize it's party piece, that massive low end, thanks to the smaller bore. That said, should you want to bring up the mids and treble you have options. First is the included wide bore tips which do a good job of reducing the mid-bass focus to let other areas shine. Heading into third party alternatives, the Spinfit CP145 function similarly to the stock wide bore tips, but with a deeper insertion. I like the sound, but I already have enough issues with the long nozzles so they weren't an ideal fit for me. The same could be said for CP100s which provide a similar experience to the included Final Audio tips, but again, with a deeper fit. Lastly, if you reallllllly want to lean into that low end, Sony Hybrids kick things up another notch while offering a very comfortable fit. Generally I find foam tips to soften treble and boost bass, but in this instance Campfire's own Mushroom tips sounded more akin to the included wide bore silicones. Very nice.
The Vega 2020 is a bass cannon through and through. That's the main focus, and Campfire Audio went all in with this sound which provides a somewhat unique experience in a high end product. On a seriously bassy track like “eXplosion” by Black Eyed Peas & Anitta, the Vega's mega-low end provides a club-like experience. I can imagine that pairing the Vega with a wearable haptic bass vest like the SubPac or Woojer would be a pretty sick, one-of-a-kind experience. Bass is not the quickest leaving deep notes to rumble endlessly, yet individual bass notes don't blend or get lost to provide a one-note sound. It's oddly articulate given the bass quantity on offer, both in mid- and sub-bass regions. Texturing is also good with grungy notes like those on The Prodigy's “Roadblox” being adequately replicated, though you will find some competitors like the Dunu Zen providing more growl. If you like bass and lots of it, you owe it to yourself to give the Vega 2020 a listen.
The midrange certainly plays second fiddle to the low end, just like everything else, yet it remains clear and coherent with only mild mid-bass bleed acting combative towards deeper male vocals. Despite the abundance of mid-bass present, the mid-range sounds comparatively lean. This contributes greatly in shedding light on the clarity and detail the Vega can provide. These aspects are not class leading by any means, which is to be expected given the main focus of the tuning, but instead are perfectly competent and functional providing a strong supporting role to the main attraction. Timbre is reasonably accurate with instruments having a lightly wooden or dry edge to them. I don't find it enough to be distracting, but purists might. That said, I can't imagine that someone wanting complete accuracy would be considering purchasing the Vega 2020 given the style of tune on hand.
The Vega's treble has a laid back presentation. Minor peaks are present around 5k, 7k, and 11k, keeping the upper ranges from being overshadowed by the abundant low end. Detail and clarity is perfectly fine and does the job, but if you're coming in expecting to intimately analyze tracks, you should be looking elsewhere. I find it works perfectly on electronic tracks like Gramatik's “Bluestep” which is loaded with hi-hats and other bright sounds which dance about through most of the track. Unlike the low end which acts fairly leisurely when it comes to attack and decay, the upper ranges are notably more snappy which leaves the Vega 2020 in a good place when tackling chaotic pieces, like the closing moments of King Crimson's “Starless and Bible Black”. Overall a good showing in the treble region.
You might expect the Vega's sound stage to suffer as a result of the lack of treble emphasis which typically aids in space and airiness. Thankfully, the Vega follows in the footsteps of other Campfire products and does a great job by providing a spacious presentation, this time carried by that thundering low end. I find the presentation wider than it is deep with sounds consistently sailing well off into the distance. Default positioning for vocals sounds like it starts just slightly inside the ear. This gives the Vega a satisfying intimacy without coming across stuffy or invasive. Channel-to-channel movement is smooth and nuanced with fine movements being replicated properly. It's not hard to track sweeping sounds. The Vega layers well enough with tracks having adequate depth. Each element plays in it's own space, but it isn't class leading by any means. The same can be said for instrument separation, although when a track gets crazy, such as on King Crimson's “21st Century Schizoid Man”, the bass gets in the way and can leave the Vega sounding congested.
Compared To A Peer (volumes matched with Dayton i MM-6)
Astrotec Phoenix (799.00 USD): The Phoenix and Vega approach a bass heavy signature in completely different ways. Where the Vega boosts both mid- and sub-bass in somewhat equal aplomb, the Phoenix skews heavily towards sub-bass. As a result, it provides even more visceral feedback from the deepest notes. Mid-bass is much leaner, cooler, and overall more subtle than it is on the Vega. The Phoenix also shoves forward more detail and texture than the Vega. This gives it a more technical edge that continues through to the rest of the signature. Such as the midrange where the Astrotec's impressive dynamic provides a much more forward presentation alongside gobs of detail and improved vocal coherence. The Phoenix doesn't sound as natural though thanks to a dry, breathy edge which is heard particularly in the upper ranges where things begin to transition to the dual electrostats. I have enjoyed this presentation which can also found within in-house designed and built balanced armatures from Sony and EarNiNE, but in terms of pure sonic accuracy it's not technically desirable. Where the Vega's treble is subdued and relaxed, the twin super-tweeters in the Phoenix aim to show off the unique electrostat tech with wide peaks at 4k and 7k. Compared to Campfire's entry, treble on the Astrotec is less dense and weighty with significantly faster attack and decay. Detail is more comparable to the Dorado 2020, but with an added layer of urgency. While the Vega is no sound stage slouch, a properly driven Phoenix will best it every time. Wider, much deeper, and with improved layering and separation along with similar imaging competency, the Phoenix nips at the heels of a good closed back, on-ear headphone.
While I'd consider both the Vega and Phoenix basshead earphones, it feels like they target different crowds. The Phoenix's focus on sub-bass, detail, and clarity makes it an audiophile guilty pleasure whereas the Vega's bass led sound and more natural tonality make it better as a daily driver and casual listening earphone. That and the fact that it is also a million times easier to drive than the Phoenix.
I don't normally recommend a separate amplifier as a mandatory accessory for an iem, but with the Phoenix that's the case. The Vega can be powered adequately with a potato yet scales well with higher end gear. The Phoenix needs at minimum a chonky portable amp like the EarMen Tr-Amp, or preferably a desktop headphone amp. It truly is that demanding, and is the main reason why I feel these two iems compliment each other perfectly. In an ideal world I'd own both, but if I had to pick just one I'd go for the Vega because it's something I could use all the time. I'd rather not lug around a clumsy portable amp, and I rarely sit still long enough for the lengthily listening sessions necessary to warrant using an 800 USD earphone mostly for in-home listening.
Campfire Audio Dorado 2020 (1,099 USD): The Vega and Dorado are certainly cut from the same cloth sharing their shell design and dynamic driver (updated for the Dorado since it no longer has to function as a full-range unit). The Dorado is it's own beast thanks to the addition of a compact balanced armature tucked snug-as-a-bug into a brass nozzle instead of the stainless steel nozzle used for the Vega. For the most part the two share their low end performance with the Dorado coming across slightly less bassy. I found this slight reduction to sound more extreme than it is thanks to the improvement in midrange and treble presence enabled by the inclusion of the balanced armature. Compared to the Vega, the Dorado's mids sound leaner, more forward, and notably more detailed. Their default vocal positioning is also slightly deeper in the ear which adds additional intimacy. I prefer the tonality of the Vega which to me comes across more natural. The treble presentation on the two is completely different. The Dorado is quite a bit brighter with a snappier attack and quicker decay. It does a better job layering and separating individual track elements, with the leaner presentation also helping in imaging accuracy. Where the Vega struggles on highly congested tracks, the Dorado has no problems. This may also be due to a mildly wider and deeper stage on which music and effects play.
Overall I enjoy both quite a lot, but the way the Vega leans completely into a bass-heavy signature really sings to me. While it lacks the detail and technical competency of the Dorado, I can't help but smile and laugh at the low end which just doesn't shine the same way on the Dorado thanks to sharing the spotlight with other aspects of the signature. I'm sure most listeners will prefer the Dorado, but I'm smitten with the Vega.
In The Ear The Vega 2020 refines the design of the original 2016 model with a new ceramic shell and stainless steel nozzle. Ceramic is an excellent material to use for this purpose as it helps control unwanted vibrations, and unlike steel or aluminum, is highly resistant to scratching and blemishes. Don't think these will be delicate either. The Vega's shells go through a rigorous sintering process where the material is heated to 600 degrees for two days, and then for another three days at 1,200 degrees. This fuses the ceramic powders into a very dense shell with limited porosity. Once this is complete, they are polished for three days in a tumbler with small alumina stones and water. This results in their gleaming, high gloss finish. Along with the premium shell material, the Vega utilizes Campfire's uber-reliable Beryllium Copper MMCX ports. The original Polaris I reviewed back in 2017 uses a less refined version of this same technology. Despite removing and plugging cables in dozens of times, the connection still feels just as good now as it did four years ago. I am pretty confident the Vega will be exceptionally durable and will last a long, long time.
If the cable looks familiar I'm not surprised as it can be found included with a number of different Campfire Audio models. The 90 degree angled jack is smartly designed with an extension to permit compatibility with a wide variety of device cases, though strain relief is still stiffer than I find ideal. That said, I still have yet to experience any issues with it on the numerous cables I've used with it. My experiences with Campfire's cables have shown them to be plenty durable. Within the small, reliefless aluminum y-split, the cable divides sending two strands on each side to the ear pieces. Slotting into the top of the split is a small plastic chin cinch. It moves much more smoothly here than on earlier Campfire cables and as a result is much more useful. Also useful are the preformed ear guides that seem to now be the standard on Campfire's cables. While the memory wire used on earlier cables worked, I found the “memory” aspect of that title limited at best which led to the wire straightening out over time. Ditching it entirely and sticking with preformed guides has resulted in a much more pleasant experience since I'm not constantly rebending the wire to ensure it stays behind my ear. I am glad Campfire Audio has stuck with this cable and is using it with numerous models in their lineup.
When it comes to fitment the smooth, well-rounded Vega 2020 should highlight the term 'universal' better than Campfire's larger, more angular housings. Even though it is quite small, the Vega is fairly heavy. It has a long, stainless steel nozzle which combined with the low-profile, over-ear design helps spread that weight evenly through the outer ear. As a result, it's a really comfortable earphone to wear for long periods. The long nozzle isn't ideal for me personally as I can't insert them deeply enough to make use of the design, but I know I'm in the minority when it comes to stuff like this. I suspect this shape and design will be a big win for the majority of users.
In addition to fitting well, the Vega has pretty impressive passive isolation. The single vent to the rear of the housing doesn't let in much noise, nor does much bleed through the dense ceramic shells. I have had no issues using these in loud areas with no need to increase the volume to counter the surrounding activities. Tossing Campfire's included Mushroom foams tips and the isolation shames most other vented, dynamic driver-based iems.
In The Box The Vega 2020 continues on with the same outstanding unboxing experience introduced with their 2019 models. The front of the exterior sheath has a geometric theme going on with a number of circles, rectangles, and a grid laying the backdrop for a high quality image of the Vega's gleaming white shells. On the back a lovely foil sticker holds things together. Removing the sticker allows you to unfurl the sheath like a blossoming flower revealing another box within, one that is printed with the more traditional evening scene that has adorned their packaging in the past. Lifting the lid you're greeted with “Nicely Done” printed on the front flap. Inside, the pale green moon-shaped case immediately draws your attention, while a smaller, elongated box containing most of the accessories fills in the remaining space. In all you get:
- Campfire Audio Vega 2020 earphones
- ‘Seafoam Green” upcycled marine plastic case
- Smoky Jacket Silver Plated Copper Litz Cable
- Final Audio tips (xs/s/m/l/xl)
Campfire Audio Marshmallow tips (s/m/l) - Wide bore single flange silicone tips (s/m/l)
- Campfire Audio lapel pin
- Cleaning tool
- Mesh accessory case (x3)
Final Thoughts As I've said in the past, I appreciate the risks Campfire Audio takes with their releases and tuning decisions. Instead of a lineup full of iterative products, almost every mainline model in their catalogue offers something different and unique. The Vega continues this trend with a tune that to my ears, is almost completely bass-oriented. Free of the treble bump of other bassy models like the Polaris II, Atlas, and Dorado 2020, the Vega provides a warm, smooth, hella bassy sound that is as entertaining as it is soothing. While I recognize the Vega is not for everyone, I think it's great.
Also great is the rest of the package. The build quality of the ceramic shells is top notch without a blemish in sight. Passive isolation is excellent and ergonomics are quite good, though keep in mind the long nozzles if you prefer shallow fit products. And lastly, the Vega is equipped with Campfire Audio's usual stable of plentiful and high quality accessories, so you're unlike to need to spend more on any third party extras to complete the package.
If you live for mass quantities of bass alongside a more mellow treble response, or simply enjoy experiencing tuning variety, it'd be a shame to overlook the Vega. The entertainment value it provides is off the charts.
Thanks for reading!
- B9
Disclaimer A huge thanks to Caleb at Campfire Audio for reaching out to see if I would be interested in covering the Vega, and for arranging a sample for review. The thoughts within this review are my subjective opinions and do not represent Campfire Audio or any other entity. At the time of writing the Vega 2020 retailed for 899.00 USD: https://campfireaudio.com/shop/vega-2020/
Specifications
- Frequency Response: 5Hz – 20kHz
- Sensitivity: 94dB SPL @ 1kHz 19.86 mVrms
- Impedance: 36ohms @ 1kHz
Some Test Tunes
Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark's Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams
alota
Indeed. And i like resolution of vega
NymPHONOmaniac
I always like your nuanced review mate! especially because i can read between your line when it come to translating it for personal taste. Keep up the good work mate! Seem like an even more bassy-berserk Polaris! Sure not for me.
B9Scrambler
@NymPHONOmaniac Thanks man 
Glad you enjoyed the review. Yeah, it's like the Polaris II dialed up to 10. The bass is hilarious. Not something I want to use all the time, but when I'm in the mood for this type of signature...oh baby! Hope everything is going well with you!
Glad you enjoyed the review. Yeah, it's like the Polaris II dialed up to 10. The bass is hilarious. Not something I want to use all the time, but when I'm in the mood for this type of signature...oh baby! Hope everything is going well with you!
Greetings!
Today we're checking out a pair headphones that are old, irrelevant, and well out of production; the JBL Reference Series 420.
Released in 2007, the 420 was the base model in JBL's Reference Series of headphones. Released at the same time was the 610, a Bluetooth model sharing more-or-less the same design. When in university, I was looking to get a quality set of headphones. In the running were the Bose Triport, some budget Grados, and the JBL Reference 420. The Triports won out and the 420 became a distant memory. I don't recall how much these were at the time, but with the limited info I can find online they seemed to retail anywhere from 150 to 394.95 USD.
While perusing Facebook Marketplace recently I came across an unopened pair of 420s for only 10 CAD. Memories of that early purchasing conundrum came rushing back, and I scooped them up right away to see what I was missing out on after all these years.
It has been 14 years since the JBL Reference 420 was released. Are they still worth picking up if you can find a set? Let's find out, shall we?
What I Hear
Note: Like the Bose Triport, the Reference 420's signature is sensitive to positioning on the head. Slide them back to boost treble and clarity. Slide them forward to soften the treble response. I find this hinders the excellent clarity a bit too much and makes the bass slightly loose, so they spent most of their time in the former position.
The first thing I did was plug the Reference 420 into the Radsone ES100, load up my Favourites playlist on Youtube, and play some League of Legends. After a few games to the sounds of a a varied mix of tracks from pop (Black Eyed Peas – Girl Like Me), to drum and bass (Wilkinson – Afterglow), some 80s synth (Kavinsky – Nightcall), classic rock (Supertramp – Rudy), rap (Sa-Roc – Forever), and a wide variety of other genres, I came away pretty damn impressed. The Reference 420 has held up well and remains a great sounding headphone in 2021.
Treble on the Reference 420 is bright and shimmery. Both brilliance and presence regions sound peaked, with bias leaning towards upper treble regions. Notes are tight and clean throughout with a lean, controlled presentation, mostly free of any splashiness. They hit hard and decay quickly leaving the 420 quite competent with fast, busy tracks that have lots going on up top. The 420 also has an unexpected amount of detail on tap too with fine nuances being picked up a replicated with great clarity. The upper treble peak, at higher volumes or with already bright tracks, can get tiring though so if you're sensitive to 7k and up, you might want to avoid these.
The midrange is clearly recessed and set behind the treble and bass regions when it comes to emphasis. Despite this, vocals are weighty, coherent, and plenty detailed. Mid-bass does bleed into males vocals somewhat, but not enough to mask what is being said. Female vocals are where the 420 shines though, giving them an intimate warmth that really meshes well with the overall tune. I was also pretty impressed with the 420's timbre quality. Running through King Crimson's live album “On Broadway”, instruments sounded accurate and comparable to products like the HiFiMan Sundarw, AKG K553 Pro, and others. Cymbals were a hint metallic which is about as bad as it got. Sibilance is something I find to be an issue with plenty of older headphones, but the Reference 420 is quite forgiving here. It won't correct it on tracks like Aesop Rock's “Blood Sandwich”, but it doesn't add to it which is perfectly fine.
Bass is where the 420 comes into it's own. Extension is great with the 420 able to provide a pounding, visceral experience on most tracks. This is backed by a prominent mid-bass region that adds warmth and density to the presentation. As noted earlier, there is some bleed into the lower mids that somewhat affects male vocals, but it's not overly distracting and in my experience does little to take away from the experience. Whereas upper regions are very quick and snappy, bass on the 420 is a little slower, something I appreciate on headphones. It lets the rumble of deep notes linger which comes across more natural to me. Detail and texture are also quite good with grungy bass lines like those from The Prodigy and Tobacco sounding appropriately low-fi.
While they may look like open- or semi open-back headphones thanks to those large silver grills that mirror JBL's computer speaker designs of the day, they're closed. As a result, the presentation is fairly intimate with sounds staying close to the head. That said, they don't lack depth and present tracks in a fairly well-rounded, even manner. Imaging is also unexpectedly good with plenty of nuance as sounds move from channel-to-channel. The Reference 420 also does a good job of keeping individual track elements convincingly separated and individual. While it's not going replace the awesome experience you get from a good semi-open or open back set of cans, the Reference 420's sound stage is perfectly competent.
Overall I'm kind of floored at how entertaining and competent sounding the Reference 420 is. Sure, they have a v-shaped signature, but their bass is tight and textured, their mids are lush and coherent, and their treble is full of sparkle and well controlled. While not huge, the sound stage is well-rounded with solid technical abilities. Beyond a bit of mid-bass bleed and some fatigue caused by the upper treble peak at higher volumes and over long listening sessions, I can't complain. This is still a great sounding set of headphones 14 years after their initial release and is one I'm absolutely going to keep using. If you can find a set in good shape for a low price, get them.
Over The Ear The Reference 420 certainly looks and feels the part of a mid-2000s product. The design is rife with glossy, piano black and chromed plastics that are magnets for dust and finger prints. Within literal seconds of removing them from the package, dust had already settled on the ear cups. It's actually quite impressive how quickly it happened. Fit and finish isn't great either. The component plastics that make up the headband are full of uneven gaps. The pivot point connecting the right ear cup to the headband creaks and snaps uncomfortably when in motion. The sliding mechanism is free of any detents so when extending the headband, it's impossible to match sides reliably. You will also likely need to re-extend on each listening session since there is nothing keeping the sliders at your preferred length. The headband padding is quite plush and while not particularly thick, it doesn't really matter because the headphones weigh so little at only 170 grams. The ear pads are also fairly thin but again, this doesn't matter too much. The drivers are slightly angled and the foam is very soft and plush resulting in a very comfortable fit. They fit my tiny head perfectly. It's too bad the glue holding the pads together completely disintegrated during its 14 year sleep. As a result, the faux-leather exterior has separated from the more plasticky interior, revealing the inner foam. They're still usable, but I need to hunt down a suitable replacement asap. At least they're easy to remove, despite four small dabs of glue in the cardinal directions holding them securely in place. Note that in their documentation JBL says the headband and ear pads are real leather. There is no way that's true...
The fixed cable continues the underwhelming build impressions. With its cloth sheath, it looks and feels quite similar to the cables found on plenty of Marley earphones. Thin, light, a bit stiff, easy to tangle and kink. It's not great. At least the straight jack is a tiny slab of rubber that will fit into any phone or DAP case with room to spare. The strain relief heading into the ear cup is flexible and long enough to be useful. Even so, I don't expect this cable to last long, especially if you are somewhat careless with your belongings. This is one that will need to be babied.
The Reference 420's compact, lightweight design is suggestive of a product intended to be used on the go. To me, that means it also needs to isolate well. Oh boy, does it ever. I don't know how JBL did it, but the 420 isolates brilliantly. This is pretty easily the best isolating set of headphones I've ever used, and that includes some noise cancelling sets like the A-Audio Legacy and the Ultimate Ears UE6000. When walking outside, I make sure to slide one ear cup back to keep an ear free so I can hear cars and other pedestrians. There's no chance I'll hear them otherwise. Gotta stay safe out there.
In The Box The Reference 420 comes with the sort of packaging that would be completely unacceptable on a 150 USD product nowadays; bulbous blister packaging. Once you've managed to cut your way through this nasty, hard plastic shell, the Reference 420 pops out of a form fitting plastic insert which covers the accessories. In all you get:
Final Thoughts If you didn't gather by now, I really, really like the JBL Reference 420. While many aspects of the product are extremely dated, from the packaging to the design, materials, and build, the sound quality is what matters most. That without question, holds up very, very well, especially for the 10 CAD I paid. I love the deep textured bass and shockingly good detail and clarity on offer from top to bottom. In addition, the Reference 420 is extremely comfortable despite the odd headband shape, and the passive isolation is like nothing I've experienced before.
If you can find a set in good shape and at a price you are comfortable with, go for it. I'd be very surprised if you didn't enjoy yourself. Just know that at this point the pads will likely have deteriorated and will need replacing, so factor that into the cost. I still have yet to find a suitable replacement, but the stock set are still working well enough, for now.
Is the Reference 420 is still worth picking up? Absolutely. I would love to see JBL update these with some modern conveniences like a removable cable and folding design, and do a time-limited re-release. I have a feeling the retro design, impressive isolation, small size, and excellent sound quality would draw some attention.
Thanks for reading!
- B9
Disclaimer I purchased the Reference 420 second-hand but unopened/unused for 10 CAD on Facebook Marketplace. The impressions here are my own subjective thoughts and do not represent JBL or any other entity. If you want to buy some for yourself, I hope you are well trained in Google-fu and wish you luck in finding a set.
Specifications
Some Test Tunes
Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark's Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams
Today we're checking out a pair headphones that are old, irrelevant, and well out of production; the JBL Reference Series 420.
Released in 2007, the 420 was the base model in JBL's Reference Series of headphones. Released at the same time was the 610, a Bluetooth model sharing more-or-less the same design. When in university, I was looking to get a quality set of headphones. In the running were the Bose Triport, some budget Grados, and the JBL Reference 420. The Triports won out and the 420 became a distant memory. I don't recall how much these were at the time, but with the limited info I can find online they seemed to retail anywhere from 150 to 394.95 USD.
While perusing Facebook Marketplace recently I came across an unopened pair of 420s for only 10 CAD. Memories of that early purchasing conundrum came rushing back, and I scooped them up right away to see what I was missing out on after all these years.
It has been 14 years since the JBL Reference 420 was released. Are they still worth picking up if you can find a set? Let's find out, shall we?
What I Hear
Note: Like the Bose Triport, the Reference 420's signature is sensitive to positioning on the head. Slide them back to boost treble and clarity. Slide them forward to soften the treble response. I find this hinders the excellent clarity a bit too much and makes the bass slightly loose, so they spent most of their time in the former position.
The first thing I did was plug the Reference 420 into the Radsone ES100, load up my Favourites playlist on Youtube, and play some League of Legends. After a few games to the sounds of a a varied mix of tracks from pop (Black Eyed Peas – Girl Like Me), to drum and bass (Wilkinson – Afterglow), some 80s synth (Kavinsky – Nightcall), classic rock (Supertramp – Rudy), rap (Sa-Roc – Forever), and a wide variety of other genres, I came away pretty damn impressed. The Reference 420 has held up well and remains a great sounding headphone in 2021.
Treble on the Reference 420 is bright and shimmery. Both brilliance and presence regions sound peaked, with bias leaning towards upper treble regions. Notes are tight and clean throughout with a lean, controlled presentation, mostly free of any splashiness. They hit hard and decay quickly leaving the 420 quite competent with fast, busy tracks that have lots going on up top. The 420 also has an unexpected amount of detail on tap too with fine nuances being picked up a replicated with great clarity. The upper treble peak, at higher volumes or with already bright tracks, can get tiring though so if you're sensitive to 7k and up, you might want to avoid these.
The midrange is clearly recessed and set behind the treble and bass regions when it comes to emphasis. Despite this, vocals are weighty, coherent, and plenty detailed. Mid-bass does bleed into males vocals somewhat, but not enough to mask what is being said. Female vocals are where the 420 shines though, giving them an intimate warmth that really meshes well with the overall tune. I was also pretty impressed with the 420's timbre quality. Running through King Crimson's live album “On Broadway”, instruments sounded accurate and comparable to products like the HiFiMan Sundarw, AKG K553 Pro, and others. Cymbals were a hint metallic which is about as bad as it got. Sibilance is something I find to be an issue with plenty of older headphones, but the Reference 420 is quite forgiving here. It won't correct it on tracks like Aesop Rock's “Blood Sandwich”, but it doesn't add to it which is perfectly fine.
Bass is where the 420 comes into it's own. Extension is great with the 420 able to provide a pounding, visceral experience on most tracks. This is backed by a prominent mid-bass region that adds warmth and density to the presentation. As noted earlier, there is some bleed into the lower mids that somewhat affects male vocals, but it's not overly distracting and in my experience does little to take away from the experience. Whereas upper regions are very quick and snappy, bass on the 420 is a little slower, something I appreciate on headphones. It lets the rumble of deep notes linger which comes across more natural to me. Detail and texture are also quite good with grungy bass lines like those from The Prodigy and Tobacco sounding appropriately low-fi.
While they may look like open- or semi open-back headphones thanks to those large silver grills that mirror JBL's computer speaker designs of the day, they're closed. As a result, the presentation is fairly intimate with sounds staying close to the head. That said, they don't lack depth and present tracks in a fairly well-rounded, even manner. Imaging is also unexpectedly good with plenty of nuance as sounds move from channel-to-channel. The Reference 420 also does a good job of keeping individual track elements convincingly separated and individual. While it's not going replace the awesome experience you get from a good semi-open or open back set of cans, the Reference 420's sound stage is perfectly competent.
Overall I'm kind of floored at how entertaining and competent sounding the Reference 420 is. Sure, they have a v-shaped signature, but their bass is tight and textured, their mids are lush and coherent, and their treble is full of sparkle and well controlled. While not huge, the sound stage is well-rounded with solid technical abilities. Beyond a bit of mid-bass bleed and some fatigue caused by the upper treble peak at higher volumes and over long listening sessions, I can't complain. This is still a great sounding set of headphones 14 years after their initial release and is one I'm absolutely going to keep using. If you can find a set in good shape for a low price, get them.
Over The Ear The Reference 420 certainly looks and feels the part of a mid-2000s product. The design is rife with glossy, piano black and chromed plastics that are magnets for dust and finger prints. Within literal seconds of removing them from the package, dust had already settled on the ear cups. It's actually quite impressive how quickly it happened. Fit and finish isn't great either. The component plastics that make up the headband are full of uneven gaps. The pivot point connecting the right ear cup to the headband creaks and snaps uncomfortably when in motion. The sliding mechanism is free of any detents so when extending the headband, it's impossible to match sides reliably. You will also likely need to re-extend on each listening session since there is nothing keeping the sliders at your preferred length. The headband padding is quite plush and while not particularly thick, it doesn't really matter because the headphones weigh so little at only 170 grams. The ear pads are also fairly thin but again, this doesn't matter too much. The drivers are slightly angled and the foam is very soft and plush resulting in a very comfortable fit. They fit my tiny head perfectly. It's too bad the glue holding the pads together completely disintegrated during its 14 year sleep. As a result, the faux-leather exterior has separated from the more plasticky interior, revealing the inner foam. They're still usable, but I need to hunt down a suitable replacement asap. At least they're easy to remove, despite four small dabs of glue in the cardinal directions holding them securely in place. Note that in their documentation JBL says the headband and ear pads are real leather. There is no way that's true...
The fixed cable continues the underwhelming build impressions. With its cloth sheath, it looks and feels quite similar to the cables found on plenty of Marley earphones. Thin, light, a bit stiff, easy to tangle and kink. It's not great. At least the straight jack is a tiny slab of rubber that will fit into any phone or DAP case with room to spare. The strain relief heading into the ear cup is flexible and long enough to be useful. Even so, I don't expect this cable to last long, especially if you are somewhat careless with your belongings. This is one that will need to be babied.
The Reference 420's compact, lightweight design is suggestive of a product intended to be used on the go. To me, that means it also needs to isolate well. Oh boy, does it ever. I don't know how JBL did it, but the 420 isolates brilliantly. This is pretty easily the best isolating set of headphones I've ever used, and that includes some noise cancelling sets like the A-Audio Legacy and the Ultimate Ears UE6000. When walking outside, I make sure to slide one ear cup back to keep an ear free so I can hear cars and other pedestrians. There's no chance I'll hear them otherwise. Gotta stay safe out there.
In The Box The Reference 420 comes with the sort of packaging that would be completely unacceptable on a 150 USD product nowadays; bulbous blister packaging. Once you've managed to cut your way through this nasty, hard plastic shell, the Reference 420 pops out of a form fitting plastic insert which covers the accessories. In all you get:
- Reference 420 headphones
- Carrying case
- 1/4” adapter
- Airplane adapter
- 1 metre extension cable
Final Thoughts If you didn't gather by now, I really, really like the JBL Reference 420. While many aspects of the product are extremely dated, from the packaging to the design, materials, and build, the sound quality is what matters most. That without question, holds up very, very well, especially for the 10 CAD I paid. I love the deep textured bass and shockingly good detail and clarity on offer from top to bottom. In addition, the Reference 420 is extremely comfortable despite the odd headband shape, and the passive isolation is like nothing I've experienced before.
If you can find a set in good shape and at a price you are comfortable with, go for it. I'd be very surprised if you didn't enjoy yourself. Just know that at this point the pads will likely have deteriorated and will need replacing, so factor that into the cost. I still have yet to find a suitable replacement, but the stock set are still working well enough, for now.
Is the Reference 420 is still worth picking up? Absolutely. I would love to see JBL update these with some modern conveniences like a removable cable and folding design, and do a time-limited re-release. I have a feeling the retro design, impressive isolation, small size, and excellent sound quality would draw some attention.
Thanks for reading!
- B9
Disclaimer I purchased the Reference 420 second-hand but unopened/unused for 10 CAD on Facebook Marketplace. The impressions here are my own subjective thoughts and do not represent JBL or any other entity. If you want to buy some for yourself, I hope you are well trained in Google-fu and wish you luck in finding a set.
Specifications
- Frequency Response: 20Hz – 20kHz
- Sensitivity: 96dB SPL/mW @ 1kHz
- Impedance: 32ohms
Some Test Tunes
Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark's Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams
John Massaria
wow!
ngoshawk
As usual...nicely done!
Greetings!
Today we're checking out the reworked 12 Classics from Meze Audio.
The original 12 Classics released in 2016 brought a more affordable product to Meze's lineup alongside yet another timeless design. While it was a very competent earphone there were some areas that could have used attention; the cable and an overly safe tune that was somewhat lacking micro detail.
Meze must agree that they hit the nail on the head with the look and ergonomics of the original 12 Classics as the V2 shares it's predecessors shell, save for a new colourway. They've also swapped out the cable for a much more pleasing cloth-coated unit and reworked the sound into something I find considerably more entertaining.
Let's take a closer look as the 12 Classics V2 and why I think this is how you successfully rework a product.
What I Hear
Tip: The included tips feature a smaller bore which helps raise the low end of the 12 Classics V2 slightly. They sound fine, but my preference was for wide bore tips which balanced out the sound slightly, namely those from JVC, the ADV Eartune Fidelity U, and the Spinfit CP145. I recommend the CP145 for those that need a deeper fit, the JVC's for cable down wear, and the Fidelity U for cable up wear. Sony Hybrids are a more comfortable alternative to the stock tips should you like how those sound but want something a bit more plush. I didn't try the 12 Classics V2 with longer bi-flange tips since I prefer a shallow fit. If you have a set of the Sennheiser style bi-flange tips that come with the Rai Solo (which I wish were included with the 12 Classics V2), those are a solid alternative to the JVC set, but with slightly improved isolation.
Treble out of the V2 is very well-tuned to my ears. Notes are clean and well-controlled without any splash or grain. Just clean, smooth, fatigue-free sound. The bias towards lower treble regions provides lots of detail without crossing over into harshness. Upper treble is pretty chill for the most part save for a small peak at 7k that adds shimmer and sparkle and helps to keep the presentation airy and spacious. Since the peak is quite mild, it's not a tiring sound and even on busy, messy tracks like King Crimson's “Starless and Bible Black”, the V2 avoids congestion or the blending of instruments and effects. The fairly rapid attack and decay the V2 possess helps, possibly due to the use of Titanium for the driver coating. It all sounds very JVC-esque and reminds me of the HA-FXH series of tip-mounted micro-driver earphones that I loved so much many moons ago.
The midrange is one of my favourite aspects of the 12 Classics V2 thanks to a satisfying upper midrange push, similar in effect to what Moondrop did with their Spaceship series. Vocals are prominent and extremely clear, but avoid crossing into shouty territory. Notes are warm and weighty with a satisfying density to them that finds a middle ground between overly thick or thin. It suits my preferences quite well. Detail, clarity and coherence are all strong points too with the V2 consistently impressing from track-to-track. Sibilance is also well-managed, though not quite as impressive as the class leader KB EAR Diamond where it is almost completely absent, even on tracks like The Crystal Method's “Grace (feat. LeAnn Rimes)”. Timbre is yet another strong point with instruments sounds like they should. Nothing comes across overly bright, woody, or dry sounding.
Bass is where the V2 surprised me most. As an avid listener of the original 12 Classics, I found the low end plenty satisfying. While mid-bass biased, it was well-weighted and warm but somewhat lacking visceral feedback. Perfectly competent and inoffensive with a relaxing quality to it. The V2 evens out the sub- to mid-bass transition, dials down the warmth, and greatly improves upon texture, detailing, and speed. Sub-bass also hits harder. It leaves the original sounding somewhat lethargic and bloomy in comparison. The new bass tuning does a fantastic job of supporting the V2's overall more lively and energetic presentation. On tracks like Havok's “D.O.A.” where the rapid double bass notes can slightly blend and smear on the original 12 Classics, the V2 keeps everything well-defined and crisp. It's all very technically sound while losing none of the musical nature of the original.
When it comes to sound stage the 12 Classics V2 follow in the footsteps of their more premium cousin, the Rai Solo. Staging is quite wide and fairly deep with a generally well-rounded balance. Vocals have a default positioning just outside the ear which helps quite a bit with the initial feeling of space. Also helping with this feeling of space is the V2's instrument separation. As mentioned earlier, sounds remain separated and distinct. They are also well layered, though I wish this were slightly more exaggerated. Imaging is tops in this price range for a single dynamic. I really enjoyed listening to Infected Mushroom through the V2 as it did justice to the way sounds fly from channel-to-channel. It also worked well with gaming enabling me to pretty easily track movement.
Compared To A Peer (volumes matched using Dayton iMM-6)
Dunu DM-480 (69.00 USD): Bass out of the DM-480 is less balanced with more of a skew towards sub-bass regions. This gives it a more visceral presentation, but with less warmth and mid-bass punch. I also found the V2 to provide slightly more texture and detail, though the difference is not profound. Leading into the mids the DM-480's are less forward. Timbre is on the cool, dry side compared to the V2, though detail and clarity are matched. Treble out of the Meze is smoother and provides a bit less detail I find them equally snappy, though the Dunu can feel slightly out of control when things get busy. Sound stage on the two is comparable with the Meze's less intimate vocals giving it an edge. Imaging is more precise out of the Meze, while I found the Dunu to provide slightly improved layering qualities. Instrument separation out of the Meze is more impressive, with the Dunu's mild splashiness hindering it's performance here. The biggest difference, however, is just how much more refined the 12 Classics V2 sound. Despite both using titanium coated drivers, the drivers in the Dunu add quite a bit more grain to the sound. It also crosses into harshness every once in a while, and is notably more subject to sibilance.
In terms of build and ergonomics, these two could could not be much more different. The Dunu's shells are a low profile, 3D printed acrylic design while the Meze have a more traditional bullet-shape with walnut wood and aluminum construction. They both look fantastic and are equally well-built. I guess it comes down to which style you prefer, or which you think is more attractive. For me it's a toss up. I prefer the look of the Meze, but the low profile, highly isolating design of the Dunu. When it comes to their cables the Dunu uses a removable 2-pin design. I've used numerous other earphones with the same or very similar cable, and it has proven to be very durable. It also has low microphonics. As much as I appreciate the upgrade Meze applied to the V2's cable, it's fixed, cloth-sheath design isn't as confidence inspiring in the long term.
Overall I greatly prefer the sound of the Meze, but the ergonomics and cable of the Dunu. If I had to pick just one, Meze all the way. The sound quality is a pretty notable step up in my opinion, while the fit and cable are more than good enough.
Shozy Form 1.1 (74.00 USD): The Form 1.1 is a 1+1 hybrid with a beryllium-coated dynamic driver. Shozy did an outstanding job selecting and tuning the balanced armature to match the tonality of the dynamic, but even so, it doesn't sound quite as coherent as the 12 Classics V2. Treble on the Form 1.1 is brilliance region biased with more relaxed lower treble and a stronger 7k peak. As a result, it provides a more vibrant listening experience at the expense of fatigue over longer listening sessions. It also brings with it more detail and improved clarity over the Meze, though notes aren't as tight and sound a bit more loose vs. the 12 Classics V2. Heading into the mids they are quite a bit more forward on the Meze. Vocals out of the 12 Classics are thicker but slightly cooler. The Form 1.1 offers slightly improved detail and clarity. Timbre on both is good with the Meze sounding a hint more natural. While bass quantities aren't vastly different, the Form 1.1's significantly altered balance leads to me perceiving it as much bassier. While the Meze's bass is tighter and more textured, the Shozy's provides a more visceral experience thanks to great sub-bass emphasis and a slower, punchier mid-bass. When it comes to sound stage I much prefer the Meze. The Form 1.1 has quite an average stage. It feels well balance din terms of width and depth, like the Meze, but comes across decidedly closer to the ear. Imaging is just a tight and nuanced as the Meze with the Shozy providing slightly better layering and instrument separation.
When it comes to build and design I definitely prefer the looks of the Meze. The Shozy is more comfortable for me, however, thanks to the low profile design that fits my outer ear perfectly. I also found it to have better fit and finish while makes sense given it's not using imperfect, organic materials like the Meze. For 12 Classics has the superior cable to me though, even if it is fixed. Like the Meze, the Form 1.1 uses a cloth-coated sheath. Unlike Meze's cable, this one is prone to tangles and kinks. Noise is kept to a minimum thanks to the over-ear design, and even after almost a year of use there is no apparent fraying, so that's a plus. Even so, I'd much prefer it to have the cable from the 12 Classics V2.
I'd be perfectly happy owning either, but the Meze's tuning and appearance is more to my taste. The Shozy is the more ergonomic earphone though, and I would much rather have a removable cable than fixed, but those aren't quite enough to give it the edge for me.
In The Ear Meze's design chops are pretty much unmatched in the hobby, in my opinion. The 99 Classics are some of the most beautiful headphones ever produced. The 12 Classics V2 utilize a much simpler design, but are no less attractive. Like their predecessors, the V1, the housings are a fairly traditional barrel-shape, but with some sensual curves. Around the waist the housing tapers in which is not only a gorgeous, subtle design queue, but it makes it easy to grip the earphone. On the rear my favourite feature of the V1 returned, that being the dimple containing the Meze logo. It's useful for inserting the earphone, but also fits the tip of my finger perfectly. I rarely sit still and tend to always be tapping my foot, clicking a pen, spinning the dials on my camera, etc. The rear of the housing acts almost like a fidget aid and keeps me distracted, when I'm not listening to music through both earpieces of course.
In addition to looking lovely in the new black and copper colour scheme, the V2 is built quite well. I would say it's even improved slightly over their predecessor. The walnut wood and aluminum front and back plates fit perfectly together now with none of the rough(ish) edges found on the V1. All logos are writing are laser etched and will not wear off over time. The aluminum hardware is flawless with smooth curves and rounded edges. Strain relief at the compact straight jack is short but weighted just right to provide protection from bends. I was very pleased to see that both ends of the y-split are relieved which is a rarity. Even more rare is that the rubber used is soft enough to flex and provide protection to the cable, and protection is just what the cable needs.
As with the original 12 Classics, the cable is fixed so when it eventually fails you'll be in the market for a new earphone (12 Classics V3?). Unlike the original 12 Classics cable, this is one I can get behind. The original's cable was very durable and looked nice, but it was stiff and the microphonics were extremely intrusive. The user experience was poor. The new cable is fabric coated and provides a much more satisfying experience. It is very light and flexible with good tangle resistance. Cable noise is still an issue and I wish Meze installed a chin cinch to help with this, but it's not unbearable and can be reduced significantly by wrapping the cable up and around the ear. I also worry that it will start to fray at common bend points (y-split and jack) as is typical of cloth sheaths, but only time will tell. Not a single thread has frayed after two months of heavy use, which I consider a good sign for overall longevity. I've found most cloth cables to start fraying within the first couple days of testing.
Thanks to the standard barrel-shape and light weight, I found the V2 to be a very pleasant earphone to wear. The nozzles at their widest are about 5.5-6mm which is pretty standard. Only those who need slim nozzles like those found on the Shure SE215 or ADV Model 3 are likely experience fitment issues. For everyone else, these will fit just like you are used to. No tricks required to get a good seal and find comfortable positioning. If you decide to swap tips, the prominent nozzle lip does a great job of holding most third party tips in place. For me, I like a wider bore so I've been using the V2 with medium JVC tips or Spinfit's CP145 which helps get a deeper seal.
When it comes to passive sound isolation, the V2 does a good job. I'd say it's improved over the V1 and maybe slightly above average in the grand scheme of things. There are small vents are the base of the nozzle and just in front of the strain relief where the cable enters the housing, but they don't let in much noise, nor cause a racket when walking around in a windy environment. I can easily wear these when out and about at just a couple notches above my typically low volumes. Indoors, I can keep volumes low since so little passes through when music is playing.
In The Box The 12 Classics V2 come in a fairly flat, squat, lift top box. On the front is the usual branding and model info, as well as an image of the earphones positioned to reflect Meze's logo. Down the right spine you find a list of product highlights and contents. Flipping to the rear you find a breakdown of the construction of the V2, along with the all-important specs and a couple highlights repeated from the spine. Lifting the lid you find the V2 and straight plug nestled tightly into some protective foam, shaped in a way to match the design on the lid. Nice touch. Below them is a slender clam shell case embossed with the Meze logo. Inside the case are the accessories. In all you get:
Final Thoughts Meze has been working hard over the years to create a competitive, class-leading lineup within a wide variety of price segments. The 12 Classics (and 12 Neo for that matter) were getting long in the tooth and the market moves quickly, so the time for Meze to re-enter the budget realms with a bang was overdue. The 12 Classics V2 is just the ticket. Not only does it uphold Meze's design chops but it sounds fantastic and goes toe-to-toe with some of my favourites of the past year.
The Moondrop SSP-like tuning has tight, textured bass, gloriously forward mids, and clean crisp treble. It's not fatiguing, the presentation is spacious and technically capable, and it's a joy to listen to. The raised upper mids will undoubtedly bother some listeners, but for me it's just right. I wish Meze had equipped the 12 Classics V2 with either a 2-pin or MMCX removable cable system, but at least the new cable is vastly superior to its predecessor so such an omission isn't much of a loss.
Overall the 12 Classics V2 is a very successful update to an older model. It marriages a modern tuning to a classic design and is one of the more pleasurable earphones to cross my path so far in 2021.
Thanks for reading!
- B9
Disclaimer
A huge thanks to Alexandra with Meze for arranging a sample of the 12 Classics V2 for the purposes of review. The thoughts within this review of my subjective opinions and do not represent Meze or any other entity. At the time of writing the 12 Classics V2 were retailing for 69.00 USD: https://mezeaudio.com/products/meze-12-classics-v2
Specifications
Some Test Tunes
Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark's Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams
Today we're checking out the reworked 12 Classics from Meze Audio.
The original 12 Classics released in 2016 brought a more affordable product to Meze's lineup alongside yet another timeless design. While it was a very competent earphone there were some areas that could have used attention; the cable and an overly safe tune that was somewhat lacking micro detail.
Meze must agree that they hit the nail on the head with the look and ergonomics of the original 12 Classics as the V2 shares it's predecessors shell, save for a new colourway. They've also swapped out the cable for a much more pleasing cloth-coated unit and reworked the sound into something I find considerably more entertaining.
Let's take a closer look as the 12 Classics V2 and why I think this is how you successfully rework a product.
What I Hear
Tip: The included tips feature a smaller bore which helps raise the low end of the 12 Classics V2 slightly. They sound fine, but my preference was for wide bore tips which balanced out the sound slightly, namely those from JVC, the ADV Eartune Fidelity U, and the Spinfit CP145. I recommend the CP145 for those that need a deeper fit, the JVC's for cable down wear, and the Fidelity U for cable up wear. Sony Hybrids are a more comfortable alternative to the stock tips should you like how those sound but want something a bit more plush. I didn't try the 12 Classics V2 with longer bi-flange tips since I prefer a shallow fit. If you have a set of the Sennheiser style bi-flange tips that come with the Rai Solo (which I wish were included with the 12 Classics V2), those are a solid alternative to the JVC set, but with slightly improved isolation.
Treble out of the V2 is very well-tuned to my ears. Notes are clean and well-controlled without any splash or grain. Just clean, smooth, fatigue-free sound. The bias towards lower treble regions provides lots of detail without crossing over into harshness. Upper treble is pretty chill for the most part save for a small peak at 7k that adds shimmer and sparkle and helps to keep the presentation airy and spacious. Since the peak is quite mild, it's not a tiring sound and even on busy, messy tracks like King Crimson's “Starless and Bible Black”, the V2 avoids congestion or the blending of instruments and effects. The fairly rapid attack and decay the V2 possess helps, possibly due to the use of Titanium for the driver coating. It all sounds very JVC-esque and reminds me of the HA-FXH series of tip-mounted micro-driver earphones that I loved so much many moons ago.
The midrange is one of my favourite aspects of the 12 Classics V2 thanks to a satisfying upper midrange push, similar in effect to what Moondrop did with their Spaceship series. Vocals are prominent and extremely clear, but avoid crossing into shouty territory. Notes are warm and weighty with a satisfying density to them that finds a middle ground between overly thick or thin. It suits my preferences quite well. Detail, clarity and coherence are all strong points too with the V2 consistently impressing from track-to-track. Sibilance is also well-managed, though not quite as impressive as the class leader KB EAR Diamond where it is almost completely absent, even on tracks like The Crystal Method's “Grace (feat. LeAnn Rimes)”. Timbre is yet another strong point with instruments sounds like they should. Nothing comes across overly bright, woody, or dry sounding.
Bass is where the V2 surprised me most. As an avid listener of the original 12 Classics, I found the low end plenty satisfying. While mid-bass biased, it was well-weighted and warm but somewhat lacking visceral feedback. Perfectly competent and inoffensive with a relaxing quality to it. The V2 evens out the sub- to mid-bass transition, dials down the warmth, and greatly improves upon texture, detailing, and speed. Sub-bass also hits harder. It leaves the original sounding somewhat lethargic and bloomy in comparison. The new bass tuning does a fantastic job of supporting the V2's overall more lively and energetic presentation. On tracks like Havok's “D.O.A.” where the rapid double bass notes can slightly blend and smear on the original 12 Classics, the V2 keeps everything well-defined and crisp. It's all very technically sound while losing none of the musical nature of the original.
When it comes to sound stage the 12 Classics V2 follow in the footsteps of their more premium cousin, the Rai Solo. Staging is quite wide and fairly deep with a generally well-rounded balance. Vocals have a default positioning just outside the ear which helps quite a bit with the initial feeling of space. Also helping with this feeling of space is the V2's instrument separation. As mentioned earlier, sounds remain separated and distinct. They are also well layered, though I wish this were slightly more exaggerated. Imaging is tops in this price range for a single dynamic. I really enjoyed listening to Infected Mushroom through the V2 as it did justice to the way sounds fly from channel-to-channel. It also worked well with gaming enabling me to pretty easily track movement.
Compared To A Peer (volumes matched using Dayton iMM-6)
Dunu DM-480 (69.00 USD): Bass out of the DM-480 is less balanced with more of a skew towards sub-bass regions. This gives it a more visceral presentation, but with less warmth and mid-bass punch. I also found the V2 to provide slightly more texture and detail, though the difference is not profound. Leading into the mids the DM-480's are less forward. Timbre is on the cool, dry side compared to the V2, though detail and clarity are matched. Treble out of the Meze is smoother and provides a bit less detail I find them equally snappy, though the Dunu can feel slightly out of control when things get busy. Sound stage on the two is comparable with the Meze's less intimate vocals giving it an edge. Imaging is more precise out of the Meze, while I found the Dunu to provide slightly improved layering qualities. Instrument separation out of the Meze is more impressive, with the Dunu's mild splashiness hindering it's performance here. The biggest difference, however, is just how much more refined the 12 Classics V2 sound. Despite both using titanium coated drivers, the drivers in the Dunu add quite a bit more grain to the sound. It also crosses into harshness every once in a while, and is notably more subject to sibilance.
In terms of build and ergonomics, these two could could not be much more different. The Dunu's shells are a low profile, 3D printed acrylic design while the Meze have a more traditional bullet-shape with walnut wood and aluminum construction. They both look fantastic and are equally well-built. I guess it comes down to which style you prefer, or which you think is more attractive. For me it's a toss up. I prefer the look of the Meze, but the low profile, highly isolating design of the Dunu. When it comes to their cables the Dunu uses a removable 2-pin design. I've used numerous other earphones with the same or very similar cable, and it has proven to be very durable. It also has low microphonics. As much as I appreciate the upgrade Meze applied to the V2's cable, it's fixed, cloth-sheath design isn't as confidence inspiring in the long term.
Overall I greatly prefer the sound of the Meze, but the ergonomics and cable of the Dunu. If I had to pick just one, Meze all the way. The sound quality is a pretty notable step up in my opinion, while the fit and cable are more than good enough.
Shozy Form 1.1 (74.00 USD): The Form 1.1 is a 1+1 hybrid with a beryllium-coated dynamic driver. Shozy did an outstanding job selecting and tuning the balanced armature to match the tonality of the dynamic, but even so, it doesn't sound quite as coherent as the 12 Classics V2. Treble on the Form 1.1 is brilliance region biased with more relaxed lower treble and a stronger 7k peak. As a result, it provides a more vibrant listening experience at the expense of fatigue over longer listening sessions. It also brings with it more detail and improved clarity over the Meze, though notes aren't as tight and sound a bit more loose vs. the 12 Classics V2. Heading into the mids they are quite a bit more forward on the Meze. Vocals out of the 12 Classics are thicker but slightly cooler. The Form 1.1 offers slightly improved detail and clarity. Timbre on both is good with the Meze sounding a hint more natural. While bass quantities aren't vastly different, the Form 1.1's significantly altered balance leads to me perceiving it as much bassier. While the Meze's bass is tighter and more textured, the Shozy's provides a more visceral experience thanks to great sub-bass emphasis and a slower, punchier mid-bass. When it comes to sound stage I much prefer the Meze. The Form 1.1 has quite an average stage. It feels well balance din terms of width and depth, like the Meze, but comes across decidedly closer to the ear. Imaging is just a tight and nuanced as the Meze with the Shozy providing slightly better layering and instrument separation.
When it comes to build and design I definitely prefer the looks of the Meze. The Shozy is more comfortable for me, however, thanks to the low profile design that fits my outer ear perfectly. I also found it to have better fit and finish while makes sense given it's not using imperfect, organic materials like the Meze. For 12 Classics has the superior cable to me though, even if it is fixed. Like the Meze, the Form 1.1 uses a cloth-coated sheath. Unlike Meze's cable, this one is prone to tangles and kinks. Noise is kept to a minimum thanks to the over-ear design, and even after almost a year of use there is no apparent fraying, so that's a plus. Even so, I'd much prefer it to have the cable from the 12 Classics V2.
I'd be perfectly happy owning either, but the Meze's tuning and appearance is more to my taste. The Shozy is the more ergonomic earphone though, and I would much rather have a removable cable than fixed, but those aren't quite enough to give it the edge for me.
In The Ear Meze's design chops are pretty much unmatched in the hobby, in my opinion. The 99 Classics are some of the most beautiful headphones ever produced. The 12 Classics V2 utilize a much simpler design, but are no less attractive. Like their predecessors, the V1, the housings are a fairly traditional barrel-shape, but with some sensual curves. Around the waist the housing tapers in which is not only a gorgeous, subtle design queue, but it makes it easy to grip the earphone. On the rear my favourite feature of the V1 returned, that being the dimple containing the Meze logo. It's useful for inserting the earphone, but also fits the tip of my finger perfectly. I rarely sit still and tend to always be tapping my foot, clicking a pen, spinning the dials on my camera, etc. The rear of the housing acts almost like a fidget aid and keeps me distracted, when I'm not listening to music through both earpieces of course.
In addition to looking lovely in the new black and copper colour scheme, the V2 is built quite well. I would say it's even improved slightly over their predecessor. The walnut wood and aluminum front and back plates fit perfectly together now with none of the rough(ish) edges found on the V1. All logos are writing are laser etched and will not wear off over time. The aluminum hardware is flawless with smooth curves and rounded edges. Strain relief at the compact straight jack is short but weighted just right to provide protection from bends. I was very pleased to see that both ends of the y-split are relieved which is a rarity. Even more rare is that the rubber used is soft enough to flex and provide protection to the cable, and protection is just what the cable needs.
As with the original 12 Classics, the cable is fixed so when it eventually fails you'll be in the market for a new earphone (12 Classics V3?). Unlike the original 12 Classics cable, this is one I can get behind. The original's cable was very durable and looked nice, but it was stiff and the microphonics were extremely intrusive. The user experience was poor. The new cable is fabric coated and provides a much more satisfying experience. It is very light and flexible with good tangle resistance. Cable noise is still an issue and I wish Meze installed a chin cinch to help with this, but it's not unbearable and can be reduced significantly by wrapping the cable up and around the ear. I also worry that it will start to fray at common bend points (y-split and jack) as is typical of cloth sheaths, but only time will tell. Not a single thread has frayed after two months of heavy use, which I consider a good sign for overall longevity. I've found most cloth cables to start fraying within the first couple days of testing.
Thanks to the standard barrel-shape and light weight, I found the V2 to be a very pleasant earphone to wear. The nozzles at their widest are about 5.5-6mm which is pretty standard. Only those who need slim nozzles like those found on the Shure SE215 or ADV Model 3 are likely experience fitment issues. For everyone else, these will fit just like you are used to. No tricks required to get a good seal and find comfortable positioning. If you decide to swap tips, the prominent nozzle lip does a great job of holding most third party tips in place. For me, I like a wider bore so I've been using the V2 with medium JVC tips or Spinfit's CP145 which helps get a deeper seal.
When it comes to passive sound isolation, the V2 does a good job. I'd say it's improved over the V1 and maybe slightly above average in the grand scheme of things. There are small vents are the base of the nozzle and just in front of the strain relief where the cable enters the housing, but they don't let in much noise, nor cause a racket when walking around in a windy environment. I can easily wear these when out and about at just a couple notches above my typically low volumes. Indoors, I can keep volumes low since so little passes through when music is playing.
In The Box The 12 Classics V2 come in a fairly flat, squat, lift top box. On the front is the usual branding and model info, as well as an image of the earphones positioned to reflect Meze's logo. Down the right spine you find a list of product highlights and contents. Flipping to the rear you find a breakdown of the construction of the V2, along with the all-important specs and a couple highlights repeated from the spine. Lifting the lid you find the V2 and straight plug nestled tightly into some protective foam, shaped in a way to match the design on the lid. Nice touch. Below them is a slender clam shell case embossed with the Meze logo. Inside the case are the accessories. In all you get:
- 12 Classics V2 earphones
- Clamshell carrying case
- Velcro cable tie
- Single flange ear tips (s/m/l)
- Bi-flange tips (m)
Final Thoughts Meze has been working hard over the years to create a competitive, class-leading lineup within a wide variety of price segments. The 12 Classics (and 12 Neo for that matter) were getting long in the tooth and the market moves quickly, so the time for Meze to re-enter the budget realms with a bang was overdue. The 12 Classics V2 is just the ticket. Not only does it uphold Meze's design chops but it sounds fantastic and goes toe-to-toe with some of my favourites of the past year.
The Moondrop SSP-like tuning has tight, textured bass, gloriously forward mids, and clean crisp treble. It's not fatiguing, the presentation is spacious and technically capable, and it's a joy to listen to. The raised upper mids will undoubtedly bother some listeners, but for me it's just right. I wish Meze had equipped the 12 Classics V2 with either a 2-pin or MMCX removable cable system, but at least the new cable is vastly superior to its predecessor so such an omission isn't much of a loss.
Overall the 12 Classics V2 is a very successful update to an older model. It marriages a modern tuning to a classic design and is one of the more pleasurable earphones to cross my path so far in 2021.
Thanks for reading!
- B9
Disclaimer
A huge thanks to Alexandra with Meze for arranging a sample of the 12 Classics V2 for the purposes of review. The thoughts within this review of my subjective opinions and do not represent Meze or any other entity. At the time of writing the 12 Classics V2 were retailing for 69.00 USD: https://mezeaudio.com/products/meze-12-classics-v2
Specifications
- Frequency response: 16Hz – 24KHz
- Impedance: 16Ω
- Sensitivity: 101dB (+/- 3db)
- Total harmonic distortion: < 0.5%
- Noise attenuation: up to 26dB
- Driver: Titanium coated 8mm mylar driver
- Cable: 1.2m 6N OFC with 3.5mm gold-plated jack
Some Test Tunes
Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark's Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams
Mightygrey
The cable was the main let-down from the V1, this sounds like a good upgrade and option for a cheap and good-sounding IEM.
B9Scrambler
@Mightygrey Definitely a great sounding cheap iem. Cable still isn't amazing or anything, but unquestionably an upgrade from the V1. Would love to see another revision in the future with a removable cable.
Greetings!
Today we're checking out Meze's midrange earphone offering, the Rai Solo.
In the realm of earphones Meze had some budget options in the 12 Classics and Neo and a premium offering in the Rai Penta, but were lacking presence with no products priced in between. Enter the Rai Solo. Released in late 2019 at 249 USD, it showed itself to be a competitive product thanks to a well-sized 9.2mm driver, ergonomic stainless steel housings, and a premium accessory kit which included a bespoke carrying case and a high quality, silver-plated cable. Now that we have entered 2021, the Rai Solo is even more competitive thanks to a drop in price to 199 USD.
I've been using the Rai Solo consistently over the last two months for everything from music to games to movies and have come away seriously impressed with the ownership experience. It easily goes head-to-head with other products in the price range and should not be overlooked.
Let's take a closer look at why, shall we?
What I Hear
Tips: The Rai Solo comes with a wide variety of ear tips. Since I found the midrange to be the star of the show, I settled on tips that played to this region. The included medium bi-flange wide bore tips were absolutely perfect for me as they provided a great seal and let the Solo's detail and clarity shine through. Smaller bore tips brought out some roughness in the mids and lower treble, but boosted the low end slightly, adding warmth to the vocals. Utilizing third party tips like Sony Hybrids or Spinfit CP100s provide a similar experience to the included small bore tips, but thanks to a softer silicone ended up providing a slightly smoother, improved sound. Other wide bore tips like generic JVCs or Spinfit CP145s gave me a similar experience to the included wide bore bi-flange set, but with reduced comfort (I prefer a stable, shallow fit with most products). If you like the sound of the bi-flange set but want something similar in a single flange design, those two might be worth checking out. Medium bore tips sounded virtually identical to the small bore sets in my experience.
The midrange of the Rai Solo is where my attention is drawn most when listening. Vocals come through loud and clear, able to cut through even the most busy of instrumentals. Check out Black Sun Empire & State Of Mind's “Caterpillar (Drumsound & Bassline Smith Remix)” to see just how articulate they can sound against a congested background. They are plenty weighty as well, as heard on Calyx & TeeBee's “Long Gone”. The Rai Solo does an amazing job with Calyx's deep, textured vocals. Improvements could be found in timbre which is a tad cool and dry, keeping the Solo from sounding completely accurate. In all honesty, I'm okay with that. The more time I spend in the hobby, the less I care about complete realism. The earphone is the final step in a reproductive audio chain where each component flavours the sound. I'm totally okay with it bringing it's own character to the party, as long as it can bring a smile to my face and bounce to my step.
The low end of the Rai Solo has gotten some flack in the past for being too light. It doesn't offer the boosted sound of your typical v-shaped best seller, yet it's still above neutral in terms of emphasis. A Boy & A Girl Feat. Megan Hamilton's “Bridge Burner” shows that while fairly reserved, bass out of the Rai Solo is deep and offers good punch. The rumbling opening moments of Kavinski's “Solli” won't rock your socks through the Solo like in will in something bassier, ala. Sennheiser IE300, but it still moves enough air to provide a solid bite of visceral feedback. Texturing and detail are quite good with the Rai Solo easily handing the grunge and grit inherent to tracks from Tobacco and The Prodigy. Speed is quick enough to handle rapid transitions, but doesn't provide the sort of snap you'd get from an armature-based low end, or small 6mm dynamic. On the other hand, it won't distort as easily as those drivers when the volume is cranked and bass slamming.
The Rai Solo's treble goes more for detail than sparkle with a prominent presence region and more relaxed brilliance region. As heard on Brookes Brothers' “Carry Me On (feat. Chrom3)” treble shimmer is there, it's just not prominent and forward. The lower treble bias leaves the Solo sounding extremely detailed and with outstanding clarity. Notes are crisp and well-defined too, which is apparent upon tossing on King Crimson's chaotic live rendition of “Cat Food”. Texturing is less smooth than the bass and mids though. I find this adds a bit of extra character that helps to distract from the under emphasized upper end sparkle.
When it comes to sound stage Meze knocked it out of the park here. The Rai Solo sounds wide and deep with vocals that are placed just outside of the ear as the default positioning. I really enjoy the way sounds can trail off into the distance and found imaging to be quite immersive and accurate. Playing World of Tanks on PC and experiencing the sounds of shells ricocheting off your armour in random directions never gets old. Going back to Black Sun Empire & State Of Mind's “Caterpillar (Drumsound & Bassline Smith Remix)”, the messy, heavily distorted track shows off the Solo's above average instrument separation and layering. It doesn't quite reach the heights of Brainwavz' B400, but it's not too far off. Pretty impressive for a single dynamic.
Overall I adore the Rai Solo's presentation. The bass is tight and punchy with just enough sub-bass emphasis to keep from feeling like there isn't enough in terms of quantity. The midrange, while not the most accurate, is rife with detail, has outstanding clarity, and yet isn't too peaky nor fatiguing. The treble is full of character too and brings with it a great sound stage and the sort of technical capability you'd want at this price. Nor a signature for everyone, but if you're open minded or enjoy variety, there is lots of love. Also, if you're a low volume listener the Rai Solo isn't something that requires high volumes to get the most of. It still sounds excellent at moderate and low volumes.
Compared To A Peer (Volumes matched with Dayton iMM-6)
DDHiFi Janus (199 USD): The Janus is DDHiFi's first earphone and like the Rai Solo, features a single dynamic driver per side. The Rai Solo's bass presence is stronger, though extension is similarly good on both. Notes out of the Janus sound a little faster and better controlled, but they give up texture and detail to the Solo. The Solo also does a better job of holding onto extended bass lines which drop off too quickly on the Janus. The midrange of the Janus is simply fantastic and bests the Rai Solo's already very good midrange. The Janus is more natural sounding thanks to a smoother, warmer sound and more accurate timbre. The Rai Solo provides more detail and achieves a greater level of clarity. Leading into the treble, the Rai Solo is quite a bit more energetic. The Janus really drops emphasis after 4k leaving it sounding quite mellow. Like the Rai Solo, notes are snappy and well controlled with little to no splashiness. Unlike the Solo, it sounds a little dull. The Solo once again is more detailed and provides greater clarity, in addition to the extra energy and liveliness. While the Janus' treble is of good quality, just as good as the Solo, the lack of emphasis has me enjoying the Meze's upper ranges considerably more. When it comes to sound stage these two go tit for tat. Both have a wide, deep stage with plenty of space and air between notes. To my surprise, despite the lack of emphasis at the extremes the Janus sounds even larger. It's pretty impressive actually. Back into the Rai Solo's favour is imaging accuracy, layering, and instrument separation which are all a small step above the Janus.
When it comes to build, the Janus is no slouch. Like the Rai Solo you will find the use of brushed stainless steel, however, it is only utilized for the front half of the shell and nozzle. The rest is clear plastic which allows you to see the unique innards. It's likely not going to be as durable long term as the Solo as a result. Fit and finish on the Janus is a hint better thanks to even tighter seams, and I also like the cable more. While it's not as visually stunning, the rubber sheath is thicker and more dense while also being more flexible and resistant to bends, kinks, and tangling.
While I enjoy the Janus more for commentary-focused content, the Rai Solo is more entertaining with basically everything else. Although the cable isn't as good, I also appreciate the more durable materials of the Meze and find it more comfortable to wear for long periods despite being larger and heavier. Plus, the Janus provides barely any more isolation than an Earpod which makes it less than ideal for use outside of the home. The Rai Solo is more versatile and convenient with fewer downsides.
HiFiMAN RE600s (199 USD): The RE600s is a classic single dynamic earphone that has been out for quite a few years now. Starting with the low end, the Rai Solo offers more weight and punch with a slightly darker tone. The RE600s is smoother and faster, but falls behind in texture and visceral feedback. Leading into the mids, the RE600s has a slightly warmer, leaner and less dense sounding presentation with a stronger lower region presence vs. the Solo which peaks in the upper mids. This gives vocals on the RE600s a more intimate, forward feel at the expense of micro-detail. Timbre is slightly more natural on the HiFiMAN thanks to a hint of dryness in the Solo. Heading into the treble neither is particularly linear with both having peaks at 4k and 7k. The Solo's 4k peak overshadows the brilliance region and gives it improved clarity and detail over the RE600s which seems to provide more shimmer and sparkle. Both offer well-defined, controlled presentations free of slop and splash. The RE600s has a well-rounded but fairly averagely sized sound stage which is quite apparent when pitting it against the Solo. The Solo sounds wider and deeper and does a better job of enveloping me in my music. The extra low end presence in particular helps with this quite a bit. In addition to sounding larger, the Solo provides a small improvement in laying and instrument separation, with similarly good imaging accuracy. If you enjoyed the RE600s but found it lacking bass, the Rai Solo might be just what you need. It provides a similar signature with improved bass response and slightly better technical ability.
Another reason you might want to go with the Rai Solo over the RE600s is the build quality. The fixed cable on the RE600s is pretty terrible. The cloth section is noisy and stiff, adjectives which can extend to the rubber coated upper section. I've used worse cables, but the RE600s' is still pretty darn low on the list. The tiny aluminum housings compete better with the Rai Solo thanks to their excellent ergonomics and low weight that allow them to nearly disappear in the ear. They certainly don't look or feel as premium as the Meze though, and come across quite delicate in comparison.
Overall I prefer the Rai Solo. It addresses some aspects of the RE600s I didn't know I needed improved, like the bass response and overall clarity. It also offers vastly improved build quality, the cable in particular, while also providing notably better isolation.
In The Ear Meze always crafts some impressive looking products. Just look at the Rai Penta, 99 Classics, and Empyrean. The Rai Solo is no different and upholds my expectations for quality design from the brand. The use of stainless steel earphones gives the Rai Solo a unique aesthetic and upon picking them up immediately provides a sense of quality thanks to their weight and solidity. It is very curvy and smooth, completely free of sharp edges like the rear of the ADV GT3. Fit and finish is also quite good with seams and a cable that sits quite flush. The more budget oriented Exclusive 5 from TFZ has a similar shape and aesthetic, but lacks the same level of design polish. When it comes to telling which channel is which, the Rai Solo lacks any L/R markings, instead opting for coloured nozzles. With tips installed you can't really tell which is which, but this is less of an issue than it might otherwise be. This earphone is designed to be worn cable up which is supported by the low profile fit and shape which really only feels comfortable when inserted in the correct orientation.
The Rai Solo's braided cable makes telling channels easy thanks to thick, coloured collars surrounding each MMCX plug. It follows traditional scheming with red for right, blue for left. The rest of the hardware is just as thoughtfully designed. The y-split and chin cinch are rubber and as a result should be plenty durable and avoid showing wear. The 90 degree angled jack is extremely compact and looks quite pleasing thanks to a mix of a metal, logo infused jacket, and the same translucent rubber used for the y-split. A nice touch to the design is that the edges flare, similar in shape to a reared cobra, giving your fingers plenty of purchase when plugging the cable in or out. The silver plated wire is coated in a thin rubber sheath that is quite light and flexible, though it does have a tendency to remember kinks and bends. While I appreciate thin cables like this because they rarely get in the way, others are not so fond and prefer something thicker and more luxurious feeling, such as the Dunu SA3's braided inclusion. Lastly, the Rai Solo's cable uses memory wire to hold the cable securely around your ears. Normally I'd mark memory wire down as a negative, however, Meze did it right by using wire that actually holds the shape you set. Sadly, that's less common than you'd think.
Comfort of the Rai Solo is pretty outstanding. Yeah, they're somewhat weighty due to the use of stainless steel, but it doesn't really matter because the ergonomics are fantastic. The nozzle angle is natural and the low profile design slots perfectly into the outer ear. I really can't say anything negative about how the Rai Solo fits. It can be worn for extremely long periods without any fatigue. It is also one of the few earphones of this style that I can lay on my side in bed while wearing, although in that situation the memory wire sometimes gets in the way. Isolation is also above average in my experience. With the stock silicone tips (medium, wide bore bi-flange is my preference) installed and no music playing, while typing on my laptop I can barely hear the snicking of the keys. All sounds are greatly dulled and muffled and trying to hold a conversation at normal speaking volumes isn't happening. Turn on your music and you're on your own. Little sound comes through, even in noisy areas. With some third party foam tips, the isolation steps up to another level. If you frequently listen in loud areas and hate turning up the volume to counter incoming noise, the Rai Solo should make you a happy listener.
In The Box The Rai Solo comes in a very classy flip top cardboard box coated in a faux-leather looking material. On the front is a clear viewing window allowing you to peer at the gorgeously crafted earpieces and silver-plated cable. Above and below the viewing window you find the usual branding and model information in silver-foil. Adding to the classiness is how slender and compact these logos are, letting the earphones themselves make a statement and draw the eye. Down the left shoulder you find silver-foil renditions of the earpiece in four different orientations, and on the rear some features, like the use of their exclusive Unified Pistonic Motion driver, a stainless steel shell designed to reduce unwanted vibrations from the driver, and that a silver-plated MMCX cable is included.
Lifting and looking to the rear of the magnetically sealed lid you find a more detailed description of Meze's Unified Pistonic Motion technology. Inside the package itself the earpieces, with cable attached, are nestled safely in a dense foam insert. You also find one of the most attractive, extravagant earphone carrying cases I've come across. It definitely takes queues from the 99 Classics case with the use of leather (faux?) and a large metal Meze logo front and centre. It is truly gorgeous. A little on the large side and more fit for a jacket pocket than pants, but who cares when it looks that good? Inside the case are the rest of the accessories. In all you get:
Final Thoughts A 199 USD the Rai Solo slots right in the midst of a segment of the market that has become hotly contested in the last couple years. It takes some something special to stand out, and in my opinion the Rai Solo is an unquestionable success.
From the get-go, the experience is a positive one. The packaging is attractive and not overly wasteful. The accessory kit features numerous sets of useful tips and an amazing carrying case. The earphones themselves look and feel stellar in the ear thanks to their ergonomic, organically curvaceous design and effective use of stainless steel. While I like the lean, light cable, some will prefer a heavier, more solid feeling option. The memory wire might be a turn off too, even though it works well and puts most memory wire systems to shame.
Most importantly, I think the Rai Solo sounds amazing. It has a detailed, forward midrange with tight, textured bass and smooth, crisp treble. This presentation is set within a spacious sound stage and isn't fatiguing, even after long listening sessions. I can absolutely see some left wanting if they are accustomed to warmer, bassier earphones with a more recessed midrange. To you I say, give yourself time to adjust. The Rai Solo is extremely capable. It joins the Moodrop SSR/SSP, Shozy Form 1.4, and Dunu DK-3001 Pro as a personal favourite and gets an easy recommendation from me. Great job Meze!
Thanks for reading.
- B9
Disclaimer A huge thanks to Alexandra for arranging a sample of the Rai Solo for the purposes of review. The thoughts within this review are my subjective opinions and do not represent Meze or any other entity. At the time of writing the Rai Solo was retailing for 199 USD: https://mezeaudio.com/products/rai-solo
Specifications
Some Test Tunes
Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark's Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams
Today we're checking out Meze's midrange earphone offering, the Rai Solo.
In the realm of earphones Meze had some budget options in the 12 Classics and Neo and a premium offering in the Rai Penta, but were lacking presence with no products priced in between. Enter the Rai Solo. Released in late 2019 at 249 USD, it showed itself to be a competitive product thanks to a well-sized 9.2mm driver, ergonomic stainless steel housings, and a premium accessory kit which included a bespoke carrying case and a high quality, silver-plated cable. Now that we have entered 2021, the Rai Solo is even more competitive thanks to a drop in price to 199 USD.
I've been using the Rai Solo consistently over the last two months for everything from music to games to movies and have come away seriously impressed with the ownership experience. It easily goes head-to-head with other products in the price range and should not be overlooked.
Let's take a closer look at why, shall we?
What I Hear
Tips: The Rai Solo comes with a wide variety of ear tips. Since I found the midrange to be the star of the show, I settled on tips that played to this region. The included medium bi-flange wide bore tips were absolutely perfect for me as they provided a great seal and let the Solo's detail and clarity shine through. Smaller bore tips brought out some roughness in the mids and lower treble, but boosted the low end slightly, adding warmth to the vocals. Utilizing third party tips like Sony Hybrids or Spinfit CP100s provide a similar experience to the included small bore tips, but thanks to a softer silicone ended up providing a slightly smoother, improved sound. Other wide bore tips like generic JVCs or Spinfit CP145s gave me a similar experience to the included wide bore bi-flange set, but with reduced comfort (I prefer a stable, shallow fit with most products). If you like the sound of the bi-flange set but want something similar in a single flange design, those two might be worth checking out. Medium bore tips sounded virtually identical to the small bore sets in my experience.
The midrange of the Rai Solo is where my attention is drawn most when listening. Vocals come through loud and clear, able to cut through even the most busy of instrumentals. Check out Black Sun Empire & State Of Mind's “Caterpillar (Drumsound & Bassline Smith Remix)” to see just how articulate they can sound against a congested background. They are plenty weighty as well, as heard on Calyx & TeeBee's “Long Gone”. The Rai Solo does an amazing job with Calyx's deep, textured vocals. Improvements could be found in timbre which is a tad cool and dry, keeping the Solo from sounding completely accurate. In all honesty, I'm okay with that. The more time I spend in the hobby, the less I care about complete realism. The earphone is the final step in a reproductive audio chain where each component flavours the sound. I'm totally okay with it bringing it's own character to the party, as long as it can bring a smile to my face and bounce to my step.
The low end of the Rai Solo has gotten some flack in the past for being too light. It doesn't offer the boosted sound of your typical v-shaped best seller, yet it's still above neutral in terms of emphasis. A Boy & A Girl Feat. Megan Hamilton's “Bridge Burner” shows that while fairly reserved, bass out of the Rai Solo is deep and offers good punch. The rumbling opening moments of Kavinski's “Solli” won't rock your socks through the Solo like in will in something bassier, ala. Sennheiser IE300, but it still moves enough air to provide a solid bite of visceral feedback. Texturing and detail are quite good with the Rai Solo easily handing the grunge and grit inherent to tracks from Tobacco and The Prodigy. Speed is quick enough to handle rapid transitions, but doesn't provide the sort of snap you'd get from an armature-based low end, or small 6mm dynamic. On the other hand, it won't distort as easily as those drivers when the volume is cranked and bass slamming.
The Rai Solo's treble goes more for detail than sparkle with a prominent presence region and more relaxed brilliance region. As heard on Brookes Brothers' “Carry Me On (feat. Chrom3)” treble shimmer is there, it's just not prominent and forward. The lower treble bias leaves the Solo sounding extremely detailed and with outstanding clarity. Notes are crisp and well-defined too, which is apparent upon tossing on King Crimson's chaotic live rendition of “Cat Food”. Texturing is less smooth than the bass and mids though. I find this adds a bit of extra character that helps to distract from the under emphasized upper end sparkle.
When it comes to sound stage Meze knocked it out of the park here. The Rai Solo sounds wide and deep with vocals that are placed just outside of the ear as the default positioning. I really enjoy the way sounds can trail off into the distance and found imaging to be quite immersive and accurate. Playing World of Tanks on PC and experiencing the sounds of shells ricocheting off your armour in random directions never gets old. Going back to Black Sun Empire & State Of Mind's “Caterpillar (Drumsound & Bassline Smith Remix)”, the messy, heavily distorted track shows off the Solo's above average instrument separation and layering. It doesn't quite reach the heights of Brainwavz' B400, but it's not too far off. Pretty impressive for a single dynamic.
Overall I adore the Rai Solo's presentation. The bass is tight and punchy with just enough sub-bass emphasis to keep from feeling like there isn't enough in terms of quantity. The midrange, while not the most accurate, is rife with detail, has outstanding clarity, and yet isn't too peaky nor fatiguing. The treble is full of character too and brings with it a great sound stage and the sort of technical capability you'd want at this price. Nor a signature for everyone, but if you're open minded or enjoy variety, there is lots of love. Also, if you're a low volume listener the Rai Solo isn't something that requires high volumes to get the most of. It still sounds excellent at moderate and low volumes.
Compared To A Peer (Volumes matched with Dayton iMM-6)
DDHiFi Janus (199 USD): The Janus is DDHiFi's first earphone and like the Rai Solo, features a single dynamic driver per side. The Rai Solo's bass presence is stronger, though extension is similarly good on both. Notes out of the Janus sound a little faster and better controlled, but they give up texture and detail to the Solo. The Solo also does a better job of holding onto extended bass lines which drop off too quickly on the Janus. The midrange of the Janus is simply fantastic and bests the Rai Solo's already very good midrange. The Janus is more natural sounding thanks to a smoother, warmer sound and more accurate timbre. The Rai Solo provides more detail and achieves a greater level of clarity. Leading into the treble, the Rai Solo is quite a bit more energetic. The Janus really drops emphasis after 4k leaving it sounding quite mellow. Like the Rai Solo, notes are snappy and well controlled with little to no splashiness. Unlike the Solo, it sounds a little dull. The Solo once again is more detailed and provides greater clarity, in addition to the extra energy and liveliness. While the Janus' treble is of good quality, just as good as the Solo, the lack of emphasis has me enjoying the Meze's upper ranges considerably more. When it comes to sound stage these two go tit for tat. Both have a wide, deep stage with plenty of space and air between notes. To my surprise, despite the lack of emphasis at the extremes the Janus sounds even larger. It's pretty impressive actually. Back into the Rai Solo's favour is imaging accuracy, layering, and instrument separation which are all a small step above the Janus.
When it comes to build, the Janus is no slouch. Like the Rai Solo you will find the use of brushed stainless steel, however, it is only utilized for the front half of the shell and nozzle. The rest is clear plastic which allows you to see the unique innards. It's likely not going to be as durable long term as the Solo as a result. Fit and finish on the Janus is a hint better thanks to even tighter seams, and I also like the cable more. While it's not as visually stunning, the rubber sheath is thicker and more dense while also being more flexible and resistant to bends, kinks, and tangling.
While I enjoy the Janus more for commentary-focused content, the Rai Solo is more entertaining with basically everything else. Although the cable isn't as good, I also appreciate the more durable materials of the Meze and find it more comfortable to wear for long periods despite being larger and heavier. Plus, the Janus provides barely any more isolation than an Earpod which makes it less than ideal for use outside of the home. The Rai Solo is more versatile and convenient with fewer downsides.
HiFiMAN RE600s (199 USD): The RE600s is a classic single dynamic earphone that has been out for quite a few years now. Starting with the low end, the Rai Solo offers more weight and punch with a slightly darker tone. The RE600s is smoother and faster, but falls behind in texture and visceral feedback. Leading into the mids, the RE600s has a slightly warmer, leaner and less dense sounding presentation with a stronger lower region presence vs. the Solo which peaks in the upper mids. This gives vocals on the RE600s a more intimate, forward feel at the expense of micro-detail. Timbre is slightly more natural on the HiFiMAN thanks to a hint of dryness in the Solo. Heading into the treble neither is particularly linear with both having peaks at 4k and 7k. The Solo's 4k peak overshadows the brilliance region and gives it improved clarity and detail over the RE600s which seems to provide more shimmer and sparkle. Both offer well-defined, controlled presentations free of slop and splash. The RE600s has a well-rounded but fairly averagely sized sound stage which is quite apparent when pitting it against the Solo. The Solo sounds wider and deeper and does a better job of enveloping me in my music. The extra low end presence in particular helps with this quite a bit. In addition to sounding larger, the Solo provides a small improvement in laying and instrument separation, with similarly good imaging accuracy. If you enjoyed the RE600s but found it lacking bass, the Rai Solo might be just what you need. It provides a similar signature with improved bass response and slightly better technical ability.
Another reason you might want to go with the Rai Solo over the RE600s is the build quality. The fixed cable on the RE600s is pretty terrible. The cloth section is noisy and stiff, adjectives which can extend to the rubber coated upper section. I've used worse cables, but the RE600s' is still pretty darn low on the list. The tiny aluminum housings compete better with the Rai Solo thanks to their excellent ergonomics and low weight that allow them to nearly disappear in the ear. They certainly don't look or feel as premium as the Meze though, and come across quite delicate in comparison.
Overall I prefer the Rai Solo. It addresses some aspects of the RE600s I didn't know I needed improved, like the bass response and overall clarity. It also offers vastly improved build quality, the cable in particular, while also providing notably better isolation.
In The Ear Meze always crafts some impressive looking products. Just look at the Rai Penta, 99 Classics, and Empyrean. The Rai Solo is no different and upholds my expectations for quality design from the brand. The use of stainless steel earphones gives the Rai Solo a unique aesthetic and upon picking them up immediately provides a sense of quality thanks to their weight and solidity. It is very curvy and smooth, completely free of sharp edges like the rear of the ADV GT3. Fit and finish is also quite good with seams and a cable that sits quite flush. The more budget oriented Exclusive 5 from TFZ has a similar shape and aesthetic, but lacks the same level of design polish. When it comes to telling which channel is which, the Rai Solo lacks any L/R markings, instead opting for coloured nozzles. With tips installed you can't really tell which is which, but this is less of an issue than it might otherwise be. This earphone is designed to be worn cable up which is supported by the low profile fit and shape which really only feels comfortable when inserted in the correct orientation.
The Rai Solo's braided cable makes telling channels easy thanks to thick, coloured collars surrounding each MMCX plug. It follows traditional scheming with red for right, blue for left. The rest of the hardware is just as thoughtfully designed. The y-split and chin cinch are rubber and as a result should be plenty durable and avoid showing wear. The 90 degree angled jack is extremely compact and looks quite pleasing thanks to a mix of a metal, logo infused jacket, and the same translucent rubber used for the y-split. A nice touch to the design is that the edges flare, similar in shape to a reared cobra, giving your fingers plenty of purchase when plugging the cable in or out. The silver plated wire is coated in a thin rubber sheath that is quite light and flexible, though it does have a tendency to remember kinks and bends. While I appreciate thin cables like this because they rarely get in the way, others are not so fond and prefer something thicker and more luxurious feeling, such as the Dunu SA3's braided inclusion. Lastly, the Rai Solo's cable uses memory wire to hold the cable securely around your ears. Normally I'd mark memory wire down as a negative, however, Meze did it right by using wire that actually holds the shape you set. Sadly, that's less common than you'd think.
Comfort of the Rai Solo is pretty outstanding. Yeah, they're somewhat weighty due to the use of stainless steel, but it doesn't really matter because the ergonomics are fantastic. The nozzle angle is natural and the low profile design slots perfectly into the outer ear. I really can't say anything negative about how the Rai Solo fits. It can be worn for extremely long periods without any fatigue. It is also one of the few earphones of this style that I can lay on my side in bed while wearing, although in that situation the memory wire sometimes gets in the way. Isolation is also above average in my experience. With the stock silicone tips (medium, wide bore bi-flange is my preference) installed and no music playing, while typing on my laptop I can barely hear the snicking of the keys. All sounds are greatly dulled and muffled and trying to hold a conversation at normal speaking volumes isn't happening. Turn on your music and you're on your own. Little sound comes through, even in noisy areas. With some third party foam tips, the isolation steps up to another level. If you frequently listen in loud areas and hate turning up the volume to counter incoming noise, the Rai Solo should make you a happy listener.
In The Box The Rai Solo comes in a very classy flip top cardboard box coated in a faux-leather looking material. On the front is a clear viewing window allowing you to peer at the gorgeously crafted earpieces and silver-plated cable. Above and below the viewing window you find the usual branding and model information in silver-foil. Adding to the classiness is how slender and compact these logos are, letting the earphones themselves make a statement and draw the eye. Down the left shoulder you find silver-foil renditions of the earpiece in four different orientations, and on the rear some features, like the use of their exclusive Unified Pistonic Motion driver, a stainless steel shell designed to reduce unwanted vibrations from the driver, and that a silver-plated MMCX cable is included.
Lifting and looking to the rear of the magnetically sealed lid you find a more detailed description of Meze's Unified Pistonic Motion technology. Inside the package itself the earpieces, with cable attached, are nestled safely in a dense foam insert. You also find one of the most attractive, extravagant earphone carrying cases I've come across. It definitely takes queues from the 99 Classics case with the use of leather (faux?) and a large metal Meze logo front and centre. It is truly gorgeous. A little on the large side and more fit for a jacket pocket than pants, but who cares when it looks that good? Inside the case are the rest of the accessories. In all you get:
- Meze Rai Solo earphones
- 1.3m silver-plated MMCX cable
- Carrying case
- Velco cable tie
- Single flange wide bore tips (s/m/l)
- Bi-flange wide bore tips (s/m/l)
- Bi-flange small bore tips (s/m)
Final Thoughts A 199 USD the Rai Solo slots right in the midst of a segment of the market that has become hotly contested in the last couple years. It takes some something special to stand out, and in my opinion the Rai Solo is an unquestionable success.
From the get-go, the experience is a positive one. The packaging is attractive and not overly wasteful. The accessory kit features numerous sets of useful tips and an amazing carrying case. The earphones themselves look and feel stellar in the ear thanks to their ergonomic, organically curvaceous design and effective use of stainless steel. While I like the lean, light cable, some will prefer a heavier, more solid feeling option. The memory wire might be a turn off too, even though it works well and puts most memory wire systems to shame.
Most importantly, I think the Rai Solo sounds amazing. It has a detailed, forward midrange with tight, textured bass and smooth, crisp treble. This presentation is set within a spacious sound stage and isn't fatiguing, even after long listening sessions. I can absolutely see some left wanting if they are accustomed to warmer, bassier earphones with a more recessed midrange. To you I say, give yourself time to adjust. The Rai Solo is extremely capable. It joins the Moodrop SSR/SSP, Shozy Form 1.4, and Dunu DK-3001 Pro as a personal favourite and gets an easy recommendation from me. Great job Meze!
Thanks for reading.
- B9
Disclaimer A huge thanks to Alexandra for arranging a sample of the Rai Solo for the purposes of review. The thoughts within this review are my subjective opinions and do not represent Meze or any other entity. At the time of writing the Rai Solo was retailing for 199 USD: https://mezeaudio.com/products/rai-solo
Specifications
- Driver: 9.2mm UPM dynamic driver
- Diaphragm thickness: 9µm
- Impedance: 16 Ohm
- SPL: 105±3dB at 1mW/1kHz
- Frequency response: 18Hz - 22kHz
- Distortion: <1% at 1mW/1kHz
- Stock cables: MMCX connector ending in 3.5mm
- Warranty period: 2 years
Some Test Tunes
Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark's Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams
B9Scrambler
@peterinvan Glad we're on the same page. Nice mod.
B9Scrambler
@ngoshawk Thanks man!
C
Codename john
Great review as usual 
Greetings!
Today we're checking out a unique product from the 'Masters of Audio Accessories' over at DDHiFi, the Janus.
DDHiFi has been making a name for themselves thanks to a wide variety of high quality portable audio accessories, be they compact DACS, cases for various FiiO products, cables, adapters, and whatever else the audio enthusiast needs. With the Janus, ambitiously named after the Roman 'God of Beginnings', they finally step into the extremely competitive world of in ear monitors.
Unlike most brands that are comfortable releasing a by-the-numbers product as their first, DDHiFi has gone a different route and created something unique. The implementation of both MMCX and 0.78mm 2-pin connection options for the removable cable is a first, as far as I'm aware. Another first among products I've tested is the use of a flexible PCB to connect the sockets and driver, forgoing the more traditional circuit board/wire setup found in competing products. The idea behind this is optimizing the circuitry to improve sound quality and reduce weight.
So how is DDHiFi's maiden earphone voyage? Let's find out.
What I Hear The Janus is a warm, well-balanced, somewhat mid-centric offering to my ears. Nothing in particular is overly emphasized leaving the listening experience quite stable and coherent from top to bottom. I found it sounded best at moderate volumes, run balanced with the stock Forest cable out of the Earmen Sparrow, so that is the setup used for the following impressions.
Oddly enough, with a lot of tracks the Janus felt like the low end rolled of severely and as a result early impressions left me underwhelmed with the bass performance. After spending more time with it and upon more extensive testing with various ear tips, I found extension into sub-bass regions to actually be quite good with Kavinsky's “Solli” having an appropriate rumble in the opening moments. Throwing on a frequency test track, I got a good sense of rumble down to around 32Hz before all sense of physical feedback was gone. Improving emphasis in these lower regions would really help with long notes that deepen, as they fall off more quickly than is ideal. Texturing is quite smooth but not to the point of eliminating detail, leaving tracks like The Prodigy's “Thunder” sounding appropriately grungy and raw. This driver doesn't feel particularly quick and on the rapid double bass notes inherent to speed metal, definition was lost. It also leaves the mid-bass feeling punchy but somewhat soft in the initial attack.
Heading into the mids you find plenty of warmth backed by silky smooth vocals and accurate timbre. Both male and female vocals are equally well represented and nicely weighted. Neither thin nor thick. Just right. I especially like how it presents Paul Williams' vocals on Daft Punk's “Touch”, easily replicating the emotion present in his performance. Despite sounding extremely refined, I never found the Janus lacking detail (unless directly comparing to like-priced, multi-driver earphones). This is not an analytic presentation by any means, instead going for a natural realism that I expect will appease those who are sticklers for an accurate sound. Unsurprisingly, I found myself picking up the Janus as my preferred earphones for listening to podcasts and similarly commentary focused content.
Treble on the Janus is quite mellow with little emphasis in the brilliance region. Once it reaches just past 4k, emphasis drops off. This is definitely not a fatiguing earphone and should be quite suitable for those of you who are treble sensitive. This tuning leaves the Janus with good detail and clarity, but lacking sparkle and shimmer. Notes are very well controlled with little splash. It's also reasonably quick, able to deal with messy tracks fairly well. I find the presentation a bit dull, but then I also prefer a brighter sound so this is pretty much the opposite of my preferences. Given this, that I enjoy the Janus as much as I do speaks volumes for how capable it is.
When it comes to sound stage the Janus is pleasantly capable. It handles both depth and width quite well with a fairly well-rounded presentation. Instruments and effects flow from the mid-range which has a default positioning just outside the head, spreading convincingly off into the distance. Imaging is fairly accurate with a decently nuanced feel, but it can't quite keep up with some of the better multi-driver offerings like Brainwavz's B400. Laying and instrument separation are also good, but again fall short of the best in the category. Overall a great sound stage with competent technical capabilities.
Tips: The Janus comes with two different types of tips; a wide bore 'treble' set and small bore 'bass' set. The bass set I was not a fan of. While yes, they did increase bass, the quantity was minor and they hinder midrange clarity. The wide bore set sounded much more well-rounded to me, and they were more comfortable to boot.
Compared To A Peer (volumes matched with Dayton iMM-6)
Shozy Form 1.4 (199 USD): The 1.4 is a five driver hybrid featuring four armatures and a single dynamic per side. Quite the contrast from the single dynamic Janus. The Form 1.4 is notably more bassy. Sub-bass is more pronounced and gives a deeper, more physical feel to notes, while the mid-bass presentation is also thicker and more forward. The bass on the Form 1.4 has a much stronger presence overall leaving the midrange sitting back in comparison to how it is presented on the Janus. The low end out of the Janus feels faster and better controlled, though it also falls behind in terms of texture and detail. The low end of the Form 1.4 is all-round more boisterous and in your face. Heading into the mids, I find they are more prominent on the Janus. Vocals out of the Form 1.4 are somehow thinner and warmer with similar clarity and detail. Neither has sibilance issues to my ear. Timbre on both is quite accurate with the Janus coming across a hint more natural. Upon a/bing the two back-to-back, treble out of the Form 1.4 is quite a bit more lively and energetic than it is on the Janus, especially in the brilliance. The Janus offers similar levels of detail and clarity, it just lacks the upper range emphasis. This result in a much more tame, less airy presenation and redirects attention back to the prominent midrange. While notes from the Janus are better controlled, the Form 1.4 is more nimble and does a better job with busy tracks. Despite the lack of upper treble air which can hinder sound stage, the Janus still takes the lead here with a wider and deeper presentation. Default vocal positioning on the Janus is further back giving the Form 1.4 the more intimate presentation. Where the Form 1.4 takes a step ahead is imaging, layering, and separation, all of which the Janus can't keep up on.
Overall I find the Janus the more natural sounding earphone, but the vast difference in tuning leaves them as complimentary products that compete in different spaces. If you want something less bassy and more mid-focused with mellow treble, the Janus is easy to recommend over the Form 1.4. If you prefer a warmer, much bassier sounding earphone, the Form 1.4 is a no-brainer.
ADV Model 3 BA2 (199 USD): The dual-armature Model 3 BA2 is a much more likely competitor for the Janus. While cooler sounding overall, it has a similar tune with restrained emphasis at the extremities and a more mid-range focused presentation. The BA2 provides a more linear transition from sub- to mid- and upper-bass regions but doesn't move air quite as effectively giving the Janus a more visceral presentation on the deepest notes. That said, the BA2 is notably faster. It handles complicated basslines more effectively and it's midbass provides more punch and texture. Heading into the mids the Janus' timbre shows itself to be very much superior, lacking the slightly dull, plasticky tone that plagues the BA2. Again though, ADV's earphone gets the nod when dealing with raw detail. It's presentation is quite a bit thicker though, hindering clarity slightly compared to the Janus. Where the Janus' treble peaks at a mere ~4k and trails off from there, the BA2's snappier treble remains fairly linear until a mild 7k peak, then drops off. This gives it a bit more sparkle on cymbals and chimes, along with more detail, but oddly does little to provide more air to the presentation. The Janus has a considerably wider and deeper sound stage compared to the BA2 which has a very intimate presentation. While I find the BA2's imaging to be a bit more precise, the Janus does a better job of layering and separating individual track elements.
Overall I prefer the Janus. While it's not a detailed and cannot match the BA2 in how it recreates drums, it is more natural sounding and feels better suited to a wider variety of genres. If you listen to a lot of drum heavy tracks and don't require the most accurate sounding mids, or need excellent passive sound isolation, the BA2 might be a better choice. Otherwise, Janus all the way.
In The Ear The Janus has a dual material construction with the rear half of the housing using a clear plastic, and the front using stainless steel, all in a familiar bullet shape. Well, familiar except for the dual MMCX + 0.78mm 2-pin ports cleverly wrapped into the design. Fit and finish is good with the component parts fitting together fairly snug. A prominent lip is present on the nozzle that does a great job holding tips in place. The stainless steel rings that surround and protect the ports have a gap wide just enough to hook a fingernail into. It's not particularly noticeable thanks to the visible inner workings, nor do I think it will cause issues with durability, though the gaps might collect dirt and grime over time. A nice touch is not only are L and R markings engraved into the steel rings surrounding each port, but positive and negative terminals indicators too. This helps ensure you don't plug in your cables out of phase. L and R markings are also duplicated within the earpieces themselves, printed on the unique, flexible PCB DDHiFi used to connect the drivers to each of the connection options. It's all very clever and innovative.
DDHiFi's 'Forest' cable, part of their 'Air' series, included with the Janus is to put it simply, pretty darn fantastic. The simple dual-core design divides into a single strand each beyond the y-split leading up to the plugs. The blue-grey sheath used has a slick, dense feel, yet remains very flexible. Few cables in my experience resist tangling quite as well. The metal hardware used is also impressive. The MMCX plugs mine came equipped with are quite compact with small Ls and Rs surrounding the base making channel identification fairly easy in good light. In poor lighting, they are tough to see and not particularly useful. The y-split and chin cinch are the same size and very compact. The cinch slides easily up and down the cable, but not so easily as to slip out of place when in use. If I were to levy any complaints at the cable, it would be with the weight. Wearing the Janus cable down, I found the weight would tug noticeably with each step, though not enough to pull it out of place. Wrapping the cable up and over the ear negates this, so those that prefer that orientation will be right at home.
Shifting to fit and comfort, DDHiFi did a good job on the Janus here too. The mix of steel and plastic remains light, and when combined with a fairly standard bullet-shape means this is one of those iems you just pop into your ear and for the most part, can forget about. There are no hot spots to worry about, or any sharp edges or awkward angles to cause discomfort. It fits very well and is something that can be worn for extended period pretty easily. Isolation is pretty much non-existent though. The six tuning ports found at the base of the nozzle let in tons of noise, an amount that cannot be countered with foam tips. These would not be up for consideration for use in noisy areas for me.
In The Box The Janus arrives in a long cardboard box covered with the same attractive, banded sleeve used for their other products, though here the band is a pale green with DDHiFi in reflective silver. On the front of the package is the usual brand and model info, as well as a partial list of contents. On the rear you can find DDHiFi's website along with some other administrative details.
Slipping off the sleeve reveals a smaller cardboard box with Janus printed on the front in which you find most of the accessories. Set beside this is a carrying case wrapped in protective plastic. Inside the case is a specially cut foam inset in which the earpieces and some other extras reside. Unfortunately, you are unlikely to continue using this insert following the unboxing as it's not designed to accommodate the cable. In all you get:
Final Thoughts For their first earphone, one with unique features like a flexible PCB and dual-socket design, it would have been easy for DDHiFi to make something that was a success from the perspective of build and design, but with sub-par audio qualities. Thankfully, that's not the case. The Janus is a competent earphone whichever way you look at it. The somewhat unique tuning comes together to provide a much better experience than the graphs would suggest and is a product I have thoroughly enjoyed testing over the last few months. It is a wonderful all-rounder.
Not only does it sound good, but the rest of the package is solid too. The well-built carrying case features a unique clasp mechanism that works well, the included tips provide unique experiences (though I'm not a fan of the bass tips), and the Forest cable is positively wonderful. Flexible, durable, and it refuses to tangle.
If you want a reasonably well-balanced sounding earphone with great mids and a unique feature set, the Janus is a one-of-a-kind product that is unlike anything else on the market (yet). Highly recommended.
Thanks for reading!
- B9
Disclaimer A huge thanks to Lily with DDHiFi for reaching out to see if I would be interested in reviewing the Janus, and for a arranging a sample. The thoughts within this review are my subjective impressions and do not represent DDHiFi or any other entity. At the time of writing the Janus was retailing for 261.80 CAD / 199.99 USD: www.aliexpress.com/item/1005001780883724.html / https://www.ddhifi.com/productinfo/84173.html
Specifications
BT - This Binary Universe
Gramatik - The Age of Reason
Hail Mary Mallon - Are You Going to Eat That?
Infected Mushroom - The Legend of the Black Shawarma
Daft Punk - Random Access Memories
Skindred - Roots Rock Riot
Massive Attack - Mezzanine
The Crystal Method - Tweekend
Aesop Rock – Spirit World Field Guide
The Prodigy - The Day is My Enemy
Gorillaz - Plastic Beach
Grand Funk Railroad - Inside Looking Out
Today we're checking out a unique product from the 'Masters of Audio Accessories' over at DDHiFi, the Janus.
DDHiFi has been making a name for themselves thanks to a wide variety of high quality portable audio accessories, be they compact DACS, cases for various FiiO products, cables, adapters, and whatever else the audio enthusiast needs. With the Janus, ambitiously named after the Roman 'God of Beginnings', they finally step into the extremely competitive world of in ear monitors.
Unlike most brands that are comfortable releasing a by-the-numbers product as their first, DDHiFi has gone a different route and created something unique. The implementation of both MMCX and 0.78mm 2-pin connection options for the removable cable is a first, as far as I'm aware. Another first among products I've tested is the use of a flexible PCB to connect the sockets and driver, forgoing the more traditional circuit board/wire setup found in competing products. The idea behind this is optimizing the circuitry to improve sound quality and reduce weight.
So how is DDHiFi's maiden earphone voyage? Let's find out.
What I Hear The Janus is a warm, well-balanced, somewhat mid-centric offering to my ears. Nothing in particular is overly emphasized leaving the listening experience quite stable and coherent from top to bottom. I found it sounded best at moderate volumes, run balanced with the stock Forest cable out of the Earmen Sparrow, so that is the setup used for the following impressions.
Oddly enough, with a lot of tracks the Janus felt like the low end rolled of severely and as a result early impressions left me underwhelmed with the bass performance. After spending more time with it and upon more extensive testing with various ear tips, I found extension into sub-bass regions to actually be quite good with Kavinsky's “Solli” having an appropriate rumble in the opening moments. Throwing on a frequency test track, I got a good sense of rumble down to around 32Hz before all sense of physical feedback was gone. Improving emphasis in these lower regions would really help with long notes that deepen, as they fall off more quickly than is ideal. Texturing is quite smooth but not to the point of eliminating detail, leaving tracks like The Prodigy's “Thunder” sounding appropriately grungy and raw. This driver doesn't feel particularly quick and on the rapid double bass notes inherent to speed metal, definition was lost. It also leaves the mid-bass feeling punchy but somewhat soft in the initial attack.
Heading into the mids you find plenty of warmth backed by silky smooth vocals and accurate timbre. Both male and female vocals are equally well represented and nicely weighted. Neither thin nor thick. Just right. I especially like how it presents Paul Williams' vocals on Daft Punk's “Touch”, easily replicating the emotion present in his performance. Despite sounding extremely refined, I never found the Janus lacking detail (unless directly comparing to like-priced, multi-driver earphones). This is not an analytic presentation by any means, instead going for a natural realism that I expect will appease those who are sticklers for an accurate sound. Unsurprisingly, I found myself picking up the Janus as my preferred earphones for listening to podcasts and similarly commentary focused content.
Treble on the Janus is quite mellow with little emphasis in the brilliance region. Once it reaches just past 4k, emphasis drops off. This is definitely not a fatiguing earphone and should be quite suitable for those of you who are treble sensitive. This tuning leaves the Janus with good detail and clarity, but lacking sparkle and shimmer. Notes are very well controlled with little splash. It's also reasonably quick, able to deal with messy tracks fairly well. I find the presentation a bit dull, but then I also prefer a brighter sound so this is pretty much the opposite of my preferences. Given this, that I enjoy the Janus as much as I do speaks volumes for how capable it is.
When it comes to sound stage the Janus is pleasantly capable. It handles both depth and width quite well with a fairly well-rounded presentation. Instruments and effects flow from the mid-range which has a default positioning just outside the head, spreading convincingly off into the distance. Imaging is fairly accurate with a decently nuanced feel, but it can't quite keep up with some of the better multi-driver offerings like Brainwavz's B400. Laying and instrument separation are also good, but again fall short of the best in the category. Overall a great sound stage with competent technical capabilities.
Tips: The Janus comes with two different types of tips; a wide bore 'treble' set and small bore 'bass' set. The bass set I was not a fan of. While yes, they did increase bass, the quantity was minor and they hinder midrange clarity. The wide bore set sounded much more well-rounded to me, and they were more comfortable to boot.
Compared To A Peer (volumes matched with Dayton iMM-6)
Shozy Form 1.4 (199 USD): The 1.4 is a five driver hybrid featuring four armatures and a single dynamic per side. Quite the contrast from the single dynamic Janus. The Form 1.4 is notably more bassy. Sub-bass is more pronounced and gives a deeper, more physical feel to notes, while the mid-bass presentation is also thicker and more forward. The bass on the Form 1.4 has a much stronger presence overall leaving the midrange sitting back in comparison to how it is presented on the Janus. The low end out of the Janus feels faster and better controlled, though it also falls behind in terms of texture and detail. The low end of the Form 1.4 is all-round more boisterous and in your face. Heading into the mids, I find they are more prominent on the Janus. Vocals out of the Form 1.4 are somehow thinner and warmer with similar clarity and detail. Neither has sibilance issues to my ear. Timbre on both is quite accurate with the Janus coming across a hint more natural. Upon a/bing the two back-to-back, treble out of the Form 1.4 is quite a bit more lively and energetic than it is on the Janus, especially in the brilliance. The Janus offers similar levels of detail and clarity, it just lacks the upper range emphasis. This result in a much more tame, less airy presenation and redirects attention back to the prominent midrange. While notes from the Janus are better controlled, the Form 1.4 is more nimble and does a better job with busy tracks. Despite the lack of upper treble air which can hinder sound stage, the Janus still takes the lead here with a wider and deeper presentation. Default vocal positioning on the Janus is further back giving the Form 1.4 the more intimate presentation. Where the Form 1.4 takes a step ahead is imaging, layering, and separation, all of which the Janus can't keep up on.
Overall I find the Janus the more natural sounding earphone, but the vast difference in tuning leaves them as complimentary products that compete in different spaces. If you want something less bassy and more mid-focused with mellow treble, the Janus is easy to recommend over the Form 1.4. If you prefer a warmer, much bassier sounding earphone, the Form 1.4 is a no-brainer.
ADV Model 3 BA2 (199 USD): The dual-armature Model 3 BA2 is a much more likely competitor for the Janus. While cooler sounding overall, it has a similar tune with restrained emphasis at the extremities and a more mid-range focused presentation. The BA2 provides a more linear transition from sub- to mid- and upper-bass regions but doesn't move air quite as effectively giving the Janus a more visceral presentation on the deepest notes. That said, the BA2 is notably faster. It handles complicated basslines more effectively and it's midbass provides more punch and texture. Heading into the mids the Janus' timbre shows itself to be very much superior, lacking the slightly dull, plasticky tone that plagues the BA2. Again though, ADV's earphone gets the nod when dealing with raw detail. It's presentation is quite a bit thicker though, hindering clarity slightly compared to the Janus. Where the Janus' treble peaks at a mere ~4k and trails off from there, the BA2's snappier treble remains fairly linear until a mild 7k peak, then drops off. This gives it a bit more sparkle on cymbals and chimes, along with more detail, but oddly does little to provide more air to the presentation. The Janus has a considerably wider and deeper sound stage compared to the BA2 which has a very intimate presentation. While I find the BA2's imaging to be a bit more precise, the Janus does a better job of layering and separating individual track elements.
Overall I prefer the Janus. While it's not a detailed and cannot match the BA2 in how it recreates drums, it is more natural sounding and feels better suited to a wider variety of genres. If you listen to a lot of drum heavy tracks and don't require the most accurate sounding mids, or need excellent passive sound isolation, the BA2 might be a better choice. Otherwise, Janus all the way.
In The Ear The Janus has a dual material construction with the rear half of the housing using a clear plastic, and the front using stainless steel, all in a familiar bullet shape. Well, familiar except for the dual MMCX + 0.78mm 2-pin ports cleverly wrapped into the design. Fit and finish is good with the component parts fitting together fairly snug. A prominent lip is present on the nozzle that does a great job holding tips in place. The stainless steel rings that surround and protect the ports have a gap wide just enough to hook a fingernail into. It's not particularly noticeable thanks to the visible inner workings, nor do I think it will cause issues with durability, though the gaps might collect dirt and grime over time. A nice touch is not only are L and R markings engraved into the steel rings surrounding each port, but positive and negative terminals indicators too. This helps ensure you don't plug in your cables out of phase. L and R markings are also duplicated within the earpieces themselves, printed on the unique, flexible PCB DDHiFi used to connect the drivers to each of the connection options. It's all very clever and innovative.
DDHiFi's 'Forest' cable, part of their 'Air' series, included with the Janus is to put it simply, pretty darn fantastic. The simple dual-core design divides into a single strand each beyond the y-split leading up to the plugs. The blue-grey sheath used has a slick, dense feel, yet remains very flexible. Few cables in my experience resist tangling quite as well. The metal hardware used is also impressive. The MMCX plugs mine came equipped with are quite compact with small Ls and Rs surrounding the base making channel identification fairly easy in good light. In poor lighting, they are tough to see and not particularly useful. The y-split and chin cinch are the same size and very compact. The cinch slides easily up and down the cable, but not so easily as to slip out of place when in use. If I were to levy any complaints at the cable, it would be with the weight. Wearing the Janus cable down, I found the weight would tug noticeably with each step, though not enough to pull it out of place. Wrapping the cable up and over the ear negates this, so those that prefer that orientation will be right at home.
Shifting to fit and comfort, DDHiFi did a good job on the Janus here too. The mix of steel and plastic remains light, and when combined with a fairly standard bullet-shape means this is one of those iems you just pop into your ear and for the most part, can forget about. There are no hot spots to worry about, or any sharp edges or awkward angles to cause discomfort. It fits very well and is something that can be worn for extended period pretty easily. Isolation is pretty much non-existent though. The six tuning ports found at the base of the nozzle let in tons of noise, an amount that cannot be countered with foam tips. These would not be up for consideration for use in noisy areas for me.
In The Box The Janus arrives in a long cardboard box covered with the same attractive, banded sleeve used for their other products, though here the band is a pale green with DDHiFi in reflective silver. On the front of the package is the usual brand and model info, as well as a partial list of contents. On the rear you can find DDHiFi's website along with some other administrative details.
Slipping off the sleeve reveals a smaller cardboard box with Janus printed on the front in which you find most of the accessories. Set beside this is a carrying case wrapped in protective plastic. Inside the case is a specially cut foam inset in which the earpieces and some other extras reside. Unfortunately, you are unlikely to continue using this insert following the unboxing as it's not designed to accommodate the cable. In all you get:
- Janus earphones
- 'Forest' cable
- Bass type silicone tips (s/m/l)
- Treble type silicone tips (s/m/l)
- 10x MMCX port covers
- Magnetic cable organizer
Final Thoughts For their first earphone, one with unique features like a flexible PCB and dual-socket design, it would have been easy for DDHiFi to make something that was a success from the perspective of build and design, but with sub-par audio qualities. Thankfully, that's not the case. The Janus is a competent earphone whichever way you look at it. The somewhat unique tuning comes together to provide a much better experience than the graphs would suggest and is a product I have thoroughly enjoyed testing over the last few months. It is a wonderful all-rounder.
Not only does it sound good, but the rest of the package is solid too. The well-built carrying case features a unique clasp mechanism that works well, the included tips provide unique experiences (though I'm not a fan of the bass tips), and the Forest cable is positively wonderful. Flexible, durable, and it refuses to tangle.
If you want a reasonably well-balanced sounding earphone with great mids and a unique feature set, the Janus is a one-of-a-kind product that is unlike anything else on the market (yet). Highly recommended.
Thanks for reading!
- B9
Disclaimer A huge thanks to Lily with DDHiFi for reaching out to see if I would be interested in reviewing the Janus, and for a arranging a sample. The thoughts within this review are my subjective impressions and do not represent DDHiFi or any other entity. At the time of writing the Janus was retailing for 261.80 CAD / 199.99 USD: www.aliexpress.com/item/1005001780883724.html / https://www.ddhifi.com/productinfo/84173.html
Specifications
- Connector: 0.78mm 2-pin and MMCX
- Plug: 2.5mm
- Impedance: 32ohms
- Sensitivity: 97dB/mW
- Frequency range: 20-20000Hz
- Cable length: 1.2m
BT - This Binary Universe
Gramatik - The Age of Reason
Hail Mary Mallon - Are You Going to Eat That?
Infected Mushroom - The Legend of the Black Shawarma
Daft Punk - Random Access Memories
Skindred - Roots Rock Riot
Massive Attack - Mezzanine
The Crystal Method - Tweekend
Aesop Rock – Spirit World Field Guide
The Prodigy - The Day is My Enemy
Gorillaz - Plastic Beach
Grand Funk Railroad - Inside Looking Out
ngoshawk
Excellent review, Thomas! We both like the Janus and it is a really good first try.
B9Scrambler
@ngoshawk Thanks Lynn!
Greetings!
Today we're checking out the all-new Sennheiser IE 300.
Sennheiser is a brand that needs no introduction. They've been around since 1945 and have created some of the most memorable and respected products in the industry, many of which have become staple recommendations for sound engineers, budding and seasoned audiophiles, and general music lovers around the world.
The new IE 300 is a replacement for the venerable IE 80s eschewing that model's classic shell design and bass tuning feature for a single signature and newly designed, highly ergonomic shell. Inside is an updated version of Sennheiser's 7mm XWB (Extra Wide Band) transducer backed by a new membrane foil and unique resonator chamber resulting in a more natural sound and a reduction of unwanted resonances.
Coming in at just under 300 USD, the IE 300 finds itself in a very competitive segment. Does it have the chops to compete? Let's find out, shall we?
What I Hear While I don't agree with marketing materials in that the IE 300 delivers a balanced sound, I will agree that is is very refined. The IE 300 doesn't shy away from treble or bass and delivers listeners with a bombastic, high energy presentation. Not until you step up to the 500 USD Polaris II from Campfire Audio have I found another v-shaped earphone that is quite as smooth and detailed as Sennheiser's newest.
The IE 300's treble feels very nimble and light with a somewhat lean weight. Notes are very tight and well controlled with excellent definition. The upper ranges of this earphone are free of splash, looseness, and any general sloppiness that can be very distracting on King Crimson's “Cat Food”. The IE 300 has plenty of upper end emphasis that gives it a very shimmery, sparkly presentation. Despite being quite bright, it somehow manages to avoid crossing the line into discomfort, retaining a refined smoothness that is quite uncommon in my experience.
Dropping down into the mids, you're greeted with solid detail retrieval amidst a similarly lean presentation as the treble. It fills out the deeper you go resulting in full-bodied male vocals, especially apparent if you use the IE 300 for podcasts and commentary-based content. The IE 300 is fairly revealing and not particularly forgiving with poor quality and/or flawed material. A satisfying warmth is present keeping both male and female vocals sounding natural, and an accurate timbre presentation that permits the accurate delineation of specific instruments. Sibilance is well-managed with tracks like The Crystal Method's “Grace” and Aesop Rock's “Blood Sandwich” seeing their more aggressive moments tamed. My only issue with the mids is that they are recessed and could benefit from some EQ to bring them more in line with surrounding frequencies.
The IE 300's low end is quite strong with plenty of emphasis in the mid- and sub-bass regions. The presentation carries notably more warmth, weight, and density than the treble and mid regions, yet remains quite quick and punchy. Visceral feedback on the deepest notes is aplenty, while mid- and upper-bass regions carry gobs of punch thanks to this little 7mm driver's excellent control. It is very articulate with quick bass lines and has no issues keeping up with the rapid double-bass found throughout Havok's album, 'Time Is Up'. Texture isn't half bad either with the IE 300 finding a welcome balance of refined smoothness and raw detail.
Another strong point of this earphone is the sound stage. From my first listen, I have been enamoured with the way the IE 300 envelops you in sound, be that music, movies, or video games. Vocals sit away from the ear by default, pulling the staging with it. From there effects and instruments expand. Even with a fun EDM track that doesn't really do much with imaging and spatial cues, such as Metrik's “We Got It (ft. Rothwell) (S.P.Y Remix)”, the IE 300 manages to surround you with the track, completely avoiding the 'in-the-head' feel provided by other products. Pitting the IE 300 against something more dynamic, such as Supertramp's “Rudy”, you get a feel for it's accurate imaging and excellent channel separation. Instruments are effectively separated and busy tracks are well-layered. I find the staging is wider than it is deep which does limit the IE 300 slightly with heavy instrumentals, such as the Witcher 2' s OST or Gyakuten Meets Orchestra (orchestral renditions of Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney tracks).
Overall I'm quite pleased with the IE 300. I like that while bright, it's not particularly tiring. While bassy, the mid-bass presence isn't overwhelming and everything is handled well. Although the mids are recessed, vocals and instruments sound natural and aren't drowned out by surrounding frequencies. On top of that, it is technically competent and has a fantastic sound stage. Those wanting a more neutral and/or balanced sounding earphone should look elsewhere while anyone wanting a refined v-shaped sound in this price range should have these on their radar.
Compared To A Peer (volumes matched with Dayton iMM-6)
ADV GT3 w black filter (299.00 USD): The single dynamic GT3 also has a v-shaped sound, though one that is less exaggerated than the IE 300. Bass out of the IE 300 is slower and warmer with more mid-bass emphasis. It provides just as much, if not more visceral feedback on the deepest notes along with additional punch and weight to the mid- and upper-bass. The GT3 pulls ahead in terms of texture and control. Leading into the mids, they are slightly more present and weighty on the GT3 but have a cooler tone which puts it on the back foot when it comes to sounding natural with proper timbre. Treble out of the IE 300 is skewed towards the brilliance region which has notable more shimmer than the GT3. The ADV lacks in brilliance, making up ground in terms of raw detail and clarity. The GT3's sound stage is positively intimate in comparison. The IE 300 is wider and deeper with more space between notes. Even so, I found the GT3 to more accurately image while giving up little to nothing in terms of separation and layering.
If you're looking for a technically impressive single dynamic and don't mind a less natural sound, the GT3 will probably be a better fit. A tuning setup that doubles down on this doesn't hurt. Otherwise, I found the IE 300 a more enjoyable, versatile listen.
BGVP DM7 (299.00 USD): The 6 armature DM7 is more balanced with a midrange that sticks out more thanks to reduced emphasis in both bass and treble regions. While I do enjoy the mids of both products, they accomplish this in different ways. The IE 300's is warmer and more natural but gives up a significant amount of presence and detail to the DM7. Bass out of the BGVP is notably leaner and less prominent. It lacks the visceral feel and punch of the Sennheiser's single dynamic, though it provides more texture and is even more capable when it comes to rapid, complicated passages. Treble out of the IE 300 is leaner and more airy with a lot more shimmer and energy. They go head-to-head on detail and clarity with the DM7 having an edge. The sound stage presentation on these two is quite different. While the DM7 is no slouch in terms of staging size, the Sennheiser feels quite a bit wider and more open, though it falls behind in depth. Imaging accuracy is more precise out of the DM7 and it does a better job of layering busy tracks, while the Sennheiser keeps up just fine when it comes to ensuring individual instruments remain clean and coherent.
If you're looking for a balanced, solidly technical earphone with a small boost to the low end the DM7 would better meet your needs than the IE 300. If that sounds boring and you prefer big bass and sparkly treble set within a wide stage backed by good technical capability, go with the IE 300.
In The Ear The IE 300's shells are plastic but they in no way look or feel cheap in the hand. From the initial product photos I figured the reflective specks within the plastic would look chinzy, but in real life it gives makes the IE 300 look like a modern, professional piece of audio equipment. Not unlike the impression I got from the glorious matte black paint Dunu used for the DK-3001 Pro. The three part design (nozzle, rear panel, and main body) is well put-together without any ill-fitting pieces, rough edges, or other such imperfections that would suggest cost costing or low quality materials. The face of the earphone contains a single pinhole vent set beside a recessed, gun-metal chrome Sennheiser logo. On the inner face the right earpiece is completely blank, while the left has the model name moulded into the plastic. Up where Sennheiser has opted to use MMCX instead of the proprietary 2-pin system from the IE80s, you find a red plastic band indicating the right channel. On the left is a black band with a small bump to aid those with a visual disability in determining channel. Overall the build quality is fantastic leaving the IE 300 as one of the best built, plastic bodies earphones I've used.
The cable is nice save for one notable flaw. On one hand, I really love the brown sheath which has a distinctly old-school look to it, hearkening back to the types of cables that were common in 2014 when I entered the hobby. While stiffer than many of the multi-strand braided cables offered with competing products, the cable included with the IE 300 is extremely resistant to tangling, doesn't retain memory of bends or kinks, and is topped off with memory wire that actually works. You bend it, it stays. It's great! I still prefer preformed ear guides, but memory wire that actually nails the 'memory' portion is pretty cool. Rare too. The other hardware is solid as well, from an extremely tiny, well-relieved 90 degree angled jack to the classy aluminum wrapped y-split and plastic chin cinch, something that would have been a sin to omit. Why? Well, if I didn't use that cinch to tuck the cable tightly around my chin, cable noise was very intrusive. While sitting it wasn't much of an issue, but go for a walk or jog and every bump or rub came through loud and clear unless that cinch was being used.
Comfort is a huge win for the IE 300. That plastic shell is quite small and slim, very lightweight, and thanks to the low profile design, unflappable during heavy movement. The memory wire is quite effective in keeping the cable neatly wrapped around the ear without worry of it bouncing up and over, something that can be an issue with lightweight and/or stiffer cables if they're lacking such wire or preformed ear guides. The IE 300 is one that I can comfortably wear for pretty much as long as I want without any risk of hot spots or general discomfort settling in. Isolation doesn't quite fare as well, at least with the silicone tips in place. When using the IE 300 in noisy places, like the local coffee shop, added volume was needed to drown out those chatting around me. Thankfully the added bass and treble Sennheiser baked in works wonders in such an environment so even with some sound leakage, you still have a good listening experience. That said, I recommend swapping over to the foam tips if isolation is key since they improve the experience a notable amount.
Overall a very premium feeling, well built earphone with excellent ergonomics and comfort. It's let down only by below average isolation with silicone tips and a noisy cable, though you can mostly address both of those concerns with the included foam tips and chin cinch.
In The Box The IE 300 arrives in a fairly large lift-top cardboard box adorned with Sennheiser's familiar blue and grey colour scheme. On the front you find an image of the IE 300 itself along with the usual branding and model information. Down the left is a list of contents and specifications, on a the right a QR code, while the back contains a list of features and product highlights in six different languages.
Removing the lid you find the IE 300's earpieces, with cable attached, neatly and safely stored in a large foam insert, half of which is covered by a cardboard flap. Lifting the flap you find the rest of the cable neatly wrapped alongside a hard, clam shell carrying case. Lifting out the cardboard flap you find one of Sennheiser's typically dense user manuals. In all you get:
Final Thoughts The IE 300 has shown itself to be an excellent companion for daily driver duties. The v-shaped signature provides an exciting listen that helped keep me energized and entertained throughout the day. The light, low profile shell looks great and is extremely comfortable. The included carrying case is small enough to fit in most pockets, yet large enough to hold most of your gear; ex. small DAP or type-C dongle, earphones, spare tips. The IE 300 also offers good technical capability in terms of quick, well-textured bass, natural sounding mids, and detailed, airy treble. This is all set within a reasonably deep, very wide sound stage that images well and does a good job separating individual instruments.
Isolation is weak when using silicone tips though, and the cable won't win any awards for noise as it transmits plenty when rubbing against your shirt. Thankfully Sennheiser included a chin cinch which mostly negates this issue. The short nozzle could also be an issue for some. If you're not opposed to using third party tips, something like the Spintfit CP145 can alleviate this issue while retaining the signature of the included silicone tips.
Overall I find the IE 300 a very compelling package. If you enjoy bombastic bass and radiant treble, the smooth, lively sound of the IE 300 is quite enjoyable and plenty versatile. There is very little I can find fault with here.
Thanks for reading!
- B9
Disclaimer A huge thanks to Everett with Sennheiser (Evshrug on Head-fi) for reaching out to see if I would be interested in reviewing the IE 300, and for arranging a sample for the purposes of review. The thoughts within this review are my subjective opinions and do not represent Sennheiser or any other entity. At the time of writing the IE 300 was retailing for 399.95 CAD / 299.95 USD: en-ca.sennheiser.com/ie-300 / https://en-us.sennheiser.com/ie-300
Specifications
Some Test Tunes
Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark's Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams
Today we're checking out the all-new Sennheiser IE 300.
Sennheiser is a brand that needs no introduction. They've been around since 1945 and have created some of the most memorable and respected products in the industry, many of which have become staple recommendations for sound engineers, budding and seasoned audiophiles, and general music lovers around the world.
The new IE 300 is a replacement for the venerable IE 80s eschewing that model's classic shell design and bass tuning feature for a single signature and newly designed, highly ergonomic shell. Inside is an updated version of Sennheiser's 7mm XWB (Extra Wide Band) transducer backed by a new membrane foil and unique resonator chamber resulting in a more natural sound and a reduction of unwanted resonances.
Coming in at just under 300 USD, the IE 300 finds itself in a very competitive segment. Does it have the chops to compete? Let's find out, shall we?
What I Hear While I don't agree with marketing materials in that the IE 300 delivers a balanced sound, I will agree that is is very refined. The IE 300 doesn't shy away from treble or bass and delivers listeners with a bombastic, high energy presentation. Not until you step up to the 500 USD Polaris II from Campfire Audio have I found another v-shaped earphone that is quite as smooth and detailed as Sennheiser's newest.
The IE 300's treble feels very nimble and light with a somewhat lean weight. Notes are very tight and well controlled with excellent definition. The upper ranges of this earphone are free of splash, looseness, and any general sloppiness that can be very distracting on King Crimson's “Cat Food”. The IE 300 has plenty of upper end emphasis that gives it a very shimmery, sparkly presentation. Despite being quite bright, it somehow manages to avoid crossing the line into discomfort, retaining a refined smoothness that is quite uncommon in my experience.
Dropping down into the mids, you're greeted with solid detail retrieval amidst a similarly lean presentation as the treble. It fills out the deeper you go resulting in full-bodied male vocals, especially apparent if you use the IE 300 for podcasts and commentary-based content. The IE 300 is fairly revealing and not particularly forgiving with poor quality and/or flawed material. A satisfying warmth is present keeping both male and female vocals sounding natural, and an accurate timbre presentation that permits the accurate delineation of specific instruments. Sibilance is well-managed with tracks like The Crystal Method's “Grace” and Aesop Rock's “Blood Sandwich” seeing their more aggressive moments tamed. My only issue with the mids is that they are recessed and could benefit from some EQ to bring them more in line with surrounding frequencies.
The IE 300's low end is quite strong with plenty of emphasis in the mid- and sub-bass regions. The presentation carries notably more warmth, weight, and density than the treble and mid regions, yet remains quite quick and punchy. Visceral feedback on the deepest notes is aplenty, while mid- and upper-bass regions carry gobs of punch thanks to this little 7mm driver's excellent control. It is very articulate with quick bass lines and has no issues keeping up with the rapid double-bass found throughout Havok's album, 'Time Is Up'. Texture isn't half bad either with the IE 300 finding a welcome balance of refined smoothness and raw detail.
Another strong point of this earphone is the sound stage. From my first listen, I have been enamoured with the way the IE 300 envelops you in sound, be that music, movies, or video games. Vocals sit away from the ear by default, pulling the staging with it. From there effects and instruments expand. Even with a fun EDM track that doesn't really do much with imaging and spatial cues, such as Metrik's “We Got It (ft. Rothwell) (S.P.Y Remix)”, the IE 300 manages to surround you with the track, completely avoiding the 'in-the-head' feel provided by other products. Pitting the IE 300 against something more dynamic, such as Supertramp's “Rudy”, you get a feel for it's accurate imaging and excellent channel separation. Instruments are effectively separated and busy tracks are well-layered. I find the staging is wider than it is deep which does limit the IE 300 slightly with heavy instrumentals, such as the Witcher 2' s OST or Gyakuten Meets Orchestra (orchestral renditions of Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney tracks).
Overall I'm quite pleased with the IE 300. I like that while bright, it's not particularly tiring. While bassy, the mid-bass presence isn't overwhelming and everything is handled well. Although the mids are recessed, vocals and instruments sound natural and aren't drowned out by surrounding frequencies. On top of that, it is technically competent and has a fantastic sound stage. Those wanting a more neutral and/or balanced sounding earphone should look elsewhere while anyone wanting a refined v-shaped sound in this price range should have these on their radar.
Compared To A Peer (volumes matched with Dayton iMM-6)
ADV GT3 w black filter (299.00 USD): The single dynamic GT3 also has a v-shaped sound, though one that is less exaggerated than the IE 300. Bass out of the IE 300 is slower and warmer with more mid-bass emphasis. It provides just as much, if not more visceral feedback on the deepest notes along with additional punch and weight to the mid- and upper-bass. The GT3 pulls ahead in terms of texture and control. Leading into the mids, they are slightly more present and weighty on the GT3 but have a cooler tone which puts it on the back foot when it comes to sounding natural with proper timbre. Treble out of the IE 300 is skewed towards the brilliance region which has notable more shimmer than the GT3. The ADV lacks in brilliance, making up ground in terms of raw detail and clarity. The GT3's sound stage is positively intimate in comparison. The IE 300 is wider and deeper with more space between notes. Even so, I found the GT3 to more accurately image while giving up little to nothing in terms of separation and layering.
If you're looking for a technically impressive single dynamic and don't mind a less natural sound, the GT3 will probably be a better fit. A tuning setup that doubles down on this doesn't hurt. Otherwise, I found the IE 300 a more enjoyable, versatile listen.
BGVP DM7 (299.00 USD): The 6 armature DM7 is more balanced with a midrange that sticks out more thanks to reduced emphasis in both bass and treble regions. While I do enjoy the mids of both products, they accomplish this in different ways. The IE 300's is warmer and more natural but gives up a significant amount of presence and detail to the DM7. Bass out of the BGVP is notably leaner and less prominent. It lacks the visceral feel and punch of the Sennheiser's single dynamic, though it provides more texture and is even more capable when it comes to rapid, complicated passages. Treble out of the IE 300 is leaner and more airy with a lot more shimmer and energy. They go head-to-head on detail and clarity with the DM7 having an edge. The sound stage presentation on these two is quite different. While the DM7 is no slouch in terms of staging size, the Sennheiser feels quite a bit wider and more open, though it falls behind in depth. Imaging accuracy is more precise out of the DM7 and it does a better job of layering busy tracks, while the Sennheiser keeps up just fine when it comes to ensuring individual instruments remain clean and coherent.
If you're looking for a balanced, solidly technical earphone with a small boost to the low end the DM7 would better meet your needs than the IE 300. If that sounds boring and you prefer big bass and sparkly treble set within a wide stage backed by good technical capability, go with the IE 300.
In The Ear The IE 300's shells are plastic but they in no way look or feel cheap in the hand. From the initial product photos I figured the reflective specks within the plastic would look chinzy, but in real life it gives makes the IE 300 look like a modern, professional piece of audio equipment. Not unlike the impression I got from the glorious matte black paint Dunu used for the DK-3001 Pro. The three part design (nozzle, rear panel, and main body) is well put-together without any ill-fitting pieces, rough edges, or other such imperfections that would suggest cost costing or low quality materials. The face of the earphone contains a single pinhole vent set beside a recessed, gun-metal chrome Sennheiser logo. On the inner face the right earpiece is completely blank, while the left has the model name moulded into the plastic. Up where Sennheiser has opted to use MMCX instead of the proprietary 2-pin system from the IE80s, you find a red plastic band indicating the right channel. On the left is a black band with a small bump to aid those with a visual disability in determining channel. Overall the build quality is fantastic leaving the IE 300 as one of the best built, plastic bodies earphones I've used.
The cable is nice save for one notable flaw. On one hand, I really love the brown sheath which has a distinctly old-school look to it, hearkening back to the types of cables that were common in 2014 when I entered the hobby. While stiffer than many of the multi-strand braided cables offered with competing products, the cable included with the IE 300 is extremely resistant to tangling, doesn't retain memory of bends or kinks, and is topped off with memory wire that actually works. You bend it, it stays. It's great! I still prefer preformed ear guides, but memory wire that actually nails the 'memory' portion is pretty cool. Rare too. The other hardware is solid as well, from an extremely tiny, well-relieved 90 degree angled jack to the classy aluminum wrapped y-split and plastic chin cinch, something that would have been a sin to omit. Why? Well, if I didn't use that cinch to tuck the cable tightly around my chin, cable noise was very intrusive. While sitting it wasn't much of an issue, but go for a walk or jog and every bump or rub came through loud and clear unless that cinch was being used.
Comfort is a huge win for the IE 300. That plastic shell is quite small and slim, very lightweight, and thanks to the low profile design, unflappable during heavy movement. The memory wire is quite effective in keeping the cable neatly wrapped around the ear without worry of it bouncing up and over, something that can be an issue with lightweight and/or stiffer cables if they're lacking such wire or preformed ear guides. The IE 300 is one that I can comfortably wear for pretty much as long as I want without any risk of hot spots or general discomfort settling in. Isolation doesn't quite fare as well, at least with the silicone tips in place. When using the IE 300 in noisy places, like the local coffee shop, added volume was needed to drown out those chatting around me. Thankfully the added bass and treble Sennheiser baked in works wonders in such an environment so even with some sound leakage, you still have a good listening experience. That said, I recommend swapping over to the foam tips if isolation is key since they improve the experience a notable amount.
Overall a very premium feeling, well built earphone with excellent ergonomics and comfort. It's let down only by below average isolation with silicone tips and a noisy cable, though you can mostly address both of those concerns with the included foam tips and chin cinch.
In The Box The IE 300 arrives in a fairly large lift-top cardboard box adorned with Sennheiser's familiar blue and grey colour scheme. On the front you find an image of the IE 300 itself along with the usual branding and model information. Down the left is a list of contents and specifications, on a the right a QR code, while the back contains a list of features and product highlights in six different languages.
Removing the lid you find the IE 300's earpieces, with cable attached, neatly and safely stored in a large foam insert, half of which is covered by a cardboard flap. Lifting the flap you find the rest of the cable neatly wrapped alongside a hard, clam shell carrying case. Lifting out the cardboard flap you find one of Sennheiser's typically dense user manuals. In all you get:
- IE 300 earphones
- MMCX cable with 3.5mm plug
- Single flange silicone ear tips (s/m/l)
- Foam ear tips (s/m/l)
- Cleaning tool
- Carrying case
Final Thoughts The IE 300 has shown itself to be an excellent companion for daily driver duties. The v-shaped signature provides an exciting listen that helped keep me energized and entertained throughout the day. The light, low profile shell looks great and is extremely comfortable. The included carrying case is small enough to fit in most pockets, yet large enough to hold most of your gear; ex. small DAP or type-C dongle, earphones, spare tips. The IE 300 also offers good technical capability in terms of quick, well-textured bass, natural sounding mids, and detailed, airy treble. This is all set within a reasonably deep, very wide sound stage that images well and does a good job separating individual instruments.
Isolation is weak when using silicone tips though, and the cable won't win any awards for noise as it transmits plenty when rubbing against your shirt. Thankfully Sennheiser included a chin cinch which mostly negates this issue. The short nozzle could also be an issue for some. If you're not opposed to using third party tips, something like the Spintfit CP145 can alleviate this issue while retaining the signature of the included silicone tips.
Overall I find the IE 300 a very compelling package. If you enjoy bombastic bass and radiant treble, the smooth, lively sound of the IE 300 is quite enjoyable and plenty versatile. There is very little I can find fault with here.
Thanks for reading!
- B9
Disclaimer A huge thanks to Everett with Sennheiser (Evshrug on Head-fi) for reaching out to see if I would be interested in reviewing the IE 300, and for arranging a sample for the purposes of review. The thoughts within this review are my subjective opinions and do not represent Sennheiser or any other entity. At the time of writing the IE 300 was retailing for 399.95 CAD / 299.95 USD: en-ca.sennheiser.com/ie-300 / https://en-us.sennheiser.com/ie-300
Specifications
- Frequency Response: 6Hz – 20,000Hz
- Sound Pressure Level: 124dB (1kHz, 1Vrms)
- Impedance: 16ohms
- THD: <0.08% (1kHz, 94dB)
Some Test Tunes
Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark's Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams
B9Scrambler
@ericpalonen Thank you sir
zombywoof
Well done. As is your usual practice, your have presented a clear, well prepared review.
ajlolo
Nice review
Greetings!
Today we're checking out a new tri-hybrid earphone, this time from LZ.
The A7 builds on the rampant success of it's predecessors. With a 7 driver setup (one dynamic for the lows, two Knowles BAs for the mids, two Knowles BA's for the highs, and dual Piezoelectric ceramic tweeters for ultra-highs), removable cables, and a tuning system replete with interchangeable nozzles and a single tuning switch, the A7 is quite a feature packed product and at under 350 USD, is a comparative bargain when looking at similarly equipped products.
Admittedly, I have not been LZ's biggest fan in the past. I purchased an A2s based on emerging feedback and the near legendary status the A2 had earned. While I enjoyed aspects of the A2s, like the build and design, the sound quality was somewhat lacklustre. A few years later I was sent an A5 for review. It was a very good earphone, but even with the updated filter set could be a little sharp in the treble region. There was also an elephant in the room; the winged Honda logo (okay, it wasn't identical. but pretty darn close) which adorned each ear piece. I've also heard some other models thanks to meet-ups with a local Head-fi-er (pre-Covid of course), none of which really tickled my fancy.
When I was contacted about reviewing the A7, I expressed my hesitation but was assured the A7 was a significant step up from the A5. Going against my gut feelings, I accepted the review opportunity. It's a good thing because the A7 has seen nothing but praise. I think it's valid too, as will be discussed throughout this review.
Let's take a closer look at the LZ A7, shall we?
What I Hear The A7 has a highly customize-able sound signature thanks to the combination of five nozzle filters and a crossover switch resulting in a total of 10 potential signatures.
Tuning Switch: The tuning switch present on the face of each earpiece swaps the A7 between Monitor and Pop modes. As you can guess from the name, Monitor mode is more balanced while Pop mode scoops the mids giving the presentation a stronger v-shape. The difference between the two isn't huge with at most about a 5dB drop in emphasis on the monitor mode between 500Hz-1kHz. It's certainly noticeable though, and when combined with some of the more exaggerated filters can provide quite a varied listening experience. I preferred to leave it in Pop mode as the low end carried more presence without losing control. Also helped to counter the lower mid peak and balance out the brightness added in by the blue and silver filters.
Filters: The A7 comes with five filter options that influence emphasis between 1.5kHz and 5kHz. The Black filters are the default upon which the others are measured, so we can consider it to have no influence on the signature (aka. +/- 0dB). I don't mind this filter. Everything sounds well-enough balanced if not a bit bright.
The Red filter has a significant effect applying a -8dB drop. This filter warms the signature a bit too much for my preference, but will likely still be too bright for treble sensitive listeners.
The Gold filter has less effect with a -3dB drop. This is my preferred filter since it keeps the A7 energetic without veering into harsh territory.
The Blue filter adds +3dB to the A7's upper mids and presence region. I find it quite comfortable to listen with thanks to the introduces of sibilance. The A7 gains some additional technical ability, but it's not worth the aggression imo.
The Silver filter bring things up +6dB turning the A7 into an analytic monster. Oddly, I found this filter less harsh and more listenable than the Blue one as it avoids the sibilance issues.
For my tastes, these are the order in which I liked the various filter options. Gold, Black=Silver, Red, Blue.
Tips: The A7 is quite receptive to tip selection which is great since it comes with three varied styles. Included are wide bore tips in the style of KZ/Tennmak Whirlwinds, generic blue-cored medium bore tips, and Sony hybrid style soft-bore tips. Along with these, I tested the A7 with a number of other third party options.
Whirlwind: I have a ton of these tips from other earphones and have found basically nothing to use them with. To my pleasant surprise, they work on the A7 and sound pretty decent! Bass steps back in terms of emphasis and warmth but keeps its quick, punchy nature. Mids unfortunately step back too and on some tracks feel too far behind the treble. Treble with these tips loses some control but I like that fine details are pulled to the forefront and the sound stage opens up.
Blue-Core: Bass and general warmth are increased over the Whirlwinds. The added warmth helps out the midrange giving vocals a more natural presentation. Treble takes a hit though, becoming a bit sharp and somewhat unpleasant. The broad sound stage of the Whirlwinds also closes up a touch. These tips are a bit hit or miss in my opinion.
Sony Hybrid Clones: These offer more or less the same experience as the Blue-Core tips, but with some of the treble edge smoothed out. I like to think that's a result of the softer silicone absorbing. These are the second best of the included options for me.
RHA Dual Density: These have been my go-to tip with the A7. At first glance they look very similar to the Blue-Core tips. Upon further inspection they have a wider bore and use a much softer, higher quality silicone. Sub-bass really stands out with these, treble is the smoothest of the bunch, and the midrange retains good presence. There are no downsides with these for my preferences.
Standard JVC Wide Bore: These provide a similar experience as the Whirlwinds but with more sub-bass presence and better controlled treble. The mids really shine with the JVCs, and the soundstage opens up giving the most spacious experience of the bunch. These are my second in line behind RHAs offering.
Spinfit CP-145: These are a new addition to my tip selection and I've not used them much with the A7, but initial impressions are excellent. Bore size finds itself between the RHA and JVC with the soft silicone of the JVC. Female vocals can sound a hint thin and the sound stage loses some depth to the JVCs, but they do nothing to hinder the low end, mid presence, or treble quality. These are nice.
Sennheiser Bi-Flange (wide bore): Once again quite similar to the Whirlwinds but with better isolation and more sub-bass. Treble can be a bit rough around the edges but the midrange stays prominent. Sound stage sounds pretty big, gaining width and depth over most of the other options. If the treble were smoother these would be a top pick, but alas, they're not a front runner.
General Sound Impressions (Monitor + Gold + RHA Dual Density)
Treble out of the A7 has excellent extension thanks to that piezoelectric driver. Detail is aplenty which also helps give the presentation outstanding clarity. The upper end air also allows plenty of space between notes, keeping things from blending or mushing together. The presentation is on the thin side and for the most part is free of splash or sloppiness which is nice because notes attack and decay quite rapidly. The presentation could certainly be tighter, but I'm not going to fault the A7 much here. My only main qualm is that the piezoelectric driver is a bit sharp and lacks the refinement of this techs implementation in the BQEYZ Spring II. Had I not heard that earphone first, I'd be plenty satisfied with the A7's piezo.
Dipping into the mids I found vocals to be very clear and punchy with a nice weight. The A7 finds itself in a good place between those earphones that come across overly lean, or overly dense and meaty. Sibilance is present but overall well managed with just a hint of “tsst” present in places it shouldn't be. I didn't notice any issues with midbass bleeding in and hindering clarity and coherence, nor with treble sheen overshadowing find details. Timbre for the most part is quite decent with the A7 having a light metallic edge placed on instruments and effects in the upper ranges. I blame that piezoelectric driver since I've noticed this quality on other earphones using this tech.
The low end is impressively linear with enough extension to provide a solid display of visceral feedback. It's not going to rattle your eardrums though. Texture and detail are above average and give the A7's low end a very dynamic and lively presentation. Thankfully there is no dull, one note bass to be found here. The driver's attack feels fairly quick with notes hitting solidly and with purpose. Things decay a little slower which helps those sub-bass rumblings linger realistically. I would like a hint more meat to the midbass as it would give the A7 some added warmth and thickness. This can somewhat be achieved by tossing it into Pop mode and swapping to the red filter.
When it comes to sound stage, the A7 is a bit of a mixed bag. I find it better on Pop than Monitor. On Pop, vocals pull back and give the presentation more depth and space while on Monitor mode the A7 has quite an intimate presentation. On Pop mode I found the nuanced imaging more accurate thanks to the extra space in which sounds could move. This also led to a more layered feel to tracks and improved separation of instruments. While I didn't find the A7 congested in Monitor mode, it nearly took on a wall-of-sound feel with sounds staying unnaturally close to the head. This mostly hurt live performances where instruments need room to breathe. EDM and more electronic reliant tracks fared better.
Overall I find the A7 to be quite technically competent and enjoyable. Bass quality is top notch and makes a strong showing. The mid range is quite clear and coherent. I find the implementation of the piezoelectric driver to be good, but BQEYZ did it better with the notably more affordable Spring II. The A7's tuning system is fairly extensive and while it can never push the earphone into neutral territory, it offers plenty of versatility and is something other brands could look to for guidance if looking at how to implement such a system properly.
Compared To A Peer (volumes matched with Dayton iMM-6)
FLC 8S (319.00 USD): The 8S is a classic at this point but is still untouched when it comes to customizing the sound signature. The A7 offers a generous 10 signatures through the combination of its five tuning filters and two crossover settings. The 8S? 36 possible combinations. Finding the right combination is as tiring as it sounds, but having so many options means the 8S can grow with you over time as your tastes change and evolve in a way the A7 simply cannot. Despite it's age, the 8S is smoother in the treble and more refined in the mids. It can be just as impressive when it comes to clarity and detail. Timbre is similarly good but where the A7 can sound somewhat metallic, the 8S can be a little plasticky. Bass is where the two really separate and the A7 will be more of a crowd pleaser. Even in it's bassiest setup, the 8S lacks the grunt of the A7, even in it's least bassy setup. The 8S has good extension but you really need to crank the volume to feel it. Texturing is also a step behind the A7. It all just feels a little soft. When it comes to staging the 8S walks all over the A7 to my ears. Notably wider and deeper, the A7 comes across quite constrained in comparison, though imaging, layering and separation capabilities remain close. If you want a neutral sounding earphone that can kinda sorta let loose at times, the 8S is still the one to beat. If bass quantity and quality is of importance, however, the A7 handily outshines the 8S.
Dunu DK-3001 Pro (469.00 USD): The hybrid DK-3001 Pro (4BA + 1DD) has only one signature which is a huge negative if you're looking for something with the inherent flexibility of a product that can be re-tuned on the fly. On the other hand, the one signature it outputs is more natural, coherent, and fine-tuned than any of the 10 signatures provided by the A7. In favour of the A7 is raw detail, particularly in the treble region. I also find the quality of the bass coming from the A7 to be superior with it having the edge in extension and texture. That said, I prefer the weight and warmth the Dunu's dynamic driver brings to the signature. Timbre is better on the Dunu, the mid-range is thicker, more natural and free of sibilance, and while less detailed, the treble it outputs is smoother, tighter, and easier on the ears. Even though it's not particularly large, the Dunu staging is also more impressive. If feels wider and deeper with additional air between instruments and notes. Imaging quality is similarly good on the A7. While the extra cost is significant, if you suspect you'll rarely utilize the tuning features of the A7 it might be worth springing for the DK-3001 Pro instead.
In The Ear The A7 follows the same design philosophy as the A5 before it, that being take the core Shure SE846 egg-like shape, toss out the cheap plastics, and recruit aluminum for a more premium feel and improved durability. Compared to the A5 the A7 is quite a bit thicker. That's a logical change given all the extra tech LZ has crammed into this new model. Most visually apparent is the switch added to the face plate. Affecting the crossover, it switches the A7 between “Monitor” and “Pop” modes of which the latter scoops the signature around -5dB between 100Hz and 2kHz. The switch is neatly integrated into the shell. It's quite small though, so you'll likely need to make use of the included tool if you want to swap between modes. Another prominent feature of the face of the A7 is the ventilation present below the laser etched branding. The twin vents are just one of three ways to determine channel thanks to red and blue coloured interiors. I personally find the L and R markers printed on the shell, and again on the cable, up near the MMCX ports easier to see. Flip the shell over and the A7 is mostly featureless, save the interchangeable tuning nozzles that can be swapped out quickly. Rubber o-rings are present to help ensure they don't work their way loose and fall off.
The A7 comes with a fantastic 8 strand, braided, 6N silver-plated, single crystal copper cable equipped with MMCX connectors. Braiding below the y-split is reasonably tight and uniform while above where it splits into groups of four strands per side, is much more loose. The hardware used is fine. The straight jack is branded with LZ HiFi Audio in cursive with adequate strain relief in place to protect the cable. The y-split is a compact piece of metal. No strain relief is found entering or exiting the split. Thankfully LZ thought to include a chin cinch. As has been the trend over the last year or so, the cinch is a clear bead. It works fine. Lastly, preformed ear guides lead into the MMCX plugs. They're reasonably flexible with some inbuilt stiffness that helps ensure the fairly weighty cable stays in place behind the ear.
Comfort is a standout for the A7. While somewhat thick, the smooth shells are not particularly large and fill the outer ear comfortably. They are free of sharp and uncomfortable edges. Thanks to the use of aluminum they are also quite light. Even during heavy movement the A7 is secure. Isolation isn't terrible either, though I wouldn't say it's really any better than average. Without any music playing, the clacking of my keyboard is present but dulled and the nearby roadway can still just barely be heard through the window. Take the A7 and my music into a more challenging location, like our local coffee shop, and I found I needed to turn up the volume just a hint to counter the noise. That or swap to foam tips which work wonders.
In The Box The A7 comes in some pretty unique packaging. The mid-sized box is made from what feels like particle board adorned with faux-wood panelling and contrasting black text that covers details like branding, the model, and location/contact information for LZ. I've yet to see another brand go this direction with their packaging. It immediately catches the eye. Flip back the lid and you see the earpieces and carrying case tightly set within a foam insert overlaid with a burned orange fabric. Lift out the insert (easier said than done) and you find some set within a much less dense foam panel. In all you get;
Final Thoughts LZ has shown itself to be a bit of a forgettable brand for me in the past. While I've generally found their stuff to be competent, none of the models I've tried (A2s, Z03A, Z04A, and A5) left me fully satisfied or excited to see what they were developing for future release. The A7 changes this.
Their dual-tuning system is one of the more effective ones I've come across. 10 tuning options is a lot, but there isn't a ton of redundancy in the available signatures. 10 options is not particularly overwhelming either, unlike the FLC 8S' with it's 36 combinations that are also difficult to swap between thanks to the teensy, tiny filters they used. LZ has done a fantastic job here.
Not only that, but the shell they're using is very comfortable and highly ergonomic, even if the busy face plate isn't the most attractive. Well, I think it looks cool, but then I also like cursive writing sooo... yeah. LZ seems to always pack in a ton of accessories with their gear, and the A7 is no different. The carrying case is gorgeous, you get a ton of tips with good variety, and the cable is high quality too. It's a very complete package that feels fitting for the price range.
Do I recommend the A7? I sure do. The piezo can be a bit harsh and the sound stage isn't particularly large, but I'm willing to overlook these qualities given how versatile the useful tuning system and outstanding technical capabilities allow it to be. Great work LZ!
Thanks for reading!
- B9
Disclaimer: A huge thanks to Peter123 over on Head-fi for suggesting I cover the A7, and to LZ for providing a sample of the A7 for the purposes of review. The thoughts within this review are my own subjective opinions based on months of regular use. They do not represent LZ or any other entity. At the time of writing the A7 was retailing for around 340 USD. You can find them through various retailers like HiFiGo, Linsoul Audio, Penon Audio, and others.
Specifications
Some Test Tunes
Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark's Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams
Fleetwood Mac – Rumors
Tobacco – screw*d Up Friends
Today we're checking out a new tri-hybrid earphone, this time from LZ.
The A7 builds on the rampant success of it's predecessors. With a 7 driver setup (one dynamic for the lows, two Knowles BAs for the mids, two Knowles BA's for the highs, and dual Piezoelectric ceramic tweeters for ultra-highs), removable cables, and a tuning system replete with interchangeable nozzles and a single tuning switch, the A7 is quite a feature packed product and at under 350 USD, is a comparative bargain when looking at similarly equipped products.
Admittedly, I have not been LZ's biggest fan in the past. I purchased an A2s based on emerging feedback and the near legendary status the A2 had earned. While I enjoyed aspects of the A2s, like the build and design, the sound quality was somewhat lacklustre. A few years later I was sent an A5 for review. It was a very good earphone, but even with the updated filter set could be a little sharp in the treble region. There was also an elephant in the room; the winged Honda logo (okay, it wasn't identical. but pretty darn close) which adorned each ear piece. I've also heard some other models thanks to meet-ups with a local Head-fi-er (pre-Covid of course), none of which really tickled my fancy.
When I was contacted about reviewing the A7, I expressed my hesitation but was assured the A7 was a significant step up from the A5. Going against my gut feelings, I accepted the review opportunity. It's a good thing because the A7 has seen nothing but praise. I think it's valid too, as will be discussed throughout this review.
Let's take a closer look at the LZ A7, shall we?
What I Hear The A7 has a highly customize-able sound signature thanks to the combination of five nozzle filters and a crossover switch resulting in a total of 10 potential signatures.
Tuning Switch: The tuning switch present on the face of each earpiece swaps the A7 between Monitor and Pop modes. As you can guess from the name, Monitor mode is more balanced while Pop mode scoops the mids giving the presentation a stronger v-shape. The difference between the two isn't huge with at most about a 5dB drop in emphasis on the monitor mode between 500Hz-1kHz. It's certainly noticeable though, and when combined with some of the more exaggerated filters can provide quite a varied listening experience. I preferred to leave it in Pop mode as the low end carried more presence without losing control. Also helped to counter the lower mid peak and balance out the brightness added in by the blue and silver filters.
Filters: The A7 comes with five filter options that influence emphasis between 1.5kHz and 5kHz. The Black filters are the default upon which the others are measured, so we can consider it to have no influence on the signature (aka. +/- 0dB). I don't mind this filter. Everything sounds well-enough balanced if not a bit bright.
The Red filter has a significant effect applying a -8dB drop. This filter warms the signature a bit too much for my preference, but will likely still be too bright for treble sensitive listeners.
The Gold filter has less effect with a -3dB drop. This is my preferred filter since it keeps the A7 energetic without veering into harsh territory.
The Blue filter adds +3dB to the A7's upper mids and presence region. I find it quite comfortable to listen with thanks to the introduces of sibilance. The A7 gains some additional technical ability, but it's not worth the aggression imo.
The Silver filter bring things up +6dB turning the A7 into an analytic monster. Oddly, I found this filter less harsh and more listenable than the Blue one as it avoids the sibilance issues.
For my tastes, these are the order in which I liked the various filter options. Gold, Black=Silver, Red, Blue.
Tips: The A7 is quite receptive to tip selection which is great since it comes with three varied styles. Included are wide bore tips in the style of KZ/Tennmak Whirlwinds, generic blue-cored medium bore tips, and Sony hybrid style soft-bore tips. Along with these, I tested the A7 with a number of other third party options.
Whirlwind: I have a ton of these tips from other earphones and have found basically nothing to use them with. To my pleasant surprise, they work on the A7 and sound pretty decent! Bass steps back in terms of emphasis and warmth but keeps its quick, punchy nature. Mids unfortunately step back too and on some tracks feel too far behind the treble. Treble with these tips loses some control but I like that fine details are pulled to the forefront and the sound stage opens up.
Blue-Core: Bass and general warmth are increased over the Whirlwinds. The added warmth helps out the midrange giving vocals a more natural presentation. Treble takes a hit though, becoming a bit sharp and somewhat unpleasant. The broad sound stage of the Whirlwinds also closes up a touch. These tips are a bit hit or miss in my opinion.
Sony Hybrid Clones: These offer more or less the same experience as the Blue-Core tips, but with some of the treble edge smoothed out. I like to think that's a result of the softer silicone absorbing. These are the second best of the included options for me.
RHA Dual Density: These have been my go-to tip with the A7. At first glance they look very similar to the Blue-Core tips. Upon further inspection they have a wider bore and use a much softer, higher quality silicone. Sub-bass really stands out with these, treble is the smoothest of the bunch, and the midrange retains good presence. There are no downsides with these for my preferences.
Standard JVC Wide Bore: These provide a similar experience as the Whirlwinds but with more sub-bass presence and better controlled treble. The mids really shine with the JVCs, and the soundstage opens up giving the most spacious experience of the bunch. These are my second in line behind RHAs offering.
Spinfit CP-145: These are a new addition to my tip selection and I've not used them much with the A7, but initial impressions are excellent. Bore size finds itself between the RHA and JVC with the soft silicone of the JVC. Female vocals can sound a hint thin and the sound stage loses some depth to the JVCs, but they do nothing to hinder the low end, mid presence, or treble quality. These are nice.
Sennheiser Bi-Flange (wide bore): Once again quite similar to the Whirlwinds but with better isolation and more sub-bass. Treble can be a bit rough around the edges but the midrange stays prominent. Sound stage sounds pretty big, gaining width and depth over most of the other options. If the treble were smoother these would be a top pick, but alas, they're not a front runner.
General Sound Impressions (Monitor + Gold + RHA Dual Density)
Treble out of the A7 has excellent extension thanks to that piezoelectric driver. Detail is aplenty which also helps give the presentation outstanding clarity. The upper end air also allows plenty of space between notes, keeping things from blending or mushing together. The presentation is on the thin side and for the most part is free of splash or sloppiness which is nice because notes attack and decay quite rapidly. The presentation could certainly be tighter, but I'm not going to fault the A7 much here. My only main qualm is that the piezoelectric driver is a bit sharp and lacks the refinement of this techs implementation in the BQEYZ Spring II. Had I not heard that earphone first, I'd be plenty satisfied with the A7's piezo.
Dipping into the mids I found vocals to be very clear and punchy with a nice weight. The A7 finds itself in a good place between those earphones that come across overly lean, or overly dense and meaty. Sibilance is present but overall well managed with just a hint of “tsst” present in places it shouldn't be. I didn't notice any issues with midbass bleeding in and hindering clarity and coherence, nor with treble sheen overshadowing find details. Timbre for the most part is quite decent with the A7 having a light metallic edge placed on instruments and effects in the upper ranges. I blame that piezoelectric driver since I've noticed this quality on other earphones using this tech.
The low end is impressively linear with enough extension to provide a solid display of visceral feedback. It's not going to rattle your eardrums though. Texture and detail are above average and give the A7's low end a very dynamic and lively presentation. Thankfully there is no dull, one note bass to be found here. The driver's attack feels fairly quick with notes hitting solidly and with purpose. Things decay a little slower which helps those sub-bass rumblings linger realistically. I would like a hint more meat to the midbass as it would give the A7 some added warmth and thickness. This can somewhat be achieved by tossing it into Pop mode and swapping to the red filter.
When it comes to sound stage, the A7 is a bit of a mixed bag. I find it better on Pop than Monitor. On Pop, vocals pull back and give the presentation more depth and space while on Monitor mode the A7 has quite an intimate presentation. On Pop mode I found the nuanced imaging more accurate thanks to the extra space in which sounds could move. This also led to a more layered feel to tracks and improved separation of instruments. While I didn't find the A7 congested in Monitor mode, it nearly took on a wall-of-sound feel with sounds staying unnaturally close to the head. This mostly hurt live performances where instruments need room to breathe. EDM and more electronic reliant tracks fared better.
Overall I find the A7 to be quite technically competent and enjoyable. Bass quality is top notch and makes a strong showing. The mid range is quite clear and coherent. I find the implementation of the piezoelectric driver to be good, but BQEYZ did it better with the notably more affordable Spring II. The A7's tuning system is fairly extensive and while it can never push the earphone into neutral territory, it offers plenty of versatility and is something other brands could look to for guidance if looking at how to implement such a system properly.
Compared To A Peer (volumes matched with Dayton iMM-6)
FLC 8S (319.00 USD): The 8S is a classic at this point but is still untouched when it comes to customizing the sound signature. The A7 offers a generous 10 signatures through the combination of its five tuning filters and two crossover settings. The 8S? 36 possible combinations. Finding the right combination is as tiring as it sounds, but having so many options means the 8S can grow with you over time as your tastes change and evolve in a way the A7 simply cannot. Despite it's age, the 8S is smoother in the treble and more refined in the mids. It can be just as impressive when it comes to clarity and detail. Timbre is similarly good but where the A7 can sound somewhat metallic, the 8S can be a little plasticky. Bass is where the two really separate and the A7 will be more of a crowd pleaser. Even in it's bassiest setup, the 8S lacks the grunt of the A7, even in it's least bassy setup. The 8S has good extension but you really need to crank the volume to feel it. Texturing is also a step behind the A7. It all just feels a little soft. When it comes to staging the 8S walks all over the A7 to my ears. Notably wider and deeper, the A7 comes across quite constrained in comparison, though imaging, layering and separation capabilities remain close. If you want a neutral sounding earphone that can kinda sorta let loose at times, the 8S is still the one to beat. If bass quantity and quality is of importance, however, the A7 handily outshines the 8S.
Dunu DK-3001 Pro (469.00 USD): The hybrid DK-3001 Pro (4BA + 1DD) has only one signature which is a huge negative if you're looking for something with the inherent flexibility of a product that can be re-tuned on the fly. On the other hand, the one signature it outputs is more natural, coherent, and fine-tuned than any of the 10 signatures provided by the A7. In favour of the A7 is raw detail, particularly in the treble region. I also find the quality of the bass coming from the A7 to be superior with it having the edge in extension and texture. That said, I prefer the weight and warmth the Dunu's dynamic driver brings to the signature. Timbre is better on the Dunu, the mid-range is thicker, more natural and free of sibilance, and while less detailed, the treble it outputs is smoother, tighter, and easier on the ears. Even though it's not particularly large, the Dunu staging is also more impressive. If feels wider and deeper with additional air between instruments and notes. Imaging quality is similarly good on the A7. While the extra cost is significant, if you suspect you'll rarely utilize the tuning features of the A7 it might be worth springing for the DK-3001 Pro instead.
In The Ear The A7 follows the same design philosophy as the A5 before it, that being take the core Shure SE846 egg-like shape, toss out the cheap plastics, and recruit aluminum for a more premium feel and improved durability. Compared to the A5 the A7 is quite a bit thicker. That's a logical change given all the extra tech LZ has crammed into this new model. Most visually apparent is the switch added to the face plate. Affecting the crossover, it switches the A7 between “Monitor” and “Pop” modes of which the latter scoops the signature around -5dB between 100Hz and 2kHz. The switch is neatly integrated into the shell. It's quite small though, so you'll likely need to make use of the included tool if you want to swap between modes. Another prominent feature of the face of the A7 is the ventilation present below the laser etched branding. The twin vents are just one of three ways to determine channel thanks to red and blue coloured interiors. I personally find the L and R markers printed on the shell, and again on the cable, up near the MMCX ports easier to see. Flip the shell over and the A7 is mostly featureless, save the interchangeable tuning nozzles that can be swapped out quickly. Rubber o-rings are present to help ensure they don't work their way loose and fall off.
The A7 comes with a fantastic 8 strand, braided, 6N silver-plated, single crystal copper cable equipped with MMCX connectors. Braiding below the y-split is reasonably tight and uniform while above where it splits into groups of four strands per side, is much more loose. The hardware used is fine. The straight jack is branded with LZ HiFi Audio in cursive with adequate strain relief in place to protect the cable. The y-split is a compact piece of metal. No strain relief is found entering or exiting the split. Thankfully LZ thought to include a chin cinch. As has been the trend over the last year or so, the cinch is a clear bead. It works fine. Lastly, preformed ear guides lead into the MMCX plugs. They're reasonably flexible with some inbuilt stiffness that helps ensure the fairly weighty cable stays in place behind the ear.
Comfort is a standout for the A7. While somewhat thick, the smooth shells are not particularly large and fill the outer ear comfortably. They are free of sharp and uncomfortable edges. Thanks to the use of aluminum they are also quite light. Even during heavy movement the A7 is secure. Isolation isn't terrible either, though I wouldn't say it's really any better than average. Without any music playing, the clacking of my keyboard is present but dulled and the nearby roadway can still just barely be heard through the window. Take the A7 and my music into a more challenging location, like our local coffee shop, and I found I needed to turn up the volume just a hint to counter the noise. That or swap to foam tips which work wonders.
In The Box The A7 comes in some pretty unique packaging. The mid-sized box is made from what feels like particle board adorned with faux-wood panelling and contrasting black text that covers details like branding, the model, and location/contact information for LZ. I've yet to see another brand go this direction with their packaging. It immediately catches the eye. Flip back the lid and you see the earpieces and carrying case tightly set within a foam insert overlaid with a burned orange fabric. Lift out the insert (easier said than done) and you find some set within a much less dense foam panel. In all you get;
- LZ A7 earphones
- 6N silver-plated, single crystal copper cable
- Faux-leather carrying case
- Small-bore Sony-hybrid tips (s/m/l)
- Medium bore single flange tips (s/m/l)
- Whirlwind wide bore tips (s/m/l)
- Switch tool
- Velcro cable tie
Final Thoughts LZ has shown itself to be a bit of a forgettable brand for me in the past. While I've generally found their stuff to be competent, none of the models I've tried (A2s, Z03A, Z04A, and A5) left me fully satisfied or excited to see what they were developing for future release. The A7 changes this.
Their dual-tuning system is one of the more effective ones I've come across. 10 tuning options is a lot, but there isn't a ton of redundancy in the available signatures. 10 options is not particularly overwhelming either, unlike the FLC 8S' with it's 36 combinations that are also difficult to swap between thanks to the teensy, tiny filters they used. LZ has done a fantastic job here.
Not only that, but the shell they're using is very comfortable and highly ergonomic, even if the busy face plate isn't the most attractive. Well, I think it looks cool, but then I also like cursive writing sooo... yeah. LZ seems to always pack in a ton of accessories with their gear, and the A7 is no different. The carrying case is gorgeous, you get a ton of tips with good variety, and the cable is high quality too. It's a very complete package that feels fitting for the price range.
Do I recommend the A7? I sure do. The piezo can be a bit harsh and the sound stage isn't particularly large, but I'm willing to overlook these qualities given how versatile the useful tuning system and outstanding technical capabilities allow it to be. Great work LZ!
Thanks for reading!
- B9
Disclaimer: A huge thanks to Peter123 over on Head-fi for suggesting I cover the A7, and to LZ for providing a sample of the A7 for the purposes of review. The thoughts within this review are my own subjective opinions based on months of regular use. They do not represent LZ or any other entity. At the time of writing the A7 was retailing for around 340 USD. You can find them through various retailers like HiFiGo, Linsoul Audio, Penon Audio, and others.
Specifications
- Drivers (per side): one dynamic driver (liquid crystal polymer diaphragm), four Knowles balanced armatures, two 7-layer piezoelectric Ceramic drivers
- Frequency response: 5 Hz – 40 kHz
- Impedance: 15 ohms (Pop), 13 ohms (Monitor)
- Sensitivity: 109 dB / mW at 1 kHz (Pop), 113 dB / mW (Monitor) at 1kHz
- Channel error: ± 0.5 dB
- Distortion rate: <1%
- Termination: 3.5 mm
- Connector: MMCX
- Cable: 8-core 6N OCC silver-plated copper cable
- Cable length: 3.9 ft (1.2 m)
Some Test Tunes
Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark's Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams
Fleetwood Mac – Rumors
Tobacco – screw*d Up Friends
numon
thanks.i learned there is FLC8s model that can be also versality. i want to ask which one has largest soundstage lz a7 vs FLC8s?
B9Scrambler
@numon FLC 8S hands down has the larger stage.
originalsnuffy
I only own two IEMs right now. FLC8D and the L7. They complement each other well.
Greetings!
Today we're checking out the newly revamped version of DDHiFi's excellent USB Type C OTG cable, the TC05.
The original TC05 has been my go-to Type C cable for mobile use for the last 6+ months thanks to the application of a durable, coiled stainless steel sheath. While it had some downsides, such as limited flexibility and the potential for permanent kinks or dents, they were worth the durability of the steel sheath. Mobile cables tend to be fragile and have a short life span, things I wasn't worried about with the original TC05. As such, you can't blame me for being a little disappointed when I saw that the updated TC05 had gone back to a more traditional rubber sheathed cable. While that feeling hasn't changed in the two or so months I've been dailying this new TC05, there are a number of benefits and other improvements that came along with it.
The new TC05 is packaged the same, showing up tidily dressed in a durable plastic case wrapped in a simple cardboard sheath. The sheath features the same classy, simple design used for their other products. Printed are the usual details; brand and model information along with a basic image of the cable and how it should be oriented with the devices being connected. Slipping off the sheath reveals the TC05 wrapped in a plastic bag set atop a social media card with scannable QR codes on the back. The requisite silica gel packet is there too should you desire a poisonous snack.
Removing the cable we see it is a whole new beast compared to the previous version. Besides the removal of the steel sheath, the most notable change is length. The original TC05 came in at just over 15.6cm tip to tail, while the new version tightens things up at 13.4cm. This change was welcome when using the TC05 to connect my phone or dap with a portable amp as the original could be just a hint cumbersome. The added length of the original worked well with desktop setups though.
Another welcome change is the use of more compact plugs. I never found those on the original large whatsoever, but they sure look like it next to the new ones. Along with those new plugs comes a snazzy new visual design. At first I thought this was a detriment since the arrows advising the data transmission direction are quite small and blend in. In use that's not really the case. DDHiFi is printed only on the source end, so it ends up being just as straightforward a process. You can ignore the arrows entirely and just look for the branding. Plug that end into your source device, the other into your amp/whatever, and away you go.
Going back to the new sheath, I'm of two minds. On one hand I appreciate the lightness and added flexibility. The cable also looks quite nice, reminding me of the one found on the iFi iEMatch. Unfortunately, DDHiFi omitted any form of strain relief. The two protrusions that look like reliefs are just part of the aluminum housing and offer no protection from bends or tugs. There is a very good chance that when the new TC05 fails, it'll be right there where the cable enters the plugs.
Speaking of plugs, in addition to the straight design found here, DDHiFi did what they do best and listened to their fans by offering two versions of the TC05. Selling alongside the straight option is one terminated in L-shaped plugs, though there is a slight increase in cost associated with this (21.05 CAD vs. 24.80 CAD, at the time of writing). The L-shaped version would be my personal choice since it looks a little more durable in design and would result in a slightly more compact mobile setup.
I prefer durability to convenience and as a result will be going back to the original TC05 for my personal use. For the vast majority of users, I think they'll greatly appreciate the updates and prefer the new version which is smaller, lighter, and more flexible. The new TC05 is a great product and just the ticket for completing your portable audio setup.
Thanks for reading!
- B9
Disclaimer Thanks to Lily with DDHiFi for sending over the new TC05 for the purposes of review. The thoughts within this review are my subjective opinions based on a couple months of use. They do not represent DDHiFi or any other entity. You can check it out here: https://www.ddhifi.com/productinfo/401430.html / www.aliexpress.com/item/32961312907.html
Today we're checking out the newly revamped version of DDHiFi's excellent USB Type C OTG cable, the TC05.
The original TC05 has been my go-to Type C cable for mobile use for the last 6+ months thanks to the application of a durable, coiled stainless steel sheath. While it had some downsides, such as limited flexibility and the potential for permanent kinks or dents, they were worth the durability of the steel sheath. Mobile cables tend to be fragile and have a short life span, things I wasn't worried about with the original TC05. As such, you can't blame me for being a little disappointed when I saw that the updated TC05 had gone back to a more traditional rubber sheathed cable. While that feeling hasn't changed in the two or so months I've been dailying this new TC05, there are a number of benefits and other improvements that came along with it.
The new TC05 is packaged the same, showing up tidily dressed in a durable plastic case wrapped in a simple cardboard sheath. The sheath features the same classy, simple design used for their other products. Printed are the usual details; brand and model information along with a basic image of the cable and how it should be oriented with the devices being connected. Slipping off the sheath reveals the TC05 wrapped in a plastic bag set atop a social media card with scannable QR codes on the back. The requisite silica gel packet is there too should you desire a poisonous snack.
Removing the cable we see it is a whole new beast compared to the previous version. Besides the removal of the steel sheath, the most notable change is length. The original TC05 came in at just over 15.6cm tip to tail, while the new version tightens things up at 13.4cm. This change was welcome when using the TC05 to connect my phone or dap with a portable amp as the original could be just a hint cumbersome. The added length of the original worked well with desktop setups though.
Another welcome change is the use of more compact plugs. I never found those on the original large whatsoever, but they sure look like it next to the new ones. Along with those new plugs comes a snazzy new visual design. At first I thought this was a detriment since the arrows advising the data transmission direction are quite small and blend in. In use that's not really the case. DDHiFi is printed only on the source end, so it ends up being just as straightforward a process. You can ignore the arrows entirely and just look for the branding. Plug that end into your source device, the other into your amp/whatever, and away you go.
Going back to the new sheath, I'm of two minds. On one hand I appreciate the lightness and added flexibility. The cable also looks quite nice, reminding me of the one found on the iFi iEMatch. Unfortunately, DDHiFi omitted any form of strain relief. The two protrusions that look like reliefs are just part of the aluminum housing and offer no protection from bends or tugs. There is a very good chance that when the new TC05 fails, it'll be right there where the cable enters the plugs.
Speaking of plugs, in addition to the straight design found here, DDHiFi did what they do best and listened to their fans by offering two versions of the TC05. Selling alongside the straight option is one terminated in L-shaped plugs, though there is a slight increase in cost associated with this (21.05 CAD vs. 24.80 CAD, at the time of writing). The L-shaped version would be my personal choice since it looks a little more durable in design and would result in a slightly more compact mobile setup.
I prefer durability to convenience and as a result will be going back to the original TC05 for my personal use. For the vast majority of users, I think they'll greatly appreciate the updates and prefer the new version which is smaller, lighter, and more flexible. The new TC05 is a great product and just the ticket for completing your portable audio setup.
Thanks for reading!
- B9
Disclaimer Thanks to Lily with DDHiFi for sending over the new TC05 for the purposes of review. The thoughts within this review are my subjective opinions based on a couple months of use. They do not represent DDHiFi or any other entity. You can check it out here: https://www.ddhifi.com/productinfo/401430.html / www.aliexpress.com/item/32961312907.html
B9Scrambler
@Singaravelan They've been flawless so far, except for some discolouring due to oxidization of the silver in one of the cables. I have three at this point (in addition to two of the original version) and the others have seen no discolouring. Not a big deal imo. They still get a hearty recommendation from me.
B9Scrambler
Cheers! Enjoy it 
Greetings!
Today we're checking out the Moondrop Super Spaceship Pulse (SSP), a companion product to the Super Spaceship Reference (SSR) which was my top earphone of 2020.
Looking at the SSP you'd be forgiven for feeling a sense of deja vu. Along with the shell, the packaging and accessories are carried over from the SSR, though with a new coat of paint and lovely new mascot. The tuning is quite similar too, though with a bumped low end that increases the SSP's widespread appeal in the way the SSR sadly failed to achieve.
Given the SSP shares all of the SSR highlights, I think they are equally good but for different reasons. The SSP is not simply the same earphone in a snazzy new shirt. Let's take a closer look.
What I Hear The SSR didn't stray far from the successful signature of it's predecessor, the Spaceship, nor does the SSP vary drastically from the SSR. Still, what slight alterations that were made result in SSP listeners having a unique experience. It should be enough to please most of those who found the SSR lacking bass, or overly aggressive in the upper mids, though I can absolutely see some wanting even more variance.
The treble presentation on the SPP is virtually identical to the SSR. As such, the SPP is extremely smooth with a very clean, well-controlled presentation. These drivers are free of grit or anything that could be deemed lacking refinement. The lower treble bias gives the presentation plenty of detail without coming across as harsh. There is just enough emphasis in the brilliance region, thanks to a very mild 7k bump, to provide some shimmer and sparkle on cymbals and chimes. The upper end roll off keeps the SSP from being fatiguing without sacrificing the airiness between notes, as also heard in the SSR. Congested tracks haven't really ever been a problem with the SSR or SSP to my ears, even on something as messy as the improvisational closing moments of King Crimson's “Starless and Bible Black”
The midrange has been a sticking point for the Spaceship series thanks to a prominent upper mid push. While for some this has resulted in the SSR coming across as 'shouty', I never really felt the same way. Vocals felt prominent and clearly took centre stage, but they didn't come across as fatiguing. That is unless the volume was pushed to levels that questioned how much the listener respected their long-term ability to hear. The SSP has a very similar midrange presentation to the SSR. That said, the additional bass present in the SSP goes a long way towards countering the upper mids by adding warmth and note thickness. This does lower overall clarity compared to the SSR, but it improves the already satisfying timbre quality by removing any dryness. A bit of clarity is a worthy trade off in my opinion. The rest of the presentation is again, pretty much the same. Vocals are forward with decent intimacy. Sibilance is managed well and isn't a problem most of the time. Aesop Rock's newest album, 'Spirit World Field Guide', is mastered with a very hot upper mid-range. While certainly more listenable through the SPP than most other iems and headphones, EQing the mids down a few dB is still helpful.
Bass is where the SSP comes into its own and gets its character. The fairly modest ~5dB boost gives the SSP's good sub-bass extension plenty of presence letting it it rumble on bass heavy tracks in a way the SSR doesn't. The extra midbass gives the SPP a thicker, more meaty feel which helps with impact. The extra warmth added to the SSP's presentation softens things up somewhat. Notes attack with authority and decay fairly quickly which helps with the punchy nature of the SSP's low end. That said, the SSR feels a little sharper and more controlled, but not by much. I really like what Moondrop did here. While the adjustments to the low end were not drastic, they were enough to shift the perception of the signature's overall balance.
When it comes to sound stage the SPP is unsurprisingly very similar to the SSR. The biggest difference can be found in width which I find more impressive on the SSP. Since the vocals have less presence thanks to a low end which shifts your focus, they feel less forward and as a result the default staging comes across less intimate. Staging depth is still excellent which combined with the improved width lets the SSP envelop you even more in orchestral and live recordings. Imaging is very good with clean channel-to-channel transitions and nuanced fine movements. Still, the SSR sounds just a hint more accurate when used for gaming. Instrument separation remains quite effective with track layering being about on par too.
Overall I feel the SPP and SSR are equally as good. The SSP's slightly warmer, more bassy sound will better please those coming from more traditional v-shaped signatures, while introducing them to technical capabilities that are mostly on par with the SSR and second to few.
Compared To A Peer (volumes matched with Dayton iMM-6)
Kinera BD005 Pro (49.00 USD): The BD005 Pro offers better bass extension with more sub-bass emphasis. This results in a more visceral feel with similar texture. Unfortunately, with less mid-bass the Kinera has a cooler sound overall, along with a leaner mid-range. Detail and clarity is similar with the SSP sounding more pleasant to my ear thanks to a more natural timbre. The BD005's cooler presentation also has a metallic edge to it and can sound too sharp at times. Sibilance is also handled with less grace and as a result the BD005 Pro can be more fatiguing. While treble emphasis is on par, notes out of the SPP sound tighter and better controlled with improved clarity and detail. The Kinera doesn't have an edge when it comes to speed and decay either, surprising given it's a hybrid utilizing a balanced armature for the upper ranges. Lastly, the SSP sounds wider and deeper with a more well-rounded staging presence. The SSP provides more nuanced imaging, with the BD005 Pro's instrument separation and track layering falling just short of the Moondrop.
While the BD005 is a great sounding earphone with looks to match, the SSP is the superior offering to my ears. Its presentation is notably more refined, natural, and realistic while at the very least matching the Kinera, if not besting it, in most technical aspects.
TinHifi T2 Plus (59.99 USD): The T2 Plus is one of the better options in it's price range. Compared to the SSP it offers a negligible amount of additional bass extension with a bit more texture. Despite a very similar mid-bass emphasis, the SSP sounds quite a bit warmer, thicker, and weightier resulting in additional punch and slam on low notes. Leading into the mids the T2 Plus is much more linear and better balanced with the bass and treble. Vocals are just as detailed as on the SSP, but with a crispness that makes the T2 Plus sound even more clear. It is more alike the SSR in the mids, despite lacking the large 4k rise. Treble on the T2 Plus comes across more emphasized and prominent in the mix with similar levels of clarity and detail to the SSP. Unfortunately for the T2 Plus, the treble sounds a little rough and less well-controlled and I find it to be more fatiguing. Having a thinner presentation contributes to this, though the extra energy it brings will be welcome to some listeners. When it comes to sound stage I was surprised to find the SSR quite a bit more spacious in all directions. The T2 Plus was a huge step up from the T4 when it came to imaging. This shows when comparing to the SSP which falls slightly behind the T2 Plus in terms of raw accuracy. That said, given the larger stage of the SSP, channel-to-channel movement feels more natural, even if it's not quite as easy to pick out the location of a sound. The T2 Plus matches the SSP's outstanding instrument separation and layering.
Overall? I prefer the SSP but I also really, really like the T2 Plus. They're comparable and more complimentary than competition in my opinion. The SSP is the better value in my eyes since technical capability is similar. Plus, the SSP's 2-pin setup is more reliable. TinHiFi's decision to go with MMCX is something that has faulted them in the past and is a red flag for some buyers.
In The Ear The SSP uses the same liquid metal alloy housings as the SSR, although in a sexy new blue colour. Forged from two pieces and held together with a single hex screw, it looks and feels very study though the seam between the two parts is quite visible. Spacing is uniform and tight all the way around though. The cables plug in tightly and with a recessed design should be well-protected from accidental bends. The metal nozzle grills with integrated tuning damper have a new design with fewer holes for sound to pass through. I suspect they contribute to the mildly boosted low end. As on the SSR they have been neatly installed. The same goes for the inner filters and vents found just under the L/R markings which have been forged into the body instead of printed or painted on. I have no issues with the way the SSP has been constructed, and also enjoy the design which pulls clear inspiration from the FLC 8S in terms of the general shape. The placement of the various vents/filters/screws also mirror the filter locations on the 8S, further strengthening the similarities. That said, the SSP is clearly not just a ripoff given it is significantly smaller, does not feature an in-depth filter system, and is overall much more blocky around the edges. Unexpectedly, the new colouring provides some additional texture that helps tips stay on better than they did on the SSR.
The silver-plated cable is the same one included with the SSR, and is a personal favourite of mine. It is soft and pliable though the preformed ear guides, while flexible and comfortable, do lead to easy tangles if you aren't careful when putting them away. The clear sheath also works in this cables favour allowing you to see the silver-plated strands within. It is quite visually striking when you take a close look. That said, the SSR's cable has started to oxidize and turn green. The hardware Moondrop selected is also a plus, as least in most areas. The 90 degree angled jack is compact and well-relieved, as are the tiny 0.78mm 2-pin plugs carried over from the Starfield (though here they are clear, not blue). While the plugs are labelled with L and R lettering to denote channel, it is extremely difficult to see so Moondrop added a red rubber ring to the right size to help out. That's a thoughtful touch. The y-split is my only area of concern since it is quite sizable and lacks strain relief. A chin cinch would have also been a welcome addition, but one is absent here. It would have been nice if Moondrop upgraded these aspects for both the SSR and SSP, but as-is what you get is functional and just fine.
Since the shell hasn't changed, the SSP is a nice product to have jammed in your ear. The small size and light weight combined with rounded edges and a reasonably long nozzle means it is quite stable during heavy movement. I can also comfortably lay my head on a pillow with them in since they sit so flush with the outer ear. Isolation is pretty sub-par though, at least without music playing. Since there are vents all over the place, plenty of sound leaks through. I can pause my music to chat with my wife while leaving them in, for example. Not too many earphones out there I can do that with. Now, bring music back into the equation and oddly, isolation feels pretty good. Little volume compensation seems to be needed to block outside noise, especially if you opt to squeeze on some foam tips.
In The Box The SSP arrives in familiar, squat, square box. Where the SSR went with a white colour scheme that matched the innocent design of the mascot on the front, the SSP goes a different route. The dark blue mirrors the edgier looking character as she lifts sunglasses off her eyes while casually blowing a large bubble out of the gum she's chewing. Just as on the SSR's package, flip around to the back and you find more traditional and helpful details; an exploded image of the SSP showing off it's component parts, an accurate frequency response graph (not the marketing-guided fakery we usually see), and a spec list in English and Mandarin.
Lift the lid off and the experience is identical to the SSR. The earphones with cable attached are resting comfortably in a foam insert. Alongside the foam insert is a smaller cardboard box embossed with the Moondrop logo in silver foil, inside which you find the included extras. In all you get:
Final Thoughts Moondrop has consistently released high quality, high performance, high value products which have vaulted them to the top of today's extremely competitive market. The SSP is yet another one of those products.
What is has borrowed from the SSR it reuses effectively, such as the impressively small, comfortable shells. At first glance the sound quality seems much the same too. However, thanks to an enhanced bass region which adds warmth and draws attention away from the upper mids, the result is something that is nearly as technically impressive as the SSR. The SSP's adjusted tune has more widespread appeal for those coming from v-shaped products that are the norm in this price range and below.
The SSP is simply outstanding and sits proudly alongside the SSR as one of my favorite earphones ever, regardless of price. It is that good.
Thanks for reading!
- B9
Disclaimer Big thanks to Moondrop for sending over a sample of the SSP for review. The thoughts within this review are my own subjective opinions based on a couple weeks of use. They do not represent Moondrop or any other entity. At the time of writing the SSP was retailing for 39.99 USD on Moondrop's official AliExpress store: https://moondrop.aliexpress.com/store/4980017 / www.aliexpress.com/item/1005001730597585.html
Specifications
Some Test Tunes
Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark's Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams
Fleetwood Mac – Rumors
Tobacco – screw*d Up Friends
Today we're checking out the Moondrop Super Spaceship Pulse (SSP), a companion product to the Super Spaceship Reference (SSR) which was my top earphone of 2020.
Looking at the SSP you'd be forgiven for feeling a sense of deja vu. Along with the shell, the packaging and accessories are carried over from the SSR, though with a new coat of paint and lovely new mascot. The tuning is quite similar too, though with a bumped low end that increases the SSP's widespread appeal in the way the SSR sadly failed to achieve.
Given the SSP shares all of the SSR highlights, I think they are equally good but for different reasons. The SSP is not simply the same earphone in a snazzy new shirt. Let's take a closer look.
What I Hear The SSR didn't stray far from the successful signature of it's predecessor, the Spaceship, nor does the SSP vary drastically from the SSR. Still, what slight alterations that were made result in SSP listeners having a unique experience. It should be enough to please most of those who found the SSR lacking bass, or overly aggressive in the upper mids, though I can absolutely see some wanting even more variance.
The treble presentation on the SPP is virtually identical to the SSR. As such, the SPP is extremely smooth with a very clean, well-controlled presentation. These drivers are free of grit or anything that could be deemed lacking refinement. The lower treble bias gives the presentation plenty of detail without coming across as harsh. There is just enough emphasis in the brilliance region, thanks to a very mild 7k bump, to provide some shimmer and sparkle on cymbals and chimes. The upper end roll off keeps the SSP from being fatiguing without sacrificing the airiness between notes, as also heard in the SSR. Congested tracks haven't really ever been a problem with the SSR or SSP to my ears, even on something as messy as the improvisational closing moments of King Crimson's “Starless and Bible Black”
The midrange has been a sticking point for the Spaceship series thanks to a prominent upper mid push. While for some this has resulted in the SSR coming across as 'shouty', I never really felt the same way. Vocals felt prominent and clearly took centre stage, but they didn't come across as fatiguing. That is unless the volume was pushed to levels that questioned how much the listener respected their long-term ability to hear. The SSP has a very similar midrange presentation to the SSR. That said, the additional bass present in the SSP goes a long way towards countering the upper mids by adding warmth and note thickness. This does lower overall clarity compared to the SSR, but it improves the already satisfying timbre quality by removing any dryness. A bit of clarity is a worthy trade off in my opinion. The rest of the presentation is again, pretty much the same. Vocals are forward with decent intimacy. Sibilance is managed well and isn't a problem most of the time. Aesop Rock's newest album, 'Spirit World Field Guide', is mastered with a very hot upper mid-range. While certainly more listenable through the SPP than most other iems and headphones, EQing the mids down a few dB is still helpful.
Bass is where the SSP comes into its own and gets its character. The fairly modest ~5dB boost gives the SSP's good sub-bass extension plenty of presence letting it it rumble on bass heavy tracks in a way the SSR doesn't. The extra midbass gives the SPP a thicker, more meaty feel which helps with impact. The extra warmth added to the SSP's presentation softens things up somewhat. Notes attack with authority and decay fairly quickly which helps with the punchy nature of the SSP's low end. That said, the SSR feels a little sharper and more controlled, but not by much. I really like what Moondrop did here. While the adjustments to the low end were not drastic, they were enough to shift the perception of the signature's overall balance.
When it comes to sound stage the SPP is unsurprisingly very similar to the SSR. The biggest difference can be found in width which I find more impressive on the SSP. Since the vocals have less presence thanks to a low end which shifts your focus, they feel less forward and as a result the default staging comes across less intimate. Staging depth is still excellent which combined with the improved width lets the SSP envelop you even more in orchestral and live recordings. Imaging is very good with clean channel-to-channel transitions and nuanced fine movements. Still, the SSR sounds just a hint more accurate when used for gaming. Instrument separation remains quite effective with track layering being about on par too.
Overall I feel the SPP and SSR are equally as good. The SSP's slightly warmer, more bassy sound will better please those coming from more traditional v-shaped signatures, while introducing them to technical capabilities that are mostly on par with the SSR and second to few.
Compared To A Peer (volumes matched with Dayton iMM-6)
Kinera BD005 Pro (49.00 USD): The BD005 Pro offers better bass extension with more sub-bass emphasis. This results in a more visceral feel with similar texture. Unfortunately, with less mid-bass the Kinera has a cooler sound overall, along with a leaner mid-range. Detail and clarity is similar with the SSP sounding more pleasant to my ear thanks to a more natural timbre. The BD005's cooler presentation also has a metallic edge to it and can sound too sharp at times. Sibilance is also handled with less grace and as a result the BD005 Pro can be more fatiguing. While treble emphasis is on par, notes out of the SPP sound tighter and better controlled with improved clarity and detail. The Kinera doesn't have an edge when it comes to speed and decay either, surprising given it's a hybrid utilizing a balanced armature for the upper ranges. Lastly, the SSP sounds wider and deeper with a more well-rounded staging presence. The SSP provides more nuanced imaging, with the BD005 Pro's instrument separation and track layering falling just short of the Moondrop.
While the BD005 is a great sounding earphone with looks to match, the SSP is the superior offering to my ears. Its presentation is notably more refined, natural, and realistic while at the very least matching the Kinera, if not besting it, in most technical aspects.
TinHifi T2 Plus (59.99 USD): The T2 Plus is one of the better options in it's price range. Compared to the SSP it offers a negligible amount of additional bass extension with a bit more texture. Despite a very similar mid-bass emphasis, the SSP sounds quite a bit warmer, thicker, and weightier resulting in additional punch and slam on low notes. Leading into the mids the T2 Plus is much more linear and better balanced with the bass and treble. Vocals are just as detailed as on the SSP, but with a crispness that makes the T2 Plus sound even more clear. It is more alike the SSR in the mids, despite lacking the large 4k rise. Treble on the T2 Plus comes across more emphasized and prominent in the mix with similar levels of clarity and detail to the SSP. Unfortunately for the T2 Plus, the treble sounds a little rough and less well-controlled and I find it to be more fatiguing. Having a thinner presentation contributes to this, though the extra energy it brings will be welcome to some listeners. When it comes to sound stage I was surprised to find the SSR quite a bit more spacious in all directions. The T2 Plus was a huge step up from the T4 when it came to imaging. This shows when comparing to the SSP which falls slightly behind the T2 Plus in terms of raw accuracy. That said, given the larger stage of the SSP, channel-to-channel movement feels more natural, even if it's not quite as easy to pick out the location of a sound. The T2 Plus matches the SSP's outstanding instrument separation and layering.
Overall? I prefer the SSP but I also really, really like the T2 Plus. They're comparable and more complimentary than competition in my opinion. The SSP is the better value in my eyes since technical capability is similar. Plus, the SSP's 2-pin setup is more reliable. TinHiFi's decision to go with MMCX is something that has faulted them in the past and is a red flag for some buyers.
In The Ear The SSP uses the same liquid metal alloy housings as the SSR, although in a sexy new blue colour. Forged from two pieces and held together with a single hex screw, it looks and feels very study though the seam between the two parts is quite visible. Spacing is uniform and tight all the way around though. The cables plug in tightly and with a recessed design should be well-protected from accidental bends. The metal nozzle grills with integrated tuning damper have a new design with fewer holes for sound to pass through. I suspect they contribute to the mildly boosted low end. As on the SSR they have been neatly installed. The same goes for the inner filters and vents found just under the L/R markings which have been forged into the body instead of printed or painted on. I have no issues with the way the SSP has been constructed, and also enjoy the design which pulls clear inspiration from the FLC 8S in terms of the general shape. The placement of the various vents/filters/screws also mirror the filter locations on the 8S, further strengthening the similarities. That said, the SSP is clearly not just a ripoff given it is significantly smaller, does not feature an in-depth filter system, and is overall much more blocky around the edges. Unexpectedly, the new colouring provides some additional texture that helps tips stay on better than they did on the SSR.
The silver-plated cable is the same one included with the SSR, and is a personal favourite of mine. It is soft and pliable though the preformed ear guides, while flexible and comfortable, do lead to easy tangles if you aren't careful when putting them away. The clear sheath also works in this cables favour allowing you to see the silver-plated strands within. It is quite visually striking when you take a close look. That said, the SSR's cable has started to oxidize and turn green. The hardware Moondrop selected is also a plus, as least in most areas. The 90 degree angled jack is compact and well-relieved, as are the tiny 0.78mm 2-pin plugs carried over from the Starfield (though here they are clear, not blue). While the plugs are labelled with L and R lettering to denote channel, it is extremely difficult to see so Moondrop added a red rubber ring to the right size to help out. That's a thoughtful touch. The y-split is my only area of concern since it is quite sizable and lacks strain relief. A chin cinch would have also been a welcome addition, but one is absent here. It would have been nice if Moondrop upgraded these aspects for both the SSR and SSP, but as-is what you get is functional and just fine.
Since the shell hasn't changed, the SSP is a nice product to have jammed in your ear. The small size and light weight combined with rounded edges and a reasonably long nozzle means it is quite stable during heavy movement. I can also comfortably lay my head on a pillow with them in since they sit so flush with the outer ear. Isolation is pretty sub-par though, at least without music playing. Since there are vents all over the place, plenty of sound leaks through. I can pause my music to chat with my wife while leaving them in, for example. Not too many earphones out there I can do that with. Now, bring music back into the equation and oddly, isolation feels pretty good. Little volume compensation seems to be needed to block outside noise, especially if you opt to squeeze on some foam tips.
In The Box The SSP arrives in familiar, squat, square box. Where the SSR went with a white colour scheme that matched the innocent design of the mascot on the front, the SSP goes a different route. The dark blue mirrors the edgier looking character as she lifts sunglasses off her eyes while casually blowing a large bubble out of the gum she's chewing. Just as on the SSR's package, flip around to the back and you find more traditional and helpful details; an exploded image of the SSP showing off it's component parts, an accurate frequency response graph (not the marketing-guided fakery we usually see), and a spec list in English and Mandarin.
Lift the lid off and the experience is identical to the SSR. The earphones with cable attached are resting comfortably in a foam insert. Alongside the foam insert is a smaller cardboard box embossed with the Moondrop logo in silver foil, inside which you find the included extras. In all you get:
- SSP earphones
- 0.78mm Silver-plated 4N-Litz OFC cable
- Single flange silicone tips (s/m/l)
- Fabric carrying pouch
Final Thoughts Moondrop has consistently released high quality, high performance, high value products which have vaulted them to the top of today's extremely competitive market. The SSP is yet another one of those products.
What is has borrowed from the SSR it reuses effectively, such as the impressively small, comfortable shells. At first glance the sound quality seems much the same too. However, thanks to an enhanced bass region which adds warmth and draws attention away from the upper mids, the result is something that is nearly as technically impressive as the SSR. The SSP's adjusted tune has more widespread appeal for those coming from v-shaped products that are the norm in this price range and below.
The SSP is simply outstanding and sits proudly alongside the SSR as one of my favorite earphones ever, regardless of price. It is that good.
Thanks for reading!
- B9
Disclaimer Big thanks to Moondrop for sending over a sample of the SSP for review. The thoughts within this review are my own subjective opinions based on a couple weeks of use. They do not represent Moondrop or any other entity. At the time of writing the SSP was retailing for 39.99 USD on Moondrop's official AliExpress store: https://moondrop.aliexpress.com/store/4980017 / www.aliexpress.com/item/1005001730597585.html
Specifications
- Impedance: 16 ohms @ 1kHz
- Sensitivity: 112dB/Vrms @ 1kHz
- Frequency Response: 20-40,000Hz
- Driver: Beryllium-coated diaphragm with PU suspension ring
- Cable: 0.78mm Silver-plated 4N-Litz OFC
- THD: ≤1%
Some Test Tunes
Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark's Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams
Fleetwood Mac – Rumors
Tobacco – screw*d Up Friends
Greetings!
Today we're checking out a modern update to a classic KZ.
The original ZST was a landmark product and KZ's first foray into hybrid earphones. It inspired an entire segment of equally budget-friendly hybrid competitors, a market that today is alive and well, teeming with new models. Prior to the release of the ZST, fans of the brand had been relentlessly asking KZ to dip their toes into the hybrid market. The consensus seemed to be that KZ had no intention of doing so. Balanced armatures (BAs) were still too pricey, meaning their implementation would drive the price above the market KZ was dominating and comfortable in. Times have clearly changed. Hybrids are now KZ's bread and butter with pure dynamic based earphones being a rarity, their release outpaced even by pure-armature models.
The ZST X revives the ZST name while also retaining key features and characteristics of the original; 1+1 hybrid, low profile shell, low price, and removable 2-pin cables. Is it a worthy successor to the landmark product that was the ZST? Let's find out.
What I Hear The ZST X is a welcome update to the original ZST with one change in particular that elevates it over it's predecessor.
Treble is one area where the two differ most. Upper treble is pretty similar with both offering a decent amount of sparkle and air between notes. The ZST X's newer drivers do sound a bit smoother and more refined. Leading into the low treble is where the two separate, and the ZST X comes into it's own. The 4K rise of the ZST X brings in plenty of detail and clarity for a budget offering. The original ZST falls far behind in this regard giving listeners a lower resolution, more analogue-like sound. I also find the ZST X to sound quite quick with a rapid attack and equally snappy decay.
The mids of the ZST X are very crisp and coherent with a fairly equal representation for male and female vocals. Note weight is moderate, with a more lean, moderately brighter sound than the original ZST. The ZST X has great clarity with a solid ability to pull micro-detail. It is certainly a step up from it's predecessor which comes across overly smooth and lacking in fine detail in comparison. Timbre on neither is completely accurate with the ZST X having the advantage. While a touch bright, it is lacking the artificial edge pasted across most of the ZST's auditory spectrum.
Bass on the two is very similar in terms of balance and linearity when transitioning from sub-bass regions and up into the lower mids. The ZST X's low end is even more elevated than the original ZST, bringing along with it additional texture. Note control is also quite good for a budget earphone with no sloppiness or bloat to speak of, except on tracks that are particularly mid-bassy. Extension is excellent with sub-bass notes providing plenty of physical feedback. The original ZST falls behind here too. The ZST X's ability to handle congested tracks is good, but tossing the rapid double bass common to speed metal trips it up. The original ZST doesn't fall far behind. Texturing on the ZST X is also quite good but falls short of the best-in-class. The original ZST is overshadowed.
When it comes to sound stage the ZST X provides a decently spacious experience that keeps up with other products in this price range. I find the staging deeper than it is wide with excellent layering and good instrument separation. Imaging is quite satisfying with fairly nuanced channel-to-channel movement. They work fine for gaming, but I wouldn't reply on them for pinpoint accuracy. In comparison, the original ZST sounds a little wider but not nearly as deep. Its imaging is more vague and lacking the same level of accuracy. The ZST doesn't layer as well either, nor are instruments as well separated. Staging qualities are where the ZST truly shows it age and is most outclassed.
Overall I find the ZST X to be a pretty significant upgrade on a technical level. It's staging qualities are notably better and it's detail retrieval and clarity are vastly improved. That said, I quite enjoy the ZST's smooth sound and fairly relaxed presentation and can see some preferring it to the Xs more lively sound.
Compared To A Peer (volumes matched with Dayton iMM-6)
KZ ZS4 (~18 USD): The ZS4 is a quite a bit more v-shaped and bassy than the already bassy ZST X. Both models bias towards sub-bass with excellent extension, with the ZST X sounding more linear as you head into the lower mids. The ZS4's low end is a bit smoother and slower sounding than the ZSTX which better handles quick notes. It also feels more textured though the differences are minimal. Mids on the ZST X are more weighty and forward with less of a rise heading into the upper mids. I actually find the ZS4 to sound slightly more timbre-accurate with the ZST X applying a wooden, blunted edge to some instruments. That said, vocals on the ZS4 do have a somewhat breathy quality to them which may bother some. Heading into the treble, the ZS4 has a clear bias towards the brilliance region making it quite a bit more sparkly and vibrant. It really highlights the v-shaped signature. The dip in the presence region also put it at a significant disadvantage in terms of detail output. In terms of sibilance, I hear it on both. It appears more often on the ZS4, but the ZST X's is sharper and more unpleasant. Sound stage is wider and deeper on the ZS4 but feels much less dynamic and more flat than what I hear from the ZST X. The ZST X offers better imaging, layering, and separation qualities too.
I appreciate the raised mids, improved technical ability, and overall more even sound of the ZST X. The ZS4's abundant low end is pretty fun though, and I like the shells a lot, even if they're not quite as comfortable as the ZST X's tried and true shape.
KB EAR KB04 (~30 USD): Comparisons to the KB04 are very similar to the ZS4. The KB EAR is notably bassier but like the ZST X has a sub-bass bias. While the bass performance in the ZST X is good, the KB04 is even tighter and punchier. That could come down to the driver tech, the dense metal housings, or a combination of the two. The KB04 has even better texturing too. Heading into the mids the ZST X pulls itself back into contention. While they both have a bump to upper mid emphasis, the ZST X's rise is more gradual and retains a more linear emphasis through into the treble regions. Along with being less fatiguing, the ZST X's timbre is more accurate, missing the dry, crispy nature of the KB04. Treble presentation is similar but I prefer the ZST X. Notes are a bit thicker, tighter, and better controlled with less overall emphasis that is more effectively balanced out by the abundant low end. Sound stage on the ZST X is a little bit wider and deeper with similar imaging quality. The KB04 offers up slightly improved layering and instrument separation.
Overall I prefer the less aggressively v-shaped sound of the ZST X. It's not as well built but it's a lot lighter, more ergonomic and comfortable, and as a budget friendly all-rounder is simply more enjoyable to use.
In The Ear The ZST X is built the same as the original ZST, more or less. Higher quality acrylics have been employed for the main body and face plate with the completely clear design mimicking that of the purple ZST Colourful that came out later in the earphone's lifespan. While I prefer the somewhat cheesy looking faux carbon-fibre face plate on the earliest ZST models, the simpler design of the new X version looks nice. Unlike the ZST X's more expensive counsins (ZSN, ZSN Pro, ZSN Pro X) the 2-pin ports are not screwed in place. Instead the somewhat complicated inner moulding keeps everything where it needs to be. The plastic nozzles of the original ZST make a return and do a fine job of holding most standard sized tips securely in place. All together, the ZST X ends up looking and feeling quite decent, especially given the low price tag.
The cable is a straight upgrade from previous KZs, including the similar looking silver-plated cable that was available as an upgrade. The sheath is thicker, more plush, and less prone to tangling above the y-split. The silver-plated wiring within has a nice sheen to it too. It looks and feels quite nice. The hardware falls into the “same old, same old” category though. The VSonic inspired y-split and jack carry over from earlier KZ's, as do the excellent preformed ear guides. Overall a great stock cable and quite welcome on a budget model.
Comfort is outstanding for me. This earpiece has been a staple across a couple brands in my experience with mild tweaks being made to the nozzle angle and quality of the plastics. With the ZST X, it fits perfectly with little to no effort required to get and maintain a good seal. The super lightweight, all-plastic design works in it's favour too. The preformed guides hold the cable securely around the ear resulting in an earphone that is very stable under extreme movement. If you have small outer ears or they're a particularly odd shape you might have issues with fit and comfort, but I expect everyone else to find these a pleasant product to wear.
Isolation is basically the same as the original ZST based on my time with the two products. Any differences are hardly noticeable. With no music on and a Youtube video playing on my laptop in the background at my normal listening volumes, everything was still audible and I could follow along, but just barely. Using them in my local coffee shop requires a mild increase in volume to compensate, but nothing extreme. In general, bringing music into the equation makes outside noise a non-issue, especially if you opt to toss on some third party foam tips.
In The Box The ZST X arrives in the same style of packaging as the majority of KZ’s modern offerings. The white exterior sheath features a coloured digital rendering of the ZST X's ear pieces as well as model info, while on the back you find specifications as well as locations and contact information for KZ. Sliding off the sheath reveals the ZST X's ear pieces set within a paper covered foam insert protected by a clear viewing lid. Lifting it all out you find the accessories below. In all you get:
Final Thoughts Overall I find the ZST X a fantastic update to the original ZST, and a very suitable replacement. It keeps what was great about the original model, namely the comfortable shell, then improves upon it in a number of areas; detail, clarity, bass extension and physical feedback, staging airiness and overall technical ability. That said, there are two other models in KZ's modern lineup that I would recommend picking up over the ZST X.
First is the EDX. At under 10 USD, it provides the same wearing experience thanks to it sharing a shell, though the ZST X comes with KZ's awesome new silver-plated cable. Sound wise they share pretty much the same signature with the ZST X providing more upper treble energy, detail, clarity. This comes at the expense of timbre which I find the EDX does better. The second I'd take over the ZST X is the DQ6. It once again offers a very similar signature but with all the peaks reduced. This leaves it more balanced and with more accurate timbre. It also looks and feels more premium thanks to the Zinc face plate, though the ZST shell is more comfortable. Well worth the increase in price in my opinion.
Would I recommend the ZST X? Yes, but with the caveat that the EDX and QD6 are unavailable to you. If that's the case, the ZST X is one of the better sub-20 USD earphones I've heard recently and makes for a great daily driver.
Thanks for reading!
- B9
Disclaimer A huge thanks to Lillian with Linsoul Audio for arranging a sample of the ZST X for the purposes of review. The thoughts within this review are my own subjective impressions based on months of time with the ZST X. They do not represent KZ, Linsoul, or any other entity. At the time of writing the ZST X was retailing for a mere 17.00 USD: https://www.linsoul.com/products/kz-zst-x
Specifications
Some Test Tunes
Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark's Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams
Fleetwood Mac – Rumors
Tobacco – screw*d Up Friends
Today we're checking out a modern update to a classic KZ.
The original ZST was a landmark product and KZ's first foray into hybrid earphones. It inspired an entire segment of equally budget-friendly hybrid competitors, a market that today is alive and well, teeming with new models. Prior to the release of the ZST, fans of the brand had been relentlessly asking KZ to dip their toes into the hybrid market. The consensus seemed to be that KZ had no intention of doing so. Balanced armatures (BAs) were still too pricey, meaning their implementation would drive the price above the market KZ was dominating and comfortable in. Times have clearly changed. Hybrids are now KZ's bread and butter with pure dynamic based earphones being a rarity, their release outpaced even by pure-armature models.
The ZST X revives the ZST name while also retaining key features and characteristics of the original; 1+1 hybrid, low profile shell, low price, and removable 2-pin cables. Is it a worthy successor to the landmark product that was the ZST? Let's find out.
What I Hear The ZST X is a welcome update to the original ZST with one change in particular that elevates it over it's predecessor.
Treble is one area where the two differ most. Upper treble is pretty similar with both offering a decent amount of sparkle and air between notes. The ZST X's newer drivers do sound a bit smoother and more refined. Leading into the low treble is where the two separate, and the ZST X comes into it's own. The 4K rise of the ZST X brings in plenty of detail and clarity for a budget offering. The original ZST falls far behind in this regard giving listeners a lower resolution, more analogue-like sound. I also find the ZST X to sound quite quick with a rapid attack and equally snappy decay.
The mids of the ZST X are very crisp and coherent with a fairly equal representation for male and female vocals. Note weight is moderate, with a more lean, moderately brighter sound than the original ZST. The ZST X has great clarity with a solid ability to pull micro-detail. It is certainly a step up from it's predecessor which comes across overly smooth and lacking in fine detail in comparison. Timbre on neither is completely accurate with the ZST X having the advantage. While a touch bright, it is lacking the artificial edge pasted across most of the ZST's auditory spectrum.
Bass on the two is very similar in terms of balance and linearity when transitioning from sub-bass regions and up into the lower mids. The ZST X's low end is even more elevated than the original ZST, bringing along with it additional texture. Note control is also quite good for a budget earphone with no sloppiness or bloat to speak of, except on tracks that are particularly mid-bassy. Extension is excellent with sub-bass notes providing plenty of physical feedback. The original ZST falls behind here too. The ZST X's ability to handle congested tracks is good, but tossing the rapid double bass common to speed metal trips it up. The original ZST doesn't fall far behind. Texturing on the ZST X is also quite good but falls short of the best-in-class. The original ZST is overshadowed.
When it comes to sound stage the ZST X provides a decently spacious experience that keeps up with other products in this price range. I find the staging deeper than it is wide with excellent layering and good instrument separation. Imaging is quite satisfying with fairly nuanced channel-to-channel movement. They work fine for gaming, but I wouldn't reply on them for pinpoint accuracy. In comparison, the original ZST sounds a little wider but not nearly as deep. Its imaging is more vague and lacking the same level of accuracy. The ZST doesn't layer as well either, nor are instruments as well separated. Staging qualities are where the ZST truly shows it age and is most outclassed.
Overall I find the ZST X to be a pretty significant upgrade on a technical level. It's staging qualities are notably better and it's detail retrieval and clarity are vastly improved. That said, I quite enjoy the ZST's smooth sound and fairly relaxed presentation and can see some preferring it to the Xs more lively sound.
Compared To A Peer (volumes matched with Dayton iMM-6)
KZ ZS4 (~18 USD): The ZS4 is a quite a bit more v-shaped and bassy than the already bassy ZST X. Both models bias towards sub-bass with excellent extension, with the ZST X sounding more linear as you head into the lower mids. The ZS4's low end is a bit smoother and slower sounding than the ZSTX which better handles quick notes. It also feels more textured though the differences are minimal. Mids on the ZST X are more weighty and forward with less of a rise heading into the upper mids. I actually find the ZS4 to sound slightly more timbre-accurate with the ZST X applying a wooden, blunted edge to some instruments. That said, vocals on the ZS4 do have a somewhat breathy quality to them which may bother some. Heading into the treble, the ZS4 has a clear bias towards the brilliance region making it quite a bit more sparkly and vibrant. It really highlights the v-shaped signature. The dip in the presence region also put it at a significant disadvantage in terms of detail output. In terms of sibilance, I hear it on both. It appears more often on the ZS4, but the ZST X's is sharper and more unpleasant. Sound stage is wider and deeper on the ZS4 but feels much less dynamic and more flat than what I hear from the ZST X. The ZST X offers better imaging, layering, and separation qualities too.
I appreciate the raised mids, improved technical ability, and overall more even sound of the ZST X. The ZS4's abundant low end is pretty fun though, and I like the shells a lot, even if they're not quite as comfortable as the ZST X's tried and true shape.
KB EAR KB04 (~30 USD): Comparisons to the KB04 are very similar to the ZS4. The KB EAR is notably bassier but like the ZST X has a sub-bass bias. While the bass performance in the ZST X is good, the KB04 is even tighter and punchier. That could come down to the driver tech, the dense metal housings, or a combination of the two. The KB04 has even better texturing too. Heading into the mids the ZST X pulls itself back into contention. While they both have a bump to upper mid emphasis, the ZST X's rise is more gradual and retains a more linear emphasis through into the treble regions. Along with being less fatiguing, the ZST X's timbre is more accurate, missing the dry, crispy nature of the KB04. Treble presentation is similar but I prefer the ZST X. Notes are a bit thicker, tighter, and better controlled with less overall emphasis that is more effectively balanced out by the abundant low end. Sound stage on the ZST X is a little bit wider and deeper with similar imaging quality. The KB04 offers up slightly improved layering and instrument separation.
Overall I prefer the less aggressively v-shaped sound of the ZST X. It's not as well built but it's a lot lighter, more ergonomic and comfortable, and as a budget friendly all-rounder is simply more enjoyable to use.
In The Ear The ZST X is built the same as the original ZST, more or less. Higher quality acrylics have been employed for the main body and face plate with the completely clear design mimicking that of the purple ZST Colourful that came out later in the earphone's lifespan. While I prefer the somewhat cheesy looking faux carbon-fibre face plate on the earliest ZST models, the simpler design of the new X version looks nice. Unlike the ZST X's more expensive counsins (ZSN, ZSN Pro, ZSN Pro X) the 2-pin ports are not screwed in place. Instead the somewhat complicated inner moulding keeps everything where it needs to be. The plastic nozzles of the original ZST make a return and do a fine job of holding most standard sized tips securely in place. All together, the ZST X ends up looking and feeling quite decent, especially given the low price tag.
The cable is a straight upgrade from previous KZs, including the similar looking silver-plated cable that was available as an upgrade. The sheath is thicker, more plush, and less prone to tangling above the y-split. The silver-plated wiring within has a nice sheen to it too. It looks and feels quite nice. The hardware falls into the “same old, same old” category though. The VSonic inspired y-split and jack carry over from earlier KZ's, as do the excellent preformed ear guides. Overall a great stock cable and quite welcome on a budget model.
Comfort is outstanding for me. This earpiece has been a staple across a couple brands in my experience with mild tweaks being made to the nozzle angle and quality of the plastics. With the ZST X, it fits perfectly with little to no effort required to get and maintain a good seal. The super lightweight, all-plastic design works in it's favour too. The preformed guides hold the cable securely around the ear resulting in an earphone that is very stable under extreme movement. If you have small outer ears or they're a particularly odd shape you might have issues with fit and comfort, but I expect everyone else to find these a pleasant product to wear.
Isolation is basically the same as the original ZST based on my time with the two products. Any differences are hardly noticeable. With no music on and a Youtube video playing on my laptop in the background at my normal listening volumes, everything was still audible and I could follow along, but just barely. Using them in my local coffee shop requires a mild increase in volume to compensate, but nothing extreme. In general, bringing music into the equation makes outside noise a non-issue, especially if you opt to toss on some third party foam tips.
In The Box The ZST X arrives in the same style of packaging as the majority of KZ’s modern offerings. The white exterior sheath features a coloured digital rendering of the ZST X's ear pieces as well as model info, while on the back you find specifications as well as locations and contact information for KZ. Sliding off the sheath reveals the ZST X's ear pieces set within a paper covered foam insert protected by a clear viewing lid. Lifting it all out you find the accessories below. In all you get:
- ZST X earphones
- 0.75mm 2-pin silver-plated braided cable
- Starline silicone tips (s/m/l)
- Manual and warranty card
Final Thoughts Overall I find the ZST X a fantastic update to the original ZST, and a very suitable replacement. It keeps what was great about the original model, namely the comfortable shell, then improves upon it in a number of areas; detail, clarity, bass extension and physical feedback, staging airiness and overall technical ability. That said, there are two other models in KZ's modern lineup that I would recommend picking up over the ZST X.
First is the EDX. At under 10 USD, it provides the same wearing experience thanks to it sharing a shell, though the ZST X comes with KZ's awesome new silver-plated cable. Sound wise they share pretty much the same signature with the ZST X providing more upper treble energy, detail, clarity. This comes at the expense of timbre which I find the EDX does better. The second I'd take over the ZST X is the DQ6. It once again offers a very similar signature but with all the peaks reduced. This leaves it more balanced and with more accurate timbre. It also looks and feels more premium thanks to the Zinc face plate, though the ZST shell is more comfortable. Well worth the increase in price in my opinion.
Would I recommend the ZST X? Yes, but with the caveat that the EDX and QD6 are unavailable to you. If that's the case, the ZST X is one of the better sub-20 USD earphones I've heard recently and makes for a great daily driver.
Thanks for reading!
- B9
Disclaimer A huge thanks to Lillian with Linsoul Audio for arranging a sample of the ZST X for the purposes of review. The thoughts within this review are my own subjective impressions based on months of time with the ZST X. They do not represent KZ, Linsoul, or any other entity. At the time of writing the ZST X was retailing for a mere 17.00 USD: https://www.linsoul.com/products/kz-zst-x
Specifications
- Frequency Response: 20-40,000Hz
- Impedance: 12 ohms
- Sensitivity: 107dB/mW
- Cable: 0.75mm 2-pin
- Driver: One balanced armature, one dynamic per side
Some Test Tunes
Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark's Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams
Fleetwood Mac – Rumors
Tobacco – screw*d Up Friends
Jimmyblues1959
Just bought a pair. Great review!
Greetings!
Today we're going to drool over the DQ6, one of KZ's most recent and most interesting (imo) releases in a while.
The DQ6 is a triple dynamic earphone with one 10mm and two 6mm drivers working in tandem thanks to a tiny crossover. The clear acrylic inner body is composed of two parts neatly glued together with a lovely zinc-alloy faceplate rounding things out. Along with KZ's snazzy new(ish) logo brandishing the face plate is a slender 4mm long vent. It's not just for show either since you can see clear through it and into the shell. Also 4mm is the width of the gold coloured nozzles, widening to 5mm at the lip which does a great job of holding tips in place. Ergonomics and isolation are both strong points of this shell which does a good job of keeping outside noise from bleeding in and remains secure and stable even under the most intense head movements.
The cable is another strong point in my opinion. As with a number of new releases from the brand like the ZST X, ZAX, and ZSN Pro X, to name a few, they've included with the DQ6 the thicker, more plush and premium feeling silver plated cable that makes their old cables feel out of date. Unfortunately the old-school VSonic inspired hardware remains. While it looks cool, especially in white, strain relief is poor and the blocky design tends to catch on things. Plus, they still aren't including a chin cinch.
In addition to the earphones and cable, the DQ6 comes with new tips. Gone are the now legendary 'Starline' tips, replaced with the same single flange set I first saw on the S2 true wireless model. While I do like these tips, I find the silicone is a bit too soft and thin and as a result getting a reliable seal wasn't a sure thing like it was with the Starlines. Know what would be cool? If KZ included both types of tips with future releases. Hint hint, KZ
Moving past the visual and physical stuff, how does the DQ6 sound? Really quite good. Certainly better than I was expecting. I've tried a couple other triple dynamics in the past. The Geek Wold GK3 was the first and while it looked awesome, Geek Wold needed to spend more time cooking up a solid tune. Rolled off treble, weird timbre, hollow mids, and a tiny sound stage were some of the offending qualities. This was followed up with the unexpectedly great bboooll BOT1. The DZAT inspired design looked nice and was backed by lush, full mids, polite treble, and fairly punchy, well-controlled bass. It could have used more micro detail though, and the fixed cables were a deal breaker for some.
The DQ6 has a light v-shaped signature with impressive coherence between the three drivers within, particularly because this thing is so inexpensive. Treble extends well into the lower brilliance region, sloping off comfortably. This gives the DQ6 a reasonably airy feel with the roll off keeping it from becoming too harsh or irritating. That said, the mild bump at 7k could stand to be toned down a bit since I'm sure it'll probably bother treble sensitive listeners. While the dynamic drivers used fall behind KZ's armatures in terms of speed and overall clarity, they sound more natural and notes are presented with better control and tightness. I missed this presentation in a KZ.
The midrange is only slightly recessed with a lift in the upper mids giving them the presence needed to avoid being drowned out or underplayed by the other frequencies. Both male and female vocals are well represented with neither really having much of an advantage. If I were to side with one or the other, I'd give male vocals the nod since the DQ6's mids aren't overly thick or warm, qualities that to my ears are more beneficial to female vocalists. Clarity is excellent with good detail overall. Micro detail is a little smoother than those earphones that lean towards a more neutral, analytic presentation, and that's fine. Timbre is quite natural with just a hint of brightness to throw it off, similar in vein to the KB EAR Diamond.
Heading into the low end the DQ6 sounds more mature than a lot of other models in their lineup. Calling one out, the much more expensive ZAX could take a lesson from the DQ6 on punch and tightness because the low end here is just that; tight and punchy. The presentation is fairly linear too with a slight skew towards sub-bass and restrained mid-bass. The DQ6 doesn't issue a head-rattling rumble like the Dunu DM-480 and instead presents itself more like Moondrop's Starfield. You feel the deepest notes, but they don't take over. The reserved mid-bass region keeps the DQ6 from sounding bloated and adds just the right amount of warmth for my tastes. Notes hit hard and are well-controlled, backed by good texturing. I'd like a bit more grunge and crunch on the dirty notes from Tobacco, but as-is the DQ6's presentation is satisfying.
The sound stage on offer from the DQ6 is one of its more average qualities. Vocals fall just short of intimate having a default positioning just inside the outer ear. Sounds spread out cleanly from there with distancing stopping around shoulder width. The occasional effect with feel like it shoots off way further into the distance, but that's not the norm. I had low expectations , but imaging is excellent with channel-to-channel movements being easy to track. Instrument separation and track layering are also quite good. The DQ6 doesn't surround you with music like the Brainwavz B400 or some other multi-driver units, but it comes closer than I was expecting. It certainly outshines any single dynamic or 1+1 hybrid that I can think of within this price range.
Overall thoughts? This is one of the better products in this price range and easily one of the best earphones to come out of KZ in a while. Outside of that 7k rise, there is little I can think of to complain about. Tossing price back into the equation and my concerns are even less important. This feels like old-school KZ at their peak, and I love it.
Thanks for reading!
- B9
Disclaimer I purchased the DQ6 from the CCA Official Store shortly after it came up for sale for 35.42 CAD. I did not ask for a discount and they did not ask for a review, nor did I have any intention of writing one. The thoughts here are my subjective opinions and do not represent KZ, the CCA Official Store, or any other entity. If you want to buy a set, and I highly recommend doing so, you can scoop up your DQ6 here: www.aliexpress.com/item/1005001894623959.html
Specifications
Today we're going to drool over the DQ6, one of KZ's most recent and most interesting (imo) releases in a while.
The DQ6 is a triple dynamic earphone with one 10mm and two 6mm drivers working in tandem thanks to a tiny crossover. The clear acrylic inner body is composed of two parts neatly glued together with a lovely zinc-alloy faceplate rounding things out. Along with KZ's snazzy new(ish) logo brandishing the face plate is a slender 4mm long vent. It's not just for show either since you can see clear through it and into the shell. Also 4mm is the width of the gold coloured nozzles, widening to 5mm at the lip which does a great job of holding tips in place. Ergonomics and isolation are both strong points of this shell which does a good job of keeping outside noise from bleeding in and remains secure and stable even under the most intense head movements.
The cable is another strong point in my opinion. As with a number of new releases from the brand like the ZST X, ZAX, and ZSN Pro X, to name a few, they've included with the DQ6 the thicker, more plush and premium feeling silver plated cable that makes their old cables feel out of date. Unfortunately the old-school VSonic inspired hardware remains. While it looks cool, especially in white, strain relief is poor and the blocky design tends to catch on things. Plus, they still aren't including a chin cinch.
In addition to the earphones and cable, the DQ6 comes with new tips. Gone are the now legendary 'Starline' tips, replaced with the same single flange set I first saw on the S2 true wireless model. While I do like these tips, I find the silicone is a bit too soft and thin and as a result getting a reliable seal wasn't a sure thing like it was with the Starlines. Know what would be cool? If KZ included both types of tips with future releases. Hint hint, KZ
Moving past the visual and physical stuff, how does the DQ6 sound? Really quite good. Certainly better than I was expecting. I've tried a couple other triple dynamics in the past. The Geek Wold GK3 was the first and while it looked awesome, Geek Wold needed to spend more time cooking up a solid tune. Rolled off treble, weird timbre, hollow mids, and a tiny sound stage were some of the offending qualities. This was followed up with the unexpectedly great bboooll BOT1. The DZAT inspired design looked nice and was backed by lush, full mids, polite treble, and fairly punchy, well-controlled bass. It could have used more micro detail though, and the fixed cables were a deal breaker for some.
The DQ6 has a light v-shaped signature with impressive coherence between the three drivers within, particularly because this thing is so inexpensive. Treble extends well into the lower brilliance region, sloping off comfortably. This gives the DQ6 a reasonably airy feel with the roll off keeping it from becoming too harsh or irritating. That said, the mild bump at 7k could stand to be toned down a bit since I'm sure it'll probably bother treble sensitive listeners. While the dynamic drivers used fall behind KZ's armatures in terms of speed and overall clarity, they sound more natural and notes are presented with better control and tightness. I missed this presentation in a KZ.
The midrange is only slightly recessed with a lift in the upper mids giving them the presence needed to avoid being drowned out or underplayed by the other frequencies. Both male and female vocals are well represented with neither really having much of an advantage. If I were to side with one or the other, I'd give male vocals the nod since the DQ6's mids aren't overly thick or warm, qualities that to my ears are more beneficial to female vocalists. Clarity is excellent with good detail overall. Micro detail is a little smoother than those earphones that lean towards a more neutral, analytic presentation, and that's fine. Timbre is quite natural with just a hint of brightness to throw it off, similar in vein to the KB EAR Diamond.
Heading into the low end the DQ6 sounds more mature than a lot of other models in their lineup. Calling one out, the much more expensive ZAX could take a lesson from the DQ6 on punch and tightness because the low end here is just that; tight and punchy. The presentation is fairly linear too with a slight skew towards sub-bass and restrained mid-bass. The DQ6 doesn't issue a head-rattling rumble like the Dunu DM-480 and instead presents itself more like Moondrop's Starfield. You feel the deepest notes, but they don't take over. The reserved mid-bass region keeps the DQ6 from sounding bloated and adds just the right amount of warmth for my tastes. Notes hit hard and are well-controlled, backed by good texturing. I'd like a bit more grunge and crunch on the dirty notes from Tobacco, but as-is the DQ6's presentation is satisfying.
The sound stage on offer from the DQ6 is one of its more average qualities. Vocals fall just short of intimate having a default positioning just inside the outer ear. Sounds spread out cleanly from there with distancing stopping around shoulder width. The occasional effect with feel like it shoots off way further into the distance, but that's not the norm. I had low expectations , but imaging is excellent with channel-to-channel movements being easy to track. Instrument separation and track layering are also quite good. The DQ6 doesn't surround you with music like the Brainwavz B400 or some other multi-driver units, but it comes closer than I was expecting. It certainly outshines any single dynamic or 1+1 hybrid that I can think of within this price range.
Overall thoughts? This is one of the better products in this price range and easily one of the best earphones to come out of KZ in a while. Outside of that 7k rise, there is little I can think of to complain about. Tossing price back into the equation and my concerns are even less important. This feels like old-school KZ at their peak, and I love it.
Thanks for reading!
- B9
Disclaimer I purchased the DQ6 from the CCA Official Store shortly after it came up for sale for 35.42 CAD. I did not ask for a discount and they did not ask for a review, nor did I have any intention of writing one. The thoughts here are my subjective opinions and do not represent KZ, the CCA Official Store, or any other entity. If you want to buy a set, and I highly recommend doing so, you can scoop up your DQ6 here: www.aliexpress.com/item/1005001894623959.html
Specifications
- Frequency Response: 20-40,000Hz
- Impedance: 24ohms
- Sensitivity: 112dB
- Cable: 0.75mm 2-pin silver-plated
- Drivers: 10mm dynamic + 2x 6mm dynamic
Alpha Whale
with a slight skew towards sub-bass and restrained mid-bass.
The reserved mid-bass region keeps the DQ6 from sounding bloated and adds just the right amount of warmth
edit: LOL, forgot that I read your review and commented already a few weeks ago.
The reserved mid-bass region keeps the DQ6 from sounding bloated and adds just the right amount of warmth
edit: LOL, forgot that I read your review and commented already a few weeks ago.
Jet Black
This or blon bl-01?
B9Scrambler
@CT007 @Jet Black DQ6 all the way.
Greetings!
Today we're checking out another release from Shozy, the Rouge.
While 2020 has been a nightmare for many, Shozy has been a shining beacon of hope thanks to a slew of outstanding releases. The Form 1.1 and Form 1.4 are some of my favourite products of the year, especially the latter, so when I saw the Rouge was on the horizon I knew I had to give it a go. Priced similarly to the 1.4 with a three driver hybrid setup utilizing Knowles drivers and a similar design motif, there was no way this one was going to pass under my radar.
I'm glad I inquired with Lillian from Linsoul about it (thanks again Lillian!!) because the Rouge joins its Form stablemates as one of the better products I've heard this year (“this year” being 2020). Let's take a closer look, shall we?
What I Hear
Tips: The tips included with the Rouge are pretty mediocre, generic tips that you get with a million other, much cheaper earphones. As such, I swapped them out right away. My recommendation is to roll with something that uses a really soft silicone, like Spinfit CP100s or JVC's standard wide bore tips. Foamies work well too. I find the soft materials suck up some of the upper mid and lower treble energy making the overall presentation a bit smoother and more relaxed. A wide bore option also helps out with instrument layering and separation.
I was hoping the Rouge would provide a similar experience to the Form models. While the family resemblance is there, the Rouge experience is a bit more well-rounded. Starting with the low end, the Rouge extends like a boss easily taking on the rumbling opening notes of Kavinski's “Solli”. Sub-bass notes are well represented and mid-bass calm and tight, leaving the Rouge feeling like it is going more for technical competency instead of raw power. The presentation is quick and well-controlled with good texturing and an overall mature sound to it. It handles grungy bass from The Prodigy just as well as the smooth sounds of Dillon Francis' Latin infusion “Look At That Butt”. Metal isn't left behind as well with the rapid double bass from Havok's “Covering Fire” sounding killer coming from the Rouge's lovely pink shells.
Leading into the mids the Rouge has a solid lift which keeps vocals at the forefront. The excellent clarity and coherence on hand ensures they cut through and stay prominent pretty much regardless of the track. Thanks to the somewhat tame midbass, there's some warmth and some thickness, but for the most part it's falls to the cooler, leaner side. The upper mid lift will lead some to say it's shouty, but I can't agree. That said, it can be extremely hot with tracks where that region is already quite boosted, such as on Aesop Rock's newest album, 'Spirit World Field Guide'. Killer album, but with headphones quite tough for me to get through unless they've got a very relaxed upper mid and lower treble. Sibilance is also an issue on Aes tracks and the Rouge does nothing to hide it. Timbre is decent enough with most instruments but as is often the case, I find Knowles driver to fall behind expectations. The plasticky edge some dislike from balanced armatures is present in small quantities here. While it sounds like I'm not really enjoying this region, that's not the case at all. I find the midrange to be the Rouge's specialty thanks to the detail, clarity, and overall coherence that makes vocal heavy tracks a joy.
The Rouge's treble regions more or less match the upper mids' emphasis and remain reasonably linear until after 7k where there is a gradually steady drop in emphasis. This works out fairly well in keeping the Rouge extremely detailed and sparkly, though I do feel dropping a few dB in the presence region could go a long way towards reducing ear fatigue at high volumes and over long listening sessions. At safe listening volumes and over listening sessions of a reasonable length, the presentation is pretty relaxed, though not to the extent of some other products I've used recently like the Cat Ear Mia. The Mia makes the Rouge sound almost bright after swapping between the two thanks to emphasis dipping significantly after 4k. General treble quality out of the Rouge is fine with plenty of speed and as noted earlier, lots of detail, I just wish notes were a hint tighter. Mild splash is present which some enjoy since it adds energy and excitement. I think it sounds sloppy and cheapens the experience, preferring something tighter and cleaner. The Rouge finds its presentation between what I find ideal and merely acceptable. Really, I wish they ditched Knowles and went with the unknown brand of drivers used in the Form 1.4
Staging qualities of the Rouge are quite good. Imaging from channel-to-channel is clean and nuanced with no vagueness off centre or otherwise. Instrument separation and track layering is also quite decent, but lacks the dynamicism and enveloping nature of products like the Form 1.4 and Brainwavz B400. The Rouge just doesn't pull me in and surround me with music quite the same way other more layered and better separated products do. Still better than average, but short of best-in-class.
Compared To A Peer (volumes matched with Dayton iMM-6)
BQEYZ Spring 2 (169.00 USD): The Rouge is a more balanced, technical take on Shozy's Form models to my ears with differences that are similar to the Spring II. BQEYZ's offering is warmer and bassier. Sub-bass on the Spring II has more emphasis and mid-bass more punch. The Rouge offers more speed, texture, and better control. Heading into the mids the Rouge is leaner and gives vocals a cooler, more detailed presentation. Timbre out of the Spring II is more natural. Treble on the Spring II is smoother with more upper end sparkle vs. the Rouge which seems to focus more on the presence region. As such I find the Rouge more detailed and less sparkly. In terms of speed and cleanliness of the notes each present, the Spring II gets the nod. The sound stage of the Rouge is wider and deeper with a more evenly rounded appearance. Imaging out of the Rouge is also more nuanced with clean channel-to-channel transitions. I also find it to offer slightly better layering with similarly good instrument separation.
Overall I find the two to be more-or-less equals with each model excelling in different areas. I could pick up either and be perfectly happy, though as an all-rounder the Spring II gets the nod thanks to it's heavier low end.
Shozy Form 1.4 (199.00 USD):When it comes to the low end, I was surprised to hear the Rouge besting the 1.4’s excellent extension and sub-bass presence. It does a great job presenting the lowest notes, although it doesn’t provide the same level of physical feedback as the 1.4. Mid-bass punch is clearly in the 1.4’s camp, inserting warmth into the overall signature that is lacking in the Rouge. Texturing is quite similar, as is overall control and note definition. While measurements show the Rouge to be the bassier of the two, it really doesn’t feel that way when actually listening to them. The more relaxed upper mids and lower treble of the 1.4 result in the perception of the low end standing out more.
The midrange is where the Rouge shines in my opinion. It is a notable step up in terms of vocal presence, clarity, and detail, and the 1.4 was no slouch in these areas. The upper mid bump really helps keep vocalists prominent in every track. I’m sure the word shouty will be tossed around by a certain few individuals, though I do not hear that quality in the Rouge. The general presentation won’t win over everyone though. Compared to the 1.4, the Rouge’s mids are leaner and cooler. Sibilance is kept in check, though the Rouge does toes the lines of acceptable on some of my more aggressive test tracks from Aesop Rock. I also found it to be a touch less timbre accurate, particularly on percussion instruments which end up having a plasticky edge to them not shared by the Form 1.4. I think the brand unknown armatures used in the Form 1.4 have a more natural and realistic presentation, even if the differences are exceptionally minimal.
Treble out of both models is quite relaxed and inoffensive to my ears. The Rouge’s improved clarity and detail can be attributed to the enhanced lower treble presence it displays. Upper treble feels pretty evenly represented with the Rouge giving off a hint more shimmer on chimes and cymbals. Attack and decay on both is similar with the Rouge coming across more aggressive and definitive. Notes sound equally tight and well-controlled. Sound stage on these earphones offers up a similar level of width and depth, but how each goes about it feels quite different. Where the Rouge’s stage is characterized by a leaner sound and more prominent vocals that the rest of the stage emanates from, the 1.4’s low end is the basis for it’s stage. The bass on that model acts like a blanket or wave that everything else seems to build on top of.
When it comes to staging qualities like imaging, layering, and separation, the Form 1.4 has got that special something the Rouge seems to lack. Imaging is similarly smooth with channel-to-channel movements and instruments are slightly better separated on the Rouge thanks to the leaner sound, but the 1.4 has got the layering advantage and ends up feeling more dynamic overall.
Overall I really, really enjoy the sound of the Rouge. It takes most of what I like about the Form series of earphones but dials down the wamrth and bass for improved detail and clarity. Vocals in particular sound amazing, just keep in mind that tracks with plenty of sibilance and a boosted upper midrange will sound quite hot and potentially uncomfortable.
In The Ear The Rouge takes design cues and sizing from the 1.4, with a similar stubby, tubby, rounded shape, and low profile, cable over-ear fitment. There are some notable physical differences though. Gone is the compact metal nozzle. Instead, the one-piece nozzle is more typical of other acrylic-shelled iems. It is fairly short with individual sound tubes for the dynamic and dual armatures. The lip for holding on tips is unfortunately not very effective given it doesn't protrude very far, and is rounded off. No protective cover is present on the end of the nozzle either, allowing you to peer down the larger of the two tubes at the Knowles style filter within. On the rear of the Form models was a vent hole finished with a stylish metal ring. That ring is gone on the Rouge, leaving just a simple vent. The ports for the 2-pin plugs were completely flush with the housing on the Form models, but are now ever so slightly recessed on the Rouge. It looks to be just enough to offer a hint of extra protection from bending, but I'm not planning to test that deliberately. The entirety of the body of each Rouge is hand-painted giving every one a unique look. I only wish there was some variety in colour options, but I can understand why that is not the case.
The cable is kind of old school in a time where everything has gone braided or cloth-coated, or both, and is reminiscent of those used by VSonic during the VSD3-era. The metallic brown sheath isn't sticky, but does show some memory retention and even after having been in use for over a month, retains some of the bends and curls from when it was first removed from it's packaging. Still, I'd rather this than the noisy, fray and tangle prone cables used on the Form models. The hardware is nice too. The metal straight jack is absolutely tiny and should work fine it most any case. Strain relief is on the short side, but is plenty flexible and should offer decent protection from bends and tugs. The y-split and chin cinch are also metal. The sliding motion of the chin cinch is firm, but not so much to be a concern. Once in place, it doesn't move so the implementation of this feature is quite positive overall.
Wearing the Rouge is a pleasant experience. The shells are extremely light. Combine that with a low profile, ergonomic shape that comfortably fills the outer ear without any pressure points or sharp edges, and you've got an earphone that can be worn for extended periods without any fatigue. If I were to find complaint anywhere, it would be with the short, wide nozzles. Those that prefer a deep fitting earphone may have trouble finding tips that extend deep enough, and stay attached. I ended up using Dunu tips for my testing since they sounded basically the same as the stock tips, stayed attached without issue, and provided a consistent seal. Isolation is slightly above average. With no music playing, I can still hear my surroundings but everything is dulled/muffled. With music playing, little to no additional volume is needed to compensate for outside noise.
In The Box The Rouge was not sent with retail packaging but given this models' similarity to the Form 1.1 and 1.4, I would look at reviews of those models to get an idea of what to expect. In fact, feel free to check out my own review of the Form 1.1; https://thecontraptionist.blog/2020/05/06/shozy-form-1-1-fun-is-fun/. With the Rouge you receive the following:
Final Thoughts The Rouge is another outstanding addition to Shozy's already kick @$$ 2020 lineup. I love that the signature is reminiscent of the Form models, but with a shift away from warmth, instead going for clarity and detail with some pretty wicked vocals. I think some would appreciate a slight reduction in upper mid and lower treble emphasis, but that can be addressed reasonably easily with mild EQ or the right tips, something you'll want to swap out of the box because the stock tips are pretty mediocre. The rest of the accessory kit isn't amazing either since you get very little compared to either of the Form models, including the much more affordable 1.1. At least it's well built and very comfortable with gorgeous shells. That said, while the pink colourway is attractive I'd appreciate some options. Purple, red, blue, etc. I can understand why Shozy stuck with just the one colour option though. These beauties are hand-painted and since they went with main brand drivers (Knowles), offering additional colour schemes would likely have driven up the cost and increased overlap within their lineup.
Overall I think the Rouge is one of the better products to come out of the nightmare that was 2020 and a great option for someone looking for this type of signature. Good job Shozy.
Thanks for reading!
- B9
Disclaimer A massive thanks to Lillian with Linsoul Audio for arranging and providing a sample of the Rouge for review. The thoughts within this review are my subjective opinions based on a couple months of regular use. They do not represent Shozy, Linsoul, or any other entity. At the time of writing the Rouge was retailing for 179.00 USD: https://www.linsoul.com/products/shozy-rouge-1
Specifications
Some Test Tunes
Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark's Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams
Fleetwood Mac – Rumors
Tobacco – screw*d Up Friends
Today we're checking out another release from Shozy, the Rouge.
While 2020 has been a nightmare for many, Shozy has been a shining beacon of hope thanks to a slew of outstanding releases. The Form 1.1 and Form 1.4 are some of my favourite products of the year, especially the latter, so when I saw the Rouge was on the horizon I knew I had to give it a go. Priced similarly to the 1.4 with a three driver hybrid setup utilizing Knowles drivers and a similar design motif, there was no way this one was going to pass under my radar.
I'm glad I inquired with Lillian from Linsoul about it (thanks again Lillian!!) because the Rouge joins its Form stablemates as one of the better products I've heard this year (“this year” being 2020). Let's take a closer look, shall we?
What I Hear
Tips: The tips included with the Rouge are pretty mediocre, generic tips that you get with a million other, much cheaper earphones. As such, I swapped them out right away. My recommendation is to roll with something that uses a really soft silicone, like Spinfit CP100s or JVC's standard wide bore tips. Foamies work well too. I find the soft materials suck up some of the upper mid and lower treble energy making the overall presentation a bit smoother and more relaxed. A wide bore option also helps out with instrument layering and separation.
I was hoping the Rouge would provide a similar experience to the Form models. While the family resemblance is there, the Rouge experience is a bit more well-rounded. Starting with the low end, the Rouge extends like a boss easily taking on the rumbling opening notes of Kavinski's “Solli”. Sub-bass notes are well represented and mid-bass calm and tight, leaving the Rouge feeling like it is going more for technical competency instead of raw power. The presentation is quick and well-controlled with good texturing and an overall mature sound to it. It handles grungy bass from The Prodigy just as well as the smooth sounds of Dillon Francis' Latin infusion “Look At That Butt”. Metal isn't left behind as well with the rapid double bass from Havok's “Covering Fire” sounding killer coming from the Rouge's lovely pink shells.
Leading into the mids the Rouge has a solid lift which keeps vocals at the forefront. The excellent clarity and coherence on hand ensures they cut through and stay prominent pretty much regardless of the track. Thanks to the somewhat tame midbass, there's some warmth and some thickness, but for the most part it's falls to the cooler, leaner side. The upper mid lift will lead some to say it's shouty, but I can't agree. That said, it can be extremely hot with tracks where that region is already quite boosted, such as on Aesop Rock's newest album, 'Spirit World Field Guide'. Killer album, but with headphones quite tough for me to get through unless they've got a very relaxed upper mid and lower treble. Sibilance is also an issue on Aes tracks and the Rouge does nothing to hide it. Timbre is decent enough with most instruments but as is often the case, I find Knowles driver to fall behind expectations. The plasticky edge some dislike from balanced armatures is present in small quantities here. While it sounds like I'm not really enjoying this region, that's not the case at all. I find the midrange to be the Rouge's specialty thanks to the detail, clarity, and overall coherence that makes vocal heavy tracks a joy.
The Rouge's treble regions more or less match the upper mids' emphasis and remain reasonably linear until after 7k where there is a gradually steady drop in emphasis. This works out fairly well in keeping the Rouge extremely detailed and sparkly, though I do feel dropping a few dB in the presence region could go a long way towards reducing ear fatigue at high volumes and over long listening sessions. At safe listening volumes and over listening sessions of a reasonable length, the presentation is pretty relaxed, though not to the extent of some other products I've used recently like the Cat Ear Mia. The Mia makes the Rouge sound almost bright after swapping between the two thanks to emphasis dipping significantly after 4k. General treble quality out of the Rouge is fine with plenty of speed and as noted earlier, lots of detail, I just wish notes were a hint tighter. Mild splash is present which some enjoy since it adds energy and excitement. I think it sounds sloppy and cheapens the experience, preferring something tighter and cleaner. The Rouge finds its presentation between what I find ideal and merely acceptable. Really, I wish they ditched Knowles and went with the unknown brand of drivers used in the Form 1.4
Staging qualities of the Rouge are quite good. Imaging from channel-to-channel is clean and nuanced with no vagueness off centre or otherwise. Instrument separation and track layering is also quite decent, but lacks the dynamicism and enveloping nature of products like the Form 1.4 and Brainwavz B400. The Rouge just doesn't pull me in and surround me with music quite the same way other more layered and better separated products do. Still better than average, but short of best-in-class.
Compared To A Peer (volumes matched with Dayton iMM-6)
BQEYZ Spring 2 (169.00 USD): The Rouge is a more balanced, technical take on Shozy's Form models to my ears with differences that are similar to the Spring II. BQEYZ's offering is warmer and bassier. Sub-bass on the Spring II has more emphasis and mid-bass more punch. The Rouge offers more speed, texture, and better control. Heading into the mids the Rouge is leaner and gives vocals a cooler, more detailed presentation. Timbre out of the Spring II is more natural. Treble on the Spring II is smoother with more upper end sparkle vs. the Rouge which seems to focus more on the presence region. As such I find the Rouge more detailed and less sparkly. In terms of speed and cleanliness of the notes each present, the Spring II gets the nod. The sound stage of the Rouge is wider and deeper with a more evenly rounded appearance. Imaging out of the Rouge is also more nuanced with clean channel-to-channel transitions. I also find it to offer slightly better layering with similarly good instrument separation.
Overall I find the two to be more-or-less equals with each model excelling in different areas. I could pick up either and be perfectly happy, though as an all-rounder the Spring II gets the nod thanks to it's heavier low end.
Shozy Form 1.4 (199.00 USD):When it comes to the low end, I was surprised to hear the Rouge besting the 1.4’s excellent extension and sub-bass presence. It does a great job presenting the lowest notes, although it doesn’t provide the same level of physical feedback as the 1.4. Mid-bass punch is clearly in the 1.4’s camp, inserting warmth into the overall signature that is lacking in the Rouge. Texturing is quite similar, as is overall control and note definition. While measurements show the Rouge to be the bassier of the two, it really doesn’t feel that way when actually listening to them. The more relaxed upper mids and lower treble of the 1.4 result in the perception of the low end standing out more.
The midrange is where the Rouge shines in my opinion. It is a notable step up in terms of vocal presence, clarity, and detail, and the 1.4 was no slouch in these areas. The upper mid bump really helps keep vocalists prominent in every track. I’m sure the word shouty will be tossed around by a certain few individuals, though I do not hear that quality in the Rouge. The general presentation won’t win over everyone though. Compared to the 1.4, the Rouge’s mids are leaner and cooler. Sibilance is kept in check, though the Rouge does toes the lines of acceptable on some of my more aggressive test tracks from Aesop Rock. I also found it to be a touch less timbre accurate, particularly on percussion instruments which end up having a plasticky edge to them not shared by the Form 1.4. I think the brand unknown armatures used in the Form 1.4 have a more natural and realistic presentation, even if the differences are exceptionally minimal.
Treble out of both models is quite relaxed and inoffensive to my ears. The Rouge’s improved clarity and detail can be attributed to the enhanced lower treble presence it displays. Upper treble feels pretty evenly represented with the Rouge giving off a hint more shimmer on chimes and cymbals. Attack and decay on both is similar with the Rouge coming across more aggressive and definitive. Notes sound equally tight and well-controlled. Sound stage on these earphones offers up a similar level of width and depth, but how each goes about it feels quite different. Where the Rouge’s stage is characterized by a leaner sound and more prominent vocals that the rest of the stage emanates from, the 1.4’s low end is the basis for it’s stage. The bass on that model acts like a blanket or wave that everything else seems to build on top of.
When it comes to staging qualities like imaging, layering, and separation, the Form 1.4 has got that special something the Rouge seems to lack. Imaging is similarly smooth with channel-to-channel movements and instruments are slightly better separated on the Rouge thanks to the leaner sound, but the 1.4 has got the layering advantage and ends up feeling more dynamic overall.
Overall I really, really enjoy the sound of the Rouge. It takes most of what I like about the Form series of earphones but dials down the wamrth and bass for improved detail and clarity. Vocals in particular sound amazing, just keep in mind that tracks with plenty of sibilance and a boosted upper midrange will sound quite hot and potentially uncomfortable.
In The Ear The Rouge takes design cues and sizing from the 1.4, with a similar stubby, tubby, rounded shape, and low profile, cable over-ear fitment. There are some notable physical differences though. Gone is the compact metal nozzle. Instead, the one-piece nozzle is more typical of other acrylic-shelled iems. It is fairly short with individual sound tubes for the dynamic and dual armatures. The lip for holding on tips is unfortunately not very effective given it doesn't protrude very far, and is rounded off. No protective cover is present on the end of the nozzle either, allowing you to peer down the larger of the two tubes at the Knowles style filter within. On the rear of the Form models was a vent hole finished with a stylish metal ring. That ring is gone on the Rouge, leaving just a simple vent. The ports for the 2-pin plugs were completely flush with the housing on the Form models, but are now ever so slightly recessed on the Rouge. It looks to be just enough to offer a hint of extra protection from bending, but I'm not planning to test that deliberately. The entirety of the body of each Rouge is hand-painted giving every one a unique look. I only wish there was some variety in colour options, but I can understand why that is not the case.
The cable is kind of old school in a time where everything has gone braided or cloth-coated, or both, and is reminiscent of those used by VSonic during the VSD3-era. The metallic brown sheath isn't sticky, but does show some memory retention and even after having been in use for over a month, retains some of the bends and curls from when it was first removed from it's packaging. Still, I'd rather this than the noisy, fray and tangle prone cables used on the Form models. The hardware is nice too. The metal straight jack is absolutely tiny and should work fine it most any case. Strain relief is on the short side, but is plenty flexible and should offer decent protection from bends and tugs. The y-split and chin cinch are also metal. The sliding motion of the chin cinch is firm, but not so much to be a concern. Once in place, it doesn't move so the implementation of this feature is quite positive overall.
Wearing the Rouge is a pleasant experience. The shells are extremely light. Combine that with a low profile, ergonomic shape that comfortably fills the outer ear without any pressure points or sharp edges, and you've got an earphone that can be worn for extended periods without any fatigue. If I were to find complaint anywhere, it would be with the short, wide nozzles. Those that prefer a deep fitting earphone may have trouble finding tips that extend deep enough, and stay attached. I ended up using Dunu tips for my testing since they sounded basically the same as the stock tips, stayed attached without issue, and provided a consistent seal. Isolation is slightly above average. With no music playing, I can still hear my surroundings but everything is dulled/muffled. With music playing, little to no additional volume is needed to compensate for outside noise.
In The Box The Rouge was not sent with retail packaging but given this models' similarity to the Form 1.1 and 1.4, I would look at reviews of those models to get an idea of what to expect. In fact, feel free to check out my own review of the Form 1.1; https://thecontraptionist.blog/2020/05/06/shozy-form-1-1-fun-is-fun/. With the Rouge you receive the following:
- Rouge earphones
- Semi-hard carrying case
- 0.78mm 2-pin cable
- Single flange silicone tips (s/m/l)
Final Thoughts The Rouge is another outstanding addition to Shozy's already kick @$$ 2020 lineup. I love that the signature is reminiscent of the Form models, but with a shift away from warmth, instead going for clarity and detail with some pretty wicked vocals. I think some would appreciate a slight reduction in upper mid and lower treble emphasis, but that can be addressed reasonably easily with mild EQ or the right tips, something you'll want to swap out of the box because the stock tips are pretty mediocre. The rest of the accessory kit isn't amazing either since you get very little compared to either of the Form models, including the much more affordable 1.1. At least it's well built and very comfortable with gorgeous shells. That said, while the pink colourway is attractive I'd appreciate some options. Purple, red, blue, etc. I can understand why Shozy stuck with just the one colour option though. These beauties are hand-painted and since they went with main brand drivers (Knowles), offering additional colour schemes would likely have driven up the cost and increased overlap within their lineup.
Overall I think the Rouge is one of the better products to come out of the nightmare that was 2020 and a great option for someone looking for this type of signature. Good job Shozy.
Thanks for reading!
- B9
Disclaimer A massive thanks to Lillian with Linsoul Audio for arranging and providing a sample of the Rouge for review. The thoughts within this review are my subjective opinions based on a couple months of regular use. They do not represent Shozy, Linsoul, or any other entity. At the time of writing the Rouge was retailing for 179.00 USD: https://www.linsoul.com/products/shozy-rouge-1
Specifications
- Frequency Response: 20Hz - 20kHz
- Impedance: 32ohms
- Sensitivity: 113dB/mW
- Driver: 1 custom dynamic + 2 Knowles balanced armatures
Some Test Tunes
Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark's Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams
Fleetwood Mac – Rumors
Tobacco – screw*d Up Friends
C
Codename john
I love the shozy 1.1. I always thought it never quite got the credit it deserved. Mainly because many were having orgasms of the Blons 
which I never quite understood 
.
which I never quite understood .
liteon163
I've been casting about, trying to find an upgrade from my Etymotic ER2XR IEMs because I feel their treble is rolled off a bit too aggressively.
The Shozy Rouge eventually came to my attention through HiFiGo and the Crinacle IEM graphing tool. I read around a bit and found quite a few good reviews. I decided to pull the trigger.
I'm glad I gave these a shot, as they're EXACTLY what I was looking for (except for the color scheme, but I can't see them when they're in my ears). The bass is clean and deep, the mids are clear and flow right along with the overall sound signature, and the treble is clear and sharp. I don't hear any sibilance, but maybe I just haven't listened enough.
The cable works well, but is kind of a mess due to its shape retention. That's why I ordered a 99.99% Purity silver replacement cable.
Just be aware they respond better to amplification than simply being driven by a phone.
The Shozy Rouge eventually came to my attention through HiFiGo and the Crinacle IEM graphing tool. I read around a bit and found quite a few good reviews. I decided to pull the trigger.
I'm glad I gave these a shot, as they're EXACTLY what I was looking for (except for the color scheme, but I can't see them when they're in my ears). The bass is clean and deep, the mids are clear and flow right along with the overall sound signature, and the treble is clear and sharp. I don't hear any sibilance, but maybe I just haven't listened enough.
The cable works well, but is kind of a mess due to its shape retention. That's why I ordered a 99.99% Purity silver replacement cable.
Just be aware they respond better to amplification than simply being driven by a phone.
Greetings!
Today we're checking out the Cat Ear's first release, the Mia.
A few months back I was approached by a peer about his new earphone brand and upcoming release, asking if I'd be interested in giving it a listen and writing a review. After being provided with some additional product details that looked promising, I agreed to give it a whirl.
The Mia is a single dynamic earphone with 8mm drivers. The traditional barrel-shaped housing is CNC'd metal with removable cables via MMCX connectors. There is also a simple tuning system in place via removable rubber-o-rings. A lot of major releases in the Chinese Hi-Fi scene this year have danced around that magical 150 USD price point. I was pleased to see Cat Ear taking a more reasonable approach to the Mia's pricing, dropping it onto the market at 99 USD.
How does the Mia do as the brand's freshman release? Let's find out.
What I Hear
Tips: The Mia comes with two sets of tips, only one of which I enjoy using with the product. Starting with the Sony hybrid clones, I'm less enthused. The small bore bloats the midbass and constricts the sound stage which take away from the already minimal treble emphasis. Good tips, but not a great pairing with the Mia. The wide bore tips on the other hand? Those are quite nice. The wide bore helps balance out the bass, brings up the treble, and releases the sound stage.
Tuning Rings: Despite the measurements showing the Mia sounding virtually identical with or without the rings in place, listening says otherwise. Without the rings installed, the sound stage feels wider and deeper, midbass less bloated, and clarity improves across the board. I see no reason to use the rings, save for a slight improvement to passive noise reduction. My testing was done without them.
Treble is rolled off in the brilliance region with focus in the upper ranges being squarely in the presence region. This means the Mia is not particularly sparkly or vibrant. The lower treble peak doesn't really do much to counter the Mia's underwhelming detail and clarity, while leaving instruments presenting as harsh and brittle. This heightens an unnaturalness that pervades throughout the general sound. However, notes are dense and full which is quite nice, and backed by realistic attack and decay qualities.
The midrange is to my ears the most enjoyable aspect of the Mia, though it isn't without some qualms. For the most part it is well presented and retains good presence next to the bass and treble. Vocalists and instruments have a satisfying weight and thickness to them. Unfortunately, at times vocals can sound nasally and somewhat muddy, particularly with male singers, so I tended to stick with instrumental tracks or female vocalists which better suit the Mia. Timbre quality is acceptable, but somewhat unnatural as noted earlier, with sounds having a crispy edge to them.
The low end of the Mia is mainly focused on the mid-bass region thanks to a fairly prominent roll-off further down. This leaves the Mia lacking in visceral feedback with notes that should slam and rumble feeling soft and impact free. The mid-bass focus also highlights minimal texturing. Overly smooth bass can work when you have excellent detail and clarity elsewhere to back it up, such as on the BQEYZ Spring II, but the Mia kinda misses the mark. At least it's quick enough to avoid congestion on all but the fastest or most congested tracks. I'd avoid using the Mia with metal since rapid double-bass tends to meld into one long, wavy note.
With the tuning rings removed, the Mia's sound stage is quite wide and reasonably deep giving it a spaciousness that you might not expect given the lack of upper treble airiness. Imaging is a little vague off centre but picks up in accuracy and nuance the further out you go. Tracks can sound quite layered with individual instruments well separated, until you toss something particularly congested or complicated at the Mia. It just doesn't have the clarity to handle overly busy music leading to muddiness.
Overall I find the Mia to be too safely tuned. While I can certainly enjoy my time listening to music with it, the lack of detail combined with notable rolling off at either end leaves it feeling a bit lifeless. As an earphone to listen with while going about your day it is fine, but for more focused listening it falls flat. It's absolutely competent, but not quite as competitive as I was hoping it would be.
Compared To A Peer
KB EAR Diamond (79.99 USD): KB EAR's single dynamic has a heavier v-shape to it's signature. It has notably more emphasis in the brilliance region giving it a much more lively and energetic feel. That lively feel is backed by a looser, less controlled, splashier sound than what the Mia outputs. The Diamond is lacking in fine detail, just like the Mia, though not to the extent of Cat Ear's offering. I'm not really a fan of the way either presents the treble region. The mids on these two earphones are quite different. The Mia's is warmer, more forward, and thicker, where the Diamond's is leaner, more detailed, and brighter sounding. Sibilance is not an issue with either to my ears. I lean slightly towards the Diamond as my preference thanks to the notable increase in clarity and detail. Bass on the Diamond is significantly less balanced with tons of sub-bass power rumbling away where the Mia trails off. While I find the Mia's mid-bass a bit too prominent, the Diamond takes it completely overboard leaving it basically ever-present regardless of the track. It can be fun at times and works well outdoors, but I'll take the Mia's low end, even if, once again, it falls short to the Diamond on texture and detail. The Diamond's soundstage is tiny, and that is evident pitting it against the Mia. The Diamond images significantly better off centre though, with this advantage dimming the further effects move away. Track layering is quite similar while I'll give the Diamond the nod when it comes to instrument separation.
In terms of build, the Diamond looks and feels quite a bit more premium. The Diamond is significantly heftier with a more complicated contrast filled design thanks to the carbon fibre face plate with gold logo insert, and the large gold-coloured nozzles. Visually it's significantly more eye catching. That carries over to the cable which is twice as thick, more flexible, not that much heavier, and again, looks much more distinct. If I asked someone which they thought was the more premium model, I'd be surprised if they chose the Mia. The Mia is built just as well (and is more comfortable), it's just not as visually distinct. To some that will be a big plus.
While the Diamond is the more visually appealing and technically competent of the two, the extreme mid-bass, tiny sound stage, and splashy treble left me enjoying the Mia more on the same tracks.
Moondrop Starfield (109.00 USD): The Starfield is a benchmark product in my opinion, easily going head-to-head with earphones significantly more expensive. Sooooo, while the Mia was quite competitive with KB EAR's Diamond, I find it falls far shorter than the 10 USD price difference between it and the Starfield would suggest. The Starfield's signature is more balanced with better end-to-end extension, though still pretty tame in the brilliance region. It is more detailed and better textured everywhere with more accurate timbre and better male vocal reproduction. Where they are about even is in note control, and I do find the Mia to sound slightly wider, though not as deep. Imaging, layering, and separation are all less impressive than the Starfield.
When it comes to build, the Mia fares better. While the Starfield is definitely the more eye catching of the two with it's shimmering blue and purple paint job and deep blue cable, it has been plagued with reports of driver failure and the delicate paint chipping to reveal repurposed Kanas housings. I wouldn't expect this to be an issue with the Mia since their earpieces, to my knowledge, are unique to the brand (one of the reasons I was interested in it). And while I love the Starfield's lightweight braided cable, many found it to be somewhat flimsy and not overly confidence inspiring for long term use. The tighter wind of the Mia's cable has me thinking it will be a bit more durable, though the rubbery feel and slight stickiness has me preferring Moondrop's cable.
Overall it should come as no surprise that I prefer the Starfield. Despite it's potential failings, I find the tuning to be more mature and complete with a visual styling that is organic and beautiful. The mere 10 USD price difference further solidifies my preference.
In The Ear The Mia's aluminum shells use a design I haven't seen anywhere else which is refreshing. The more traditional barrel-shaped housing is also a nice change of pace from the low profile, cable-up design that seems to be dominant nowadays. Lots of people seem to prefer a more basic cable-down design which the Mia satisfies. Of course, you can always wear it cable up if you want. Fit and finish is excellent with no misaligned parts or sloppy workmanship, though you might find the protruding MMCX ports to look like they should sit more flush with the body of the housing. Their placement is intentional since they hide a vent that is covered by the tuning rings when installed, and hold the rings in place. The metal nozzle grill is neatly applied. The L/R markings located under the body of each earpiece, directly in front of the MMCX port, feel like they're laser etched in place so you won't have to worry about them wearing off.
Going back to the tuning rings, I suspect they will be fragile in the long term since one was already snapped out of the box. I would like to see Cat Ear redesign this system. Maybe swap to a more traditional removable nozzle filter, or it they want to stay unique maybe try designing a twistable metal or plastic collar where the rubber ring would normally sit. Could even try a variable vent design similar to what Accutone did with the Taurus. Or they could ditch the tuning system entirely since the Mia sounds better, in my opinion, without the rings installed.
Cat Ear put a lot of emphasis on their cable which, like every other aspect of the product, has gone through cryogenic treatment at -196 degrees. Why is that important? Not a clue, but it sounds cool. The cable itself utilizes a familiar four strand wind similar to what we've seen from TFZ Secret Garden HD. While a bit more rubbery and slightly sticky than I'd prefer, it's far from the bouncy, sticky, Flubber-like mess that was TFZ's attempt. The hardware used is something I really like about this cable. The MMCX plugs are metal and very compact. The metal y-split is also quite compact with just hint of strain relief entering the bottom. There is no strain relief leading out the top since Cat Ear opted to install a metal chin cinch, a handy feature that is often absent (such as on the Starfield's cable). The straight plug is also fairly compact with fine knurling for grip and a small, stiff strain relief that, if we're being honest here, probably won't do much to protect the cable from major bends or tugs. While I quite enjoy actually using the cable, this style has fallen out of favour for the fancier, more flamboyant cables included with products like FiiO's FD1 and TinHiFi T3.
Pending you are using tips that seal properly, the Mia slots in place securely and does little to announce it's presence. I can wear these cable up or down for hours at a time. The only time I experienced discomfort was when wearing them cable down for a few hours. The length of the earpieces means they dip down at the end and put just a hint more pressure on the top of the ear canal. Eventually that turned into a bit of a hot spot. Taking a quick break helped, as did looping the cable up and around my ear which improved weight distribution. Isolation on the Mia is pretty average with the tuning rings in place, and slightly worse with them removed. However, once music was playing the amount of passive noise reduction provided was perfectly serviceable in moderately loud locations. You'll likely need to up the volume in noisy areas though, or better yet, switch to foam tips.
In The Box The Mia comes in a fairly large black and red themed lift-top box. On the front is the usual branding and model info with the face of a cat lurking in the background, seemingly ready to pounce on unsuspecting passerbys. Flipping to the back you find a list of specs, features and measurements, along with location and contact information for the brand. Lifting the lid revels the earphones and cable nestled within and around a dense, dual-layer foam pad. Beneath lies another cardboard box within which are all the accessories. In all you get:
Final Thoughts The Mia is a good starting point for the Cat Ear brand. While it hasn't completely won me over and is probably priced just a little higher than it should be, there are plenty of aspects I like. The housings look nice and are comfortable, the cable isn't flashy but in use is pleasant, and the easy going sound is great for long term listening sessions. Where the Mia stumbles for me is in the general lack of detail and texture it provides. This combined with a lack of upper treble energy and rolled off bass leaves it sounding somewhat uninvolved. Someone looking for a truly relaxed sound will probably be a lot more happy with the Mia than myself given my preferences usually lean towards thinner, brighter sounding products. The tuning ring design was also a cool idea, but in practice feels more gimmicky than practical and could use a redesign.
Overall I like the Mia and while it could use some fine tuning, it has me excited to see where the brand goes from here.
Thanks for reading!
- B9
Disclaimer A big thanks to Steve at Cat Ear for reaching out to see if I would be interested in covering the Mia, and for arranging a sample. The thoughts within this review are my subjective impressions and do not represent Cat Ear or any other entity. At the time of writing the Mia was retailing for 99 USD and could be picked up through various online retailers; https://www.catearaudio.com/product/mia
Specifications
Some Test Tunes
Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark's Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams
Fleetwood Mac – Rumors
Tobacco – screw*d Up Friends
Today we're checking out the Cat Ear's first release, the Mia.
A few months back I was approached by a peer about his new earphone brand and upcoming release, asking if I'd be interested in giving it a listen and writing a review. After being provided with some additional product details that looked promising, I agreed to give it a whirl.
The Mia is a single dynamic earphone with 8mm drivers. The traditional barrel-shaped housing is CNC'd metal with removable cables via MMCX connectors. There is also a simple tuning system in place via removable rubber-o-rings. A lot of major releases in the Chinese Hi-Fi scene this year have danced around that magical 150 USD price point. I was pleased to see Cat Ear taking a more reasonable approach to the Mia's pricing, dropping it onto the market at 99 USD.
How does the Mia do as the brand's freshman release? Let's find out.
What I Hear
Tips: The Mia comes with two sets of tips, only one of which I enjoy using with the product. Starting with the Sony hybrid clones, I'm less enthused. The small bore bloats the midbass and constricts the sound stage which take away from the already minimal treble emphasis. Good tips, but not a great pairing with the Mia. The wide bore tips on the other hand? Those are quite nice. The wide bore helps balance out the bass, brings up the treble, and releases the sound stage.
Tuning Rings: Despite the measurements showing the Mia sounding virtually identical with or without the rings in place, listening says otherwise. Without the rings installed, the sound stage feels wider and deeper, midbass less bloated, and clarity improves across the board. I see no reason to use the rings, save for a slight improvement to passive noise reduction. My testing was done without them.
Treble is rolled off in the brilliance region with focus in the upper ranges being squarely in the presence region. This means the Mia is not particularly sparkly or vibrant. The lower treble peak doesn't really do much to counter the Mia's underwhelming detail and clarity, while leaving instruments presenting as harsh and brittle. This heightens an unnaturalness that pervades throughout the general sound. However, notes are dense and full which is quite nice, and backed by realistic attack and decay qualities.
The midrange is to my ears the most enjoyable aspect of the Mia, though it isn't without some qualms. For the most part it is well presented and retains good presence next to the bass and treble. Vocalists and instruments have a satisfying weight and thickness to them. Unfortunately, at times vocals can sound nasally and somewhat muddy, particularly with male singers, so I tended to stick with instrumental tracks or female vocalists which better suit the Mia. Timbre quality is acceptable, but somewhat unnatural as noted earlier, with sounds having a crispy edge to them.
The low end of the Mia is mainly focused on the mid-bass region thanks to a fairly prominent roll-off further down. This leaves the Mia lacking in visceral feedback with notes that should slam and rumble feeling soft and impact free. The mid-bass focus also highlights minimal texturing. Overly smooth bass can work when you have excellent detail and clarity elsewhere to back it up, such as on the BQEYZ Spring II, but the Mia kinda misses the mark. At least it's quick enough to avoid congestion on all but the fastest or most congested tracks. I'd avoid using the Mia with metal since rapid double-bass tends to meld into one long, wavy note.
With the tuning rings removed, the Mia's sound stage is quite wide and reasonably deep giving it a spaciousness that you might not expect given the lack of upper treble airiness. Imaging is a little vague off centre but picks up in accuracy and nuance the further out you go. Tracks can sound quite layered with individual instruments well separated, until you toss something particularly congested or complicated at the Mia. It just doesn't have the clarity to handle overly busy music leading to muddiness.
Overall I find the Mia to be too safely tuned. While I can certainly enjoy my time listening to music with it, the lack of detail combined with notable rolling off at either end leaves it feeling a bit lifeless. As an earphone to listen with while going about your day it is fine, but for more focused listening it falls flat. It's absolutely competent, but not quite as competitive as I was hoping it would be.
Compared To A Peer
KB EAR Diamond (79.99 USD): KB EAR's single dynamic has a heavier v-shape to it's signature. It has notably more emphasis in the brilliance region giving it a much more lively and energetic feel. That lively feel is backed by a looser, less controlled, splashier sound than what the Mia outputs. The Diamond is lacking in fine detail, just like the Mia, though not to the extent of Cat Ear's offering. I'm not really a fan of the way either presents the treble region. The mids on these two earphones are quite different. The Mia's is warmer, more forward, and thicker, where the Diamond's is leaner, more detailed, and brighter sounding. Sibilance is not an issue with either to my ears. I lean slightly towards the Diamond as my preference thanks to the notable increase in clarity and detail. Bass on the Diamond is significantly less balanced with tons of sub-bass power rumbling away where the Mia trails off. While I find the Mia's mid-bass a bit too prominent, the Diamond takes it completely overboard leaving it basically ever-present regardless of the track. It can be fun at times and works well outdoors, but I'll take the Mia's low end, even if, once again, it falls short to the Diamond on texture and detail. The Diamond's soundstage is tiny, and that is evident pitting it against the Mia. The Diamond images significantly better off centre though, with this advantage dimming the further effects move away. Track layering is quite similar while I'll give the Diamond the nod when it comes to instrument separation.
In terms of build, the Diamond looks and feels quite a bit more premium. The Diamond is significantly heftier with a more complicated contrast filled design thanks to the carbon fibre face plate with gold logo insert, and the large gold-coloured nozzles. Visually it's significantly more eye catching. That carries over to the cable which is twice as thick, more flexible, not that much heavier, and again, looks much more distinct. If I asked someone which they thought was the more premium model, I'd be surprised if they chose the Mia. The Mia is built just as well (and is more comfortable), it's just not as visually distinct. To some that will be a big plus.
While the Diamond is the more visually appealing and technically competent of the two, the extreme mid-bass, tiny sound stage, and splashy treble left me enjoying the Mia more on the same tracks.
Moondrop Starfield (109.00 USD): The Starfield is a benchmark product in my opinion, easily going head-to-head with earphones significantly more expensive. Sooooo, while the Mia was quite competitive with KB EAR's Diamond, I find it falls far shorter than the 10 USD price difference between it and the Starfield would suggest. The Starfield's signature is more balanced with better end-to-end extension, though still pretty tame in the brilliance region. It is more detailed and better textured everywhere with more accurate timbre and better male vocal reproduction. Where they are about even is in note control, and I do find the Mia to sound slightly wider, though not as deep. Imaging, layering, and separation are all less impressive than the Starfield.
When it comes to build, the Mia fares better. While the Starfield is definitely the more eye catching of the two with it's shimmering blue and purple paint job and deep blue cable, it has been plagued with reports of driver failure and the delicate paint chipping to reveal repurposed Kanas housings. I wouldn't expect this to be an issue with the Mia since their earpieces, to my knowledge, are unique to the brand (one of the reasons I was interested in it). And while I love the Starfield's lightweight braided cable, many found it to be somewhat flimsy and not overly confidence inspiring for long term use. The tighter wind of the Mia's cable has me thinking it will be a bit more durable, though the rubbery feel and slight stickiness has me preferring Moondrop's cable.
Overall it should come as no surprise that I prefer the Starfield. Despite it's potential failings, I find the tuning to be more mature and complete with a visual styling that is organic and beautiful. The mere 10 USD price difference further solidifies my preference.
In The Ear The Mia's aluminum shells use a design I haven't seen anywhere else which is refreshing. The more traditional barrel-shaped housing is also a nice change of pace from the low profile, cable-up design that seems to be dominant nowadays. Lots of people seem to prefer a more basic cable-down design which the Mia satisfies. Of course, you can always wear it cable up if you want. Fit and finish is excellent with no misaligned parts or sloppy workmanship, though you might find the protruding MMCX ports to look like they should sit more flush with the body of the housing. Their placement is intentional since they hide a vent that is covered by the tuning rings when installed, and hold the rings in place. The metal nozzle grill is neatly applied. The L/R markings located under the body of each earpiece, directly in front of the MMCX port, feel like they're laser etched in place so you won't have to worry about them wearing off.
Going back to the tuning rings, I suspect they will be fragile in the long term since one was already snapped out of the box. I would like to see Cat Ear redesign this system. Maybe swap to a more traditional removable nozzle filter, or it they want to stay unique maybe try designing a twistable metal or plastic collar where the rubber ring would normally sit. Could even try a variable vent design similar to what Accutone did with the Taurus. Or they could ditch the tuning system entirely since the Mia sounds better, in my opinion, without the rings installed.
Cat Ear put a lot of emphasis on their cable which, like every other aspect of the product, has gone through cryogenic treatment at -196 degrees. Why is that important? Not a clue, but it sounds cool. The cable itself utilizes a familiar four strand wind similar to what we've seen from TFZ Secret Garden HD. While a bit more rubbery and slightly sticky than I'd prefer, it's far from the bouncy, sticky, Flubber-like mess that was TFZ's attempt. The hardware used is something I really like about this cable. The MMCX plugs are metal and very compact. The metal y-split is also quite compact with just hint of strain relief entering the bottom. There is no strain relief leading out the top since Cat Ear opted to install a metal chin cinch, a handy feature that is often absent (such as on the Starfield's cable). The straight plug is also fairly compact with fine knurling for grip and a small, stiff strain relief that, if we're being honest here, probably won't do much to protect the cable from major bends or tugs. While I quite enjoy actually using the cable, this style has fallen out of favour for the fancier, more flamboyant cables included with products like FiiO's FD1 and TinHiFi T3.
Pending you are using tips that seal properly, the Mia slots in place securely and does little to announce it's presence. I can wear these cable up or down for hours at a time. The only time I experienced discomfort was when wearing them cable down for a few hours. The length of the earpieces means they dip down at the end and put just a hint more pressure on the top of the ear canal. Eventually that turned into a bit of a hot spot. Taking a quick break helped, as did looping the cable up and around my ear which improved weight distribution. Isolation on the Mia is pretty average with the tuning rings in place, and slightly worse with them removed. However, once music was playing the amount of passive noise reduction provided was perfectly serviceable in moderately loud locations. You'll likely need to up the volume in noisy areas though, or better yet, switch to foam tips.
In The Box The Mia comes in a fairly large black and red themed lift-top box. On the front is the usual branding and model info with the face of a cat lurking in the background, seemingly ready to pounce on unsuspecting passerbys. Flipping to the back you find a list of specs, features and measurements, along with location and contact information for the brand. Lifting the lid revels the earphones and cable nestled within and around a dense, dual-layer foam pad. Beneath lies another cardboard box within which are all the accessories. In all you get:
- Mia earphones
- MMCX cable
- Black Sony-hybrid style tips (s/m/l)
- Pink single flange wide-bore tips
- Half-moon shaped carrying case
- 1x pair of spare o-rings
Final Thoughts The Mia is a good starting point for the Cat Ear brand. While it hasn't completely won me over and is probably priced just a little higher than it should be, there are plenty of aspects I like. The housings look nice and are comfortable, the cable isn't flashy but in use is pleasant, and the easy going sound is great for long term listening sessions. Where the Mia stumbles for me is in the general lack of detail and texture it provides. This combined with a lack of upper treble energy and rolled off bass leaves it sounding somewhat uninvolved. Someone looking for a truly relaxed sound will probably be a lot more happy with the Mia than myself given my preferences usually lean towards thinner, brighter sounding products. The tuning ring design was also a cool idea, but in practice feels more gimmicky than practical and could use a redesign.
Overall I like the Mia and while it could use some fine tuning, it has me excited to see where the brand goes from here.
Thanks for reading!
- B9
Disclaimer A big thanks to Steve at Cat Ear for reaching out to see if I would be interested in covering the Mia, and for arranging a sample. The thoughts within this review are my subjective impressions and do not represent Cat Ear or any other entity. At the time of writing the Mia was retailing for 99 USD and could be picked up through various online retailers; https://www.catearaudio.com/product/mia
Specifications
- Driver: 8mm dynamic
- Impedance: 16ohms
- Sensitivity: 105dB/mW
- Cable: Silver-plated OFC with MMCX
Some Test Tunes
Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark's Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams
Fleetwood Mac – Rumors
Tobacco – screw*d Up Friends
C
Codename john
Funny you said that about QC issues with the Starfields drivers. The left ear went in mine for a couple of days then returned to normality out of the blue . Very strange ! Never had that happen to me before.
. Very strange ! Never had that happen to me before.
B9Scrambler
@Codename john Mine have been fine but I've seen a few complaints in various forums. Suspect any QC issues are the minority since it sounds like Moondrop sold a butt ton of the Starfield and concerns seem to be few and far between. Bummer when it happens to anyone though. Glad yours recovered!
C
Codename john
Indeed. Great review as usual bro 
Greetings!
Today we're checking out the Sparrow from EarMen, a new USB dongle-DAC.
EarMen clearly has a sense of humour, and it shows in the clever naming of their products. With models like the Donald Dac and TR-Amp in their lineup drawing a chuckle, it is no surprise that the Sparrow is a jab at a popular series of DragonFly DACs from AudioQuest. Sparrows are known to snack on the occasional dragonfly which for most avian species is notoriously wily and difficult to catch thanks to their speed and uncanny agility. The attention of consumers is much the same when there are piles of similar products on the market.
The Sparrow has been with me for five months now and has powered everything from budget friendly earphones like the KZ EDX and Moondrop SSR to full-sized planar and closed back headphones like the HiFiMAN Deva and Campfire Audio Cascade. Did it do a good job of it? Let's find out.
Packaging and Accessories The Sparrow arrives in a surprisingly large, flat box with a mostly smooth, matte black texture. On the front is the usual branding and model info, along with a glossy, embossed image of the Sparrow set between wire frame images of the front and rear panels. What's neat about these images is they are 1:1 and accurately reflect the Sparrow's compact dimension. Flipping to the rear are some basic specifications along with logos for PCM, Hi-Res Audio, DXD, DSD, and MQA.
Cutting the QA seals and lifting the slender top flap reveals a sheet of soft foam taking up the entirely of the interior. Set within shaped inserts are the Sparrow and two cables; USB Type A to C, and USB Type C to C. Also inside is a warranty card and a much more in depth specifications sheet.
Overall a very simple but effective unboxing experience. I appreciate that EarMen included a Type C to C cable in the box, as that has been a main criticism of mine as of late for a couple other products that fill a similar niche, such as the Radsone Earstudio HUD100 and EarMen's own TR-Amp, although the latter is notably less portable than the Sparrow or HUD100.
Build Quality Initial images of the Sparrow had me thinking it would be a compact, plastic affair, but wow was I ever surprised once it showed up. A lot like the FiiO BTR3K, the Sparrow takes cues from modern smartphone design with front and rear glass panels and a painted black aluminum surround. It feels amazing in the hand for such a small device, with a weight and density I would attribute to something larger and more visually substantial.
On top top end of the device is a USB type-C input, while the opposite end housing the standard 3.5mm output, along with a balanced 2.5mm output. The type-C and 3.5mm ports are neatly integrated, while the 2.5mm port is flattened along the top and bottom, shaving off some of the plastic surround. It doesn't effect anything and I haven't experienced any issues with durability, it just looks odd given they didn't do the same thing with the larger 3.5mm port.
The front glass panel houses the EarMen logo, brand name, and model information. The brand and model names are decked in a reflective silver that looks better in person than in pics, while the logo is a soft white. Flipping to the rear panel you find the MQA logo, model and brand names, again in that sexy reflective silver. A small Hi-Res Audio logo sits dead centre. Further adding to the premium feel of the Sparrow is that all of this branding/writing is under the glass panels, ensuring they won't wear off over time.
A neat touch that went unnoticed until the device had powered up was the EarMen logo doubling as an LED. It indicates a number of things; white means the device is connected, with red indicating the opposite. Green says you're using PCM, DXD, or DSD audio formats, while Magenta indicates MQA is in use. The colour indicators are more limited than some of the competition, such as the aforementioned BTR3K and Earstudio HUD100, both of which indicate 5 or more formats with various colours. I never refer to this feature, but if you're one who does, you might be underwhelmed by the lack of precision in format indication.
Overall, the Sparrow looks classy and feels excellent in the hand. The build quality is fantastic, but I would like to see either EarMen or a third part like DDHiFi develop a case for it because glass is glass, and glass breaks when dropped. The Sparrow lacks a plastic insulating layer between the aluminum frame and glass panels. If it somehow finds its way from your pocket to the ground the shock will transmit straight through to the glass, increasing the likelihood of cracks or chipping. It's such a good looking device, I would hate to see that happen to anyone.
Sound Quality and Device Pairing The Sparrow utilizes the Sabre ES9281Pro, a flagship in their ESS lineup of DACs. As I explained in my TR-Amp review, I’m casual scum when it comes to explaining and/or understanding the tech behind DACs and amps. As such, EarMen can take over in describing why the above matters. This next bit has been borrowed from the Sparrow’s product page.
“Sparrow is powered by ES9281PRO, the flagship of the ESS line, which can provide best-in-class audio performance at 124 dB DNR and -112 Total Harmonic Distortion plus Noise (THD+N). The ES9281PRO is the first USB product that offers an integrated hardware MQA (Master Quality Authenticated) renderer that makes MQA playback easy and cost-efficient. The encoding process folds extra information into the signal that can be recovered later. The ES9281PRO automatically detects the MQA stream and engage the rendering. The entire process requires no additional design work.”
That out of the way, what I've found is the Sparrow follows the experience I had with the TR-Amp. Through both the 3.5mm single-ended output and 2.5mm balanced output, the sound of the Sparrow is extremely clean. The 2019 Campfire Audio Solaris and original Polaris are some of the pickiest products I've come across, revealing noise from the vast majority of sources I've tested. Even through balanced out on the Sparrow, the background is dead silent and hiss free. Impressively, the Sparrow bests the Radsone Earstudio HUD100. While the HUD100 is dead silent through its standard output, the high output option introduces a hint of background hiss on sensitive earphones like the aforementioned Campfire Audio gear. Compared to another similarly sized DAC/Amp, the Periodic Audio Nickel, there is no comparison. The Sparrow is significantly cleaner sounding, most especially with sensitive gear that is basically unusable with the Nickel.
Also impressive is the Sparrows ability to drive headphones of various requirements. We already know it handles extremely sensitive stuff with ease, but what about something a bit more challenging? Well, HiFiMAN's affordable orthodynamics, the Sundara and DEVA, are easily brought up to volume with plenty of headroom and no distortion. Same with the notably more demanding Alara from Brainwavz. When listening to the demanding Astrotec Phoenix, the Sparrow's basic 3.5mm output produces more volume than the Radsone HUD100 and its high output port under the same settings. When comparing the Periodic Audio Nickel to the Sparrow, I was expecting the Nickel to be the better of thw two in terms of raw volume output but that's simply not the case. What about the ridiculous HiFiMAN Susvara, a device that makes full-size desktop amps weep? Like the HUD100 and to a lesser extent, the Nickel, the Sparrow can run it though it understandably isn't ideal. The sound produced lacks the nuanced dynamics and soundstage the Susvara is capable off. I suspect the two would work better together if I had an appropriate cable to use the Susvara through the more powerful balanced out. Still, the Sparrow isn't being knocked for this. Expecting such a small DAC intended for use with portable devices to run a full-sized flagship planar is absurd and completely unreasonable. What is impressive is that the Sparrow will do it as well as it does, while still running extremely sensitive products with a perfectly clean background.
When it comes to sound quality the Sparrow continues to follow in the footsteps of the TR-Amp with a coloured signature that adds warmth and low end to the presentation. That said, it's not an overbearing amount of heat or bass leaving it fine to just pair with products that already have these qualities in aplomb, such as the new Vega 2020 from Campfire Audio. Adding to those qualities does not leave it lacking in upper end air or emphasis either, meaning it still pairs well with bright earphones like the ADV GT3. For a portable device this tune is ideal since bass is the first thing to lose impact when outside of the home in a noisy environment, where ever that may be for those of us in Covid-current environments. Extension deep into sub-bass regions or well into the brilliance region is excellent with no roll off that I can detect. The Astrotec Phoenix provides the deep, physical rumble I expect, while the soaring highs of EarNiNE's EN2J are there in full force. Notes are presentation pretty much the same as I felt with the TR-Amp. Everything is quick and snappy and as a result I never found anything to be held back in those regards when paired with the Sparrow. Where I found the TR-Amp to slightly compress the sound stage, no such flaw can be heard in the Sparrow. The Campfire Audio Andromeda sounds just as open and spacious here as it does through my TEAC HA-501 desktop amp (but without the background hiss) and other products like the ZiShan DSD or FiiO BTR3K. It also does a good job of displaying the imaging, instrument separation, and layering qualities already inherent to anything you plug into it. The Brainwavz B400 can still envelope me in a busy track without congestion, just as the original Campfire Audio Polaris' wall-of-sound is retained. Flaws already inherent to the staging qualities of your headphone or earphone will still be present, but nothing new will be added
When listening to it next to some competition, the Sparrow comes out on top. I wasn't expecting to find another portable DAC I liked as much, or more, than Radsone's HUD100 this year, but the Sparrow comes out on top in terms of sound quality. While they are both tuned very similarly, particularly when you start using the tuning switch on the HUD100, the Sparrow has better micro detail and a more dynamic feel to it thanks to more apparent depth and height to it's extremes. This along with a more rapid feel to notes when they hit and decay, it just sounds like a more lively, crisp version of the sound offered up by the HUD100. Pitting it against the Periodic Audio Nickel, a device that pretty much stays glued to my Shanling M0, shows just how hard hitting the 199 USD Sparrow is. At 299 USD, the Nickel is completely shamed when it comes to build quality, but more importantly, can't really hold up to the Sparrow when it comes to sound. In the Nickel's favour it does present itself with a more balanced, less warm signature. It also provides a hint more space and seems to image slightly better. These positives come at the expense of the smooth, natural sound provided by the Sparrow. The Nickel adds a harsh, almost metallic edge to some products and as a result it lacks the pairing versatility of EarMen's smaller, more feature rich and affordable option. My M0 might have a new best friend...
Final Thoughts The last five months with the Sparrow have been an absolute joy. The small size and outstanding build quality as well as the powerful output via both single-ended and balanced outputs have made it a near perfect companion to use at all times. Whether I'm at work on my laptop or desktop, typing up a review or answering emails from a client, lying back in my recliner for some rare casual listening time, out for an evening walk, or analyzing a product for my next review, the Sparrow has integrated itself seamlessly into whatever task I need it for. This little device is outstanding, and well worth the attention of anyone in the market for a compact type-C DAC/Amp/Pre-Amp.
Thanks for reading!
- B9
Disclaimer A huge thanks to Miroslav for reaching out to see if I'd be interested in reviewing the Sparrow and for arranging a sample for the purposes of this review. The thoughts within this review are my own subjective opinions based on five months of regular use. They do not represent EarMen or any other entity. Please note that the first sample provided was dead on arrival and was replaced by EarMen. Hopefully they were able to determine why as it was returned for examination. At the time of writing the Sparrow was retailing for 199.00 USD. You can check it out here: https://earmen-shop.com/products/sparrow
Today we're checking out the Sparrow from EarMen, a new USB dongle-DAC.
EarMen clearly has a sense of humour, and it shows in the clever naming of their products. With models like the Donald Dac and TR-Amp in their lineup drawing a chuckle, it is no surprise that the Sparrow is a jab at a popular series of DragonFly DACs from AudioQuest. Sparrows are known to snack on the occasional dragonfly which for most avian species is notoriously wily and difficult to catch thanks to their speed and uncanny agility. The attention of consumers is much the same when there are piles of similar products on the market.
The Sparrow has been with me for five months now and has powered everything from budget friendly earphones like the KZ EDX and Moondrop SSR to full-sized planar and closed back headphones like the HiFiMAN Deva and Campfire Audio Cascade. Did it do a good job of it? Let's find out.
Packaging and Accessories The Sparrow arrives in a surprisingly large, flat box with a mostly smooth, matte black texture. On the front is the usual branding and model info, along with a glossy, embossed image of the Sparrow set between wire frame images of the front and rear panels. What's neat about these images is they are 1:1 and accurately reflect the Sparrow's compact dimension. Flipping to the rear are some basic specifications along with logos for PCM, Hi-Res Audio, DXD, DSD, and MQA.
Cutting the QA seals and lifting the slender top flap reveals a sheet of soft foam taking up the entirely of the interior. Set within shaped inserts are the Sparrow and two cables; USB Type A to C, and USB Type C to C. Also inside is a warranty card and a much more in depth specifications sheet.
Overall a very simple but effective unboxing experience. I appreciate that EarMen included a Type C to C cable in the box, as that has been a main criticism of mine as of late for a couple other products that fill a similar niche, such as the Radsone Earstudio HUD100 and EarMen's own TR-Amp, although the latter is notably less portable than the Sparrow or HUD100.
Build Quality Initial images of the Sparrow had me thinking it would be a compact, plastic affair, but wow was I ever surprised once it showed up. A lot like the FiiO BTR3K, the Sparrow takes cues from modern smartphone design with front and rear glass panels and a painted black aluminum surround. It feels amazing in the hand for such a small device, with a weight and density I would attribute to something larger and more visually substantial.
On top top end of the device is a USB type-C input, while the opposite end housing the standard 3.5mm output, along with a balanced 2.5mm output. The type-C and 3.5mm ports are neatly integrated, while the 2.5mm port is flattened along the top and bottom, shaving off some of the plastic surround. It doesn't effect anything and I haven't experienced any issues with durability, it just looks odd given they didn't do the same thing with the larger 3.5mm port.
The front glass panel houses the EarMen logo, brand name, and model information. The brand and model names are decked in a reflective silver that looks better in person than in pics, while the logo is a soft white. Flipping to the rear panel you find the MQA logo, model and brand names, again in that sexy reflective silver. A small Hi-Res Audio logo sits dead centre. Further adding to the premium feel of the Sparrow is that all of this branding/writing is under the glass panels, ensuring they won't wear off over time.
A neat touch that went unnoticed until the device had powered up was the EarMen logo doubling as an LED. It indicates a number of things; white means the device is connected, with red indicating the opposite. Green says you're using PCM, DXD, or DSD audio formats, while Magenta indicates MQA is in use. The colour indicators are more limited than some of the competition, such as the aforementioned BTR3K and Earstudio HUD100, both of which indicate 5 or more formats with various colours. I never refer to this feature, but if you're one who does, you might be underwhelmed by the lack of precision in format indication.
Overall, the Sparrow looks classy and feels excellent in the hand. The build quality is fantastic, but I would like to see either EarMen or a third part like DDHiFi develop a case for it because glass is glass, and glass breaks when dropped. The Sparrow lacks a plastic insulating layer between the aluminum frame and glass panels. If it somehow finds its way from your pocket to the ground the shock will transmit straight through to the glass, increasing the likelihood of cracks or chipping. It's such a good looking device, I would hate to see that happen to anyone.
Sound Quality and Device Pairing The Sparrow utilizes the Sabre ES9281Pro, a flagship in their ESS lineup of DACs. As I explained in my TR-Amp review, I’m casual scum when it comes to explaining and/or understanding the tech behind DACs and amps. As such, EarMen can take over in describing why the above matters. This next bit has been borrowed from the Sparrow’s product page.
“Sparrow is powered by ES9281PRO, the flagship of the ESS line, which can provide best-in-class audio performance at 124 dB DNR and -112 Total Harmonic Distortion plus Noise (THD+N). The ES9281PRO is the first USB product that offers an integrated hardware MQA (Master Quality Authenticated) renderer that makes MQA playback easy and cost-efficient. The encoding process folds extra information into the signal that can be recovered later. The ES9281PRO automatically detects the MQA stream and engage the rendering. The entire process requires no additional design work.”
That out of the way, what I've found is the Sparrow follows the experience I had with the TR-Amp. Through both the 3.5mm single-ended output and 2.5mm balanced output, the sound of the Sparrow is extremely clean. The 2019 Campfire Audio Solaris and original Polaris are some of the pickiest products I've come across, revealing noise from the vast majority of sources I've tested. Even through balanced out on the Sparrow, the background is dead silent and hiss free. Impressively, the Sparrow bests the Radsone Earstudio HUD100. While the HUD100 is dead silent through its standard output, the high output option introduces a hint of background hiss on sensitive earphones like the aforementioned Campfire Audio gear. Compared to another similarly sized DAC/Amp, the Periodic Audio Nickel, there is no comparison. The Sparrow is significantly cleaner sounding, most especially with sensitive gear that is basically unusable with the Nickel.
Also impressive is the Sparrows ability to drive headphones of various requirements. We already know it handles extremely sensitive stuff with ease, but what about something a bit more challenging? Well, HiFiMAN's affordable orthodynamics, the Sundara and DEVA, are easily brought up to volume with plenty of headroom and no distortion. Same with the notably more demanding Alara from Brainwavz. When listening to the demanding Astrotec Phoenix, the Sparrow's basic 3.5mm output produces more volume than the Radsone HUD100 and its high output port under the same settings. When comparing the Periodic Audio Nickel to the Sparrow, I was expecting the Nickel to be the better of thw two in terms of raw volume output but that's simply not the case. What about the ridiculous HiFiMAN Susvara, a device that makes full-size desktop amps weep? Like the HUD100 and to a lesser extent, the Nickel, the Sparrow can run it though it understandably isn't ideal. The sound produced lacks the nuanced dynamics and soundstage the Susvara is capable off. I suspect the two would work better together if I had an appropriate cable to use the Susvara through the more powerful balanced out. Still, the Sparrow isn't being knocked for this. Expecting such a small DAC intended for use with portable devices to run a full-sized flagship planar is absurd and completely unreasonable. What is impressive is that the Sparrow will do it as well as it does, while still running extremely sensitive products with a perfectly clean background.
When it comes to sound quality the Sparrow continues to follow in the footsteps of the TR-Amp with a coloured signature that adds warmth and low end to the presentation. That said, it's not an overbearing amount of heat or bass leaving it fine to just pair with products that already have these qualities in aplomb, such as the new Vega 2020 from Campfire Audio. Adding to those qualities does not leave it lacking in upper end air or emphasis either, meaning it still pairs well with bright earphones like the ADV GT3. For a portable device this tune is ideal since bass is the first thing to lose impact when outside of the home in a noisy environment, where ever that may be for those of us in Covid-current environments. Extension deep into sub-bass regions or well into the brilliance region is excellent with no roll off that I can detect. The Astrotec Phoenix provides the deep, physical rumble I expect, while the soaring highs of EarNiNE's EN2J are there in full force. Notes are presentation pretty much the same as I felt with the TR-Amp. Everything is quick and snappy and as a result I never found anything to be held back in those regards when paired with the Sparrow. Where I found the TR-Amp to slightly compress the sound stage, no such flaw can be heard in the Sparrow. The Campfire Audio Andromeda sounds just as open and spacious here as it does through my TEAC HA-501 desktop amp (but without the background hiss) and other products like the ZiShan DSD or FiiO BTR3K. It also does a good job of displaying the imaging, instrument separation, and layering qualities already inherent to anything you plug into it. The Brainwavz B400 can still envelope me in a busy track without congestion, just as the original Campfire Audio Polaris' wall-of-sound is retained. Flaws already inherent to the staging qualities of your headphone or earphone will still be present, but nothing new will be added
When listening to it next to some competition, the Sparrow comes out on top. I wasn't expecting to find another portable DAC I liked as much, or more, than Radsone's HUD100 this year, but the Sparrow comes out on top in terms of sound quality. While they are both tuned very similarly, particularly when you start using the tuning switch on the HUD100, the Sparrow has better micro detail and a more dynamic feel to it thanks to more apparent depth and height to it's extremes. This along with a more rapid feel to notes when they hit and decay, it just sounds like a more lively, crisp version of the sound offered up by the HUD100. Pitting it against the Periodic Audio Nickel, a device that pretty much stays glued to my Shanling M0, shows just how hard hitting the 199 USD Sparrow is. At 299 USD, the Nickel is completely shamed when it comes to build quality, but more importantly, can't really hold up to the Sparrow when it comes to sound. In the Nickel's favour it does present itself with a more balanced, less warm signature. It also provides a hint more space and seems to image slightly better. These positives come at the expense of the smooth, natural sound provided by the Sparrow. The Nickel adds a harsh, almost metallic edge to some products and as a result it lacks the pairing versatility of EarMen's smaller, more feature rich and affordable option. My M0 might have a new best friend...
Final Thoughts The last five months with the Sparrow have been an absolute joy. The small size and outstanding build quality as well as the powerful output via both single-ended and balanced outputs have made it a near perfect companion to use at all times. Whether I'm at work on my laptop or desktop, typing up a review or answering emails from a client, lying back in my recliner for some rare casual listening time, out for an evening walk, or analyzing a product for my next review, the Sparrow has integrated itself seamlessly into whatever task I need it for. This little device is outstanding, and well worth the attention of anyone in the market for a compact type-C DAC/Amp/Pre-Amp.
Thanks for reading!
- B9
Disclaimer A huge thanks to Miroslav for reaching out to see if I'd be interested in reviewing the Sparrow and for arranging a sample for the purposes of this review. The thoughts within this review are my own subjective opinions based on five months of regular use. They do not represent EarMen or any other entity. Please note that the first sample provided was dead on arrival and was replaced by EarMen. Hopefully they were able to determine why as it was returned for examination. At the time of writing the Sparrow was retailing for 199.00 USD. You can check it out here: https://earmen-shop.com/products/sparrow
Specifications
Greetings!
Today we're checking out one of the more impressive products to have crossed my plate this year, the Spring II from BQEYZ.
My first experience with the brand was through the KC2, a very well-tuned quad-driver hybrid that recently saw a resurgence in popularity. I quite enjoy it and still pull it out for the occasional listen and comparison to more current gear. Why? Well, because it is still relevant. I suspect the same thing will happen with the Spring II years down the road because this earphone is the complete package. It sounds awesome, is built well, and has impressive tech and specs that I am confident will ensure it remains relevant for years to come.
Let's take a closer look, shall we?
What I Hear I've not really been a fan of piezo-equipped earphones in the past. When it comes to raw detail and clarity, they certainly haven't disappointed. Where the tech lost me was that every single one was seriously boosted in the brilliance region making them sound thin, extremely tiring, and uncomfortable at anything but quite low volumes. They tended to sound pretty unnatural too. A recent example that bucks the trend for the most part is the LZ A7. While still quite bright, it's not harsh or unnatural. The Spring II takes things a step further in the right direction by turning down the emphasis allowing it to blend in well with the other driver technologies BQEYZ utilized with the Spring II.
I still hear a peak in the upper treble, but it doesn't lead to anything sharp or unpleasant, instead giving the Spring II a satisfying shimmer and sparkle on cymbals and chimes. Detail and clarity are fantastic with fine details coming through clean and clear. Note control is impressive thanks to very crisp attack and decay properties, easily besting armatures used by the competition and hanging with the tuning found in more pricey gear. It works just as well with the synthetic effects on “Enter The Warrior” by The Prototypes ft. B3NDU, as it does with the chaotic hit hats on Havok's “No amnesty”. This is hands down the best tuned piezoelectric driver I've heard to date.
The midrange of the Spring II is handled by a single balanced armature which is awesome. This is where armatures excel so it makes sense to have it handle this region. The presentation is not entirely linear with the extremities being pulled back to sit in line with the surrounding frequencies. This leaves a small bump around that 2k that works wonders in my opinion. Vocals are adequately dense and weighty with amazing coherence that cuts through the thundering bass and treble shimmer. While both male and female vocals are represented fairly evenly, I find the latter to sound a bit sweeter and carry a hint more emphasis. Timbre is another strong point with the Spring II avoiding the plasticy, dull edge that some find common to armatures.
Bass out of the Spring II is elevated with good extension. On tracks that dip deep like Ludacris' “How Low” you get plenty of physical feedback via a thundering, rumbling sensation that tickles the ear. Mid-bass is a little more elevated than I prefer, but it mostly stays away from the mids and avoids sounding bloated. Where the low end of the Spring II is less impressive is in texture. It is smooth, has a natural attack and decay, and is well controlled, but lacks micro-detail which leaves it feeling a bit flat. I still enjoy it, but it falls short of best-in-class here.
Heading into the sound stage the Spring II remains very competent. It doesn't come across as massive and sprawling, nor closed in and intimate, instead finding a nice middle ground. When a track needs to be intimate, the Spring II can pull it off, such as on Culprate's “Undefined”. When it needs to pull back and portray space and allow congested tracks room to breath, such as on BT's experimental “13 Angels On My Broken Windowsill”, it can do that too. This versatility has made them an excellent companion for gaming since the excellent imaging qualities kept effects where they needed to be allowing me to accurately track my opponents in War Thunder and other games. Layering and instrument separation qualities are also above average ensuring the Spring II avoided congestion.
Overall I find the Spring II to be a pretty outstanding sounding earphone. I'm super impressed with the coherency between the three driver technologies in use, and that BQEYZ managed to get them to play together so well. Unlike some other products where it is obvious multiple driver technologies are in use thanks to differing tonalities that just don't play well together, that absolutely is not the case here. It's all very coherent and matched beautifully. The only complaint I can levy at the way the Spring II sounds comes down to the dynamic driver which would benefit from additional texture and detail.
Compared To A Peer (volumes matched with Dayton iMM-6)
TinHiFi P1 (169.00 USD): The P1 follows Tin's popular tuning of a neutral-bright, bass-lite sound. As a result the Spring II offers up a much more robust low end. It digs deeper, hits harder, but doesn't offer up quite as much texture as the P1. Only with a significant bass boost, such as that provided by the iFi hip-dac's XBass feature, can the P1 compete with the Spring II when it comes to bass. Looking to the mids I feel the Spring II continues to best the P1. While the P1's mids are more forward, clarity is only about on par with the Spring II. BQEYZ's offering brings in a more natural timbre, warmth, and thickness, leaving it the more satisfying listen to my ears. Treble is another area where I feel the P1 remains behind the Spring II. The P1 has a sharp peak in the brilliance region that tilts what is otherwise a balanced tune towards brightness. The Spring II's piezoelectric driver doesn't quite match the P1's planar when it comes to raw detail, but upends it when it comes to control and cleanliness of each note. The P1's treble sounds a hint loose and uncontrolled in comparison (and yes, it is getting more than enough power). Where the P1 has a clear advantage over the Spring II is in its sound stage which is notably wider and deeper. Imaging on the P1 is slightly more precise. The Spring II does a better job with instrument separation and layering though.
Overall I much prefer the Spring II. If the P1 didn't require a ton of power and some serious EQing or bass boost feature to give the low end some grunt, this would be a closer fight.
Shozy Rouge (179.00 USD): The Rouge is a more balanced, technical take on Shozy's Form models to my ears with differences that are similar to the Spring II. BQEYZ's offering is warmer and bassier. Sub-bass on the Spring II has more emphasis and mid-bass more punch. The Rouge offers more speed, texture, and better control. Heading into the mids the Rouge is leaner and gives vocals a cooler, more detailed presentation. Timbre out of the Spring II is more natural. Treble on the Spring II is smoother with more upper end sparkle vs. the Rouge which seems to focus more on the presence region. As such I find the Rouge more detailed. In terms of speed and cleanliness of the notes each present, the Spring II gets the nod. The sound stage of the Rouge is wider and deeper with a more evenly rounded appearance. Imaging out of the Rouge is also more nuanced with clean channel-to-channel transitions. I also find it to offer slightly better layering with similarly good instrument separation.
Overall I find the two to be more-or-less equals with each model excelling in different areas. I could pick up either and be perfectly happy, though as an all-rounder the Spring II gets the nod thanks to it's heavier low end.
In The Ear The Spring 2's moon-shaped metal shells are fairly small and dense with a reasonable heft that gives them a quality feel that plastic earphones can rarely match. Fit and finish is seriously impressive with seams for the individual components and nozzle tighter than a measurebater's poop chute. While fairly simple, there are some flourishes to the design that give the Spring II a satisfying visual appeal, like the recessed cutout on which the brand (right earpiece) and model name (left earpiece) are laser etched, or the tapered reflective red band that wraps around the edge of each shell. Along the inner half of the shell you find three small vents set just around a small dip to help ensure they aren't blocked when the Spring II is in use. The vent closest to the nozzle is slightly larger than the usual pinhole vents on other products, and is filled with a clearly visible, fine white mesh. L and R notifications can be found between the vents, backing up the easily read channel indicators already present on the cable.
And speaking of the cable, it too is gorgeous and something I would find perfectly acceptable if included with the top of the line products I've been covering recently. While it follows a trend I dislike, that being loose braiding, the quality of the braid is flawless with none of the usual oddities I've seen from other brands. The sheath is impossibly soft and flexible with little noise transmission when rubbing against your clothing. The hardware is top tier too, from the compact metal, BQEYZ-branded straight jack to the comfortable pre-formed ear guides that lead into compact 2-pin plugs adorned with clear channel labels. Strain relief at the jack is mediocre and absent at the y-split, but this style of cable doesn't really benefit from it anyway so no big loss. Lastly, a bead-style chin cinch can be found resting just above the y-split and does a stellar job of tightening up the fit when necessary.
While the Spring II is a comfortable earphone, ergonomics feel just a little “off”, at least for my ears. I'm not sure if it's the nozzle length, angle, or maybe just the half-moon shape. Whatever it is keeps the Spring II from feeling 100% stable at all times, particularly in my left ear which requires fairly regular fiddling to return a proper seal. All that said, there are no sharp edges or hot spots that cause discomfort and I can wear them pretty much indefinitely without issue, save for the fiddling with fit.
Isolation is slightly below average, not completely unexpected given the shallow fit and ample ventilation. With no music playing, I can clearly hear chatter nearby, the snicking of key caps on my laptop while I type, and other ambient noise. It's all dulled somewhat, just never fully blocked. Turning music on obviously helps, but in particularly noisy locations like a busy coffee shop, I found a bump in volume necessary to counter the noise. As expected, foam tips also help to improve passive isolation and work wonders in making the Spring II more suitable for use outside quiet environments.
In The Box BQEYZ has certainly stepped up their packaging game since I last reviewed one of their products (KC2). The exterior sheath has a tasteful design. Dead centre on the front is Spring 2 with Spring written in slender cursive and placed at a 45 degree angle along side a large 2. In the top left corner is the BQEYZ brand name, and in the background what looks like a delicate wisp of smoke. On the back of the sheath is a wire frame image of the ear pieces, a list of package contents, and important specifications.
Sliding the sheath off reveals a textured black box with BQEYZ in silver foil set in the top left. Lifting the lid uncovers the Spring 2's earpieces set within a foam insert, along with a cardboard shield hiding a decently spacious carrying case. Inside the case is all of the accessories. In all you get:
Final Thoughts The Spring II is the result of a thoughtful production period that has created a well-rounded, versatile earphone. Outside of a desire for additional low end texture, there is little for me to complain about. Detail and clarity is excellent through the treble and mids, vocals are weighty, and there is no lack of sub-bass. A good sound stage is backed by a capable technical performance. Most importantly, the three types of driver technology found within work together in a cohesive manner that was entirely unexpected.
In addition to the Spring II's strong sonic performance, it is well built and comes with a wonderful accessory kit that includes a decent ear tip selection and quality cable, among other items. It doesn't feel like any corners were cut to meet the 169.00 USD price tag which is always a relief. Few products feel as complete as the Spring II in this price range and as a result it gets an easy recommendation from me. Great job BQEYZ!
Thanks for reading!
- B9
Disclaimer A huge thanks to Elle with BQEYZ for arranging and sample of the Spring II for review. The thoughts within this review are my subjective impressions based on a couple months with the Spring II. They do not represent BQEYZ, Amazon, or any other entity. At the time of writing it was retailing for 169.00 USD. You can check it out here: https://www.amazon.com/Equipped-Detachable-Isolation-Audiophiles-Musicians/dp/B089NDGC1P/
Specifications
Some Test Tunes
Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark's Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams
Fleetwood Mac – Rumors
Tobacco – screw*d Up Friends
Today we're checking out one of the more impressive products to have crossed my plate this year, the Spring II from BQEYZ.
My first experience with the brand was through the KC2, a very well-tuned quad-driver hybrid that recently saw a resurgence in popularity. I quite enjoy it and still pull it out for the occasional listen and comparison to more current gear. Why? Well, because it is still relevant. I suspect the same thing will happen with the Spring II years down the road because this earphone is the complete package. It sounds awesome, is built well, and has impressive tech and specs that I am confident will ensure it remains relevant for years to come.
Let's take a closer look, shall we?
What I Hear I've not really been a fan of piezo-equipped earphones in the past. When it comes to raw detail and clarity, they certainly haven't disappointed. Where the tech lost me was that every single one was seriously boosted in the brilliance region making them sound thin, extremely tiring, and uncomfortable at anything but quite low volumes. They tended to sound pretty unnatural too. A recent example that bucks the trend for the most part is the LZ A7. While still quite bright, it's not harsh or unnatural. The Spring II takes things a step further in the right direction by turning down the emphasis allowing it to blend in well with the other driver technologies BQEYZ utilized with the Spring II.
I still hear a peak in the upper treble, but it doesn't lead to anything sharp or unpleasant, instead giving the Spring II a satisfying shimmer and sparkle on cymbals and chimes. Detail and clarity are fantastic with fine details coming through clean and clear. Note control is impressive thanks to very crisp attack and decay properties, easily besting armatures used by the competition and hanging with the tuning found in more pricey gear. It works just as well with the synthetic effects on “Enter The Warrior” by The Prototypes ft. B3NDU, as it does with the chaotic hit hats on Havok's “No amnesty”. This is hands down the best tuned piezoelectric driver I've heard to date.
The midrange of the Spring II is handled by a single balanced armature which is awesome. This is where armatures excel so it makes sense to have it handle this region. The presentation is not entirely linear with the extremities being pulled back to sit in line with the surrounding frequencies. This leaves a small bump around that 2k that works wonders in my opinion. Vocals are adequately dense and weighty with amazing coherence that cuts through the thundering bass and treble shimmer. While both male and female vocals are represented fairly evenly, I find the latter to sound a bit sweeter and carry a hint more emphasis. Timbre is another strong point with the Spring II avoiding the plasticy, dull edge that some find common to armatures.
Bass out of the Spring II is elevated with good extension. On tracks that dip deep like Ludacris' “How Low” you get plenty of physical feedback via a thundering, rumbling sensation that tickles the ear. Mid-bass is a little more elevated than I prefer, but it mostly stays away from the mids and avoids sounding bloated. Where the low end of the Spring II is less impressive is in texture. It is smooth, has a natural attack and decay, and is well controlled, but lacks micro-detail which leaves it feeling a bit flat. I still enjoy it, but it falls short of best-in-class here.
Heading into the sound stage the Spring II remains very competent. It doesn't come across as massive and sprawling, nor closed in and intimate, instead finding a nice middle ground. When a track needs to be intimate, the Spring II can pull it off, such as on Culprate's “Undefined”. When it needs to pull back and portray space and allow congested tracks room to breath, such as on BT's experimental “13 Angels On My Broken Windowsill”, it can do that too. This versatility has made them an excellent companion for gaming since the excellent imaging qualities kept effects where they needed to be allowing me to accurately track my opponents in War Thunder and other games. Layering and instrument separation qualities are also above average ensuring the Spring II avoided congestion.
Overall I find the Spring II to be a pretty outstanding sounding earphone. I'm super impressed with the coherency between the three driver technologies in use, and that BQEYZ managed to get them to play together so well. Unlike some other products where it is obvious multiple driver technologies are in use thanks to differing tonalities that just don't play well together, that absolutely is not the case here. It's all very coherent and matched beautifully. The only complaint I can levy at the way the Spring II sounds comes down to the dynamic driver which would benefit from additional texture and detail.
Compared To A Peer (volumes matched with Dayton iMM-6)
TinHiFi P1 (169.00 USD): The P1 follows Tin's popular tuning of a neutral-bright, bass-lite sound. As a result the Spring II offers up a much more robust low end. It digs deeper, hits harder, but doesn't offer up quite as much texture as the P1. Only with a significant bass boost, such as that provided by the iFi hip-dac's XBass feature, can the P1 compete with the Spring II when it comes to bass. Looking to the mids I feel the Spring II continues to best the P1. While the P1's mids are more forward, clarity is only about on par with the Spring II. BQEYZ's offering brings in a more natural timbre, warmth, and thickness, leaving it the more satisfying listen to my ears. Treble is another area where I feel the P1 remains behind the Spring II. The P1 has a sharp peak in the brilliance region that tilts what is otherwise a balanced tune towards brightness. The Spring II's piezoelectric driver doesn't quite match the P1's planar when it comes to raw detail, but upends it when it comes to control and cleanliness of each note. The P1's treble sounds a hint loose and uncontrolled in comparison (and yes, it is getting more than enough power). Where the P1 has a clear advantage over the Spring II is in its sound stage which is notably wider and deeper. Imaging on the P1 is slightly more precise. The Spring II does a better job with instrument separation and layering though.
Overall I much prefer the Spring II. If the P1 didn't require a ton of power and some serious EQing or bass boost feature to give the low end some grunt, this would be a closer fight.
Shozy Rouge (179.00 USD): The Rouge is a more balanced, technical take on Shozy's Form models to my ears with differences that are similar to the Spring II. BQEYZ's offering is warmer and bassier. Sub-bass on the Spring II has more emphasis and mid-bass more punch. The Rouge offers more speed, texture, and better control. Heading into the mids the Rouge is leaner and gives vocals a cooler, more detailed presentation. Timbre out of the Spring II is more natural. Treble on the Spring II is smoother with more upper end sparkle vs. the Rouge which seems to focus more on the presence region. As such I find the Rouge more detailed. In terms of speed and cleanliness of the notes each present, the Spring II gets the nod. The sound stage of the Rouge is wider and deeper with a more evenly rounded appearance. Imaging out of the Rouge is also more nuanced with clean channel-to-channel transitions. I also find it to offer slightly better layering with similarly good instrument separation.
Overall I find the two to be more-or-less equals with each model excelling in different areas. I could pick up either and be perfectly happy, though as an all-rounder the Spring II gets the nod thanks to it's heavier low end.
In The Ear The Spring 2's moon-shaped metal shells are fairly small and dense with a reasonable heft that gives them a quality feel that plastic earphones can rarely match. Fit and finish is seriously impressive with seams for the individual components and nozzle tighter than a measurebater's poop chute. While fairly simple, there are some flourishes to the design that give the Spring II a satisfying visual appeal, like the recessed cutout on which the brand (right earpiece) and model name (left earpiece) are laser etched, or the tapered reflective red band that wraps around the edge of each shell. Along the inner half of the shell you find three small vents set just around a small dip to help ensure they aren't blocked when the Spring II is in use. The vent closest to the nozzle is slightly larger than the usual pinhole vents on other products, and is filled with a clearly visible, fine white mesh. L and R notifications can be found between the vents, backing up the easily read channel indicators already present on the cable.
And speaking of the cable, it too is gorgeous and something I would find perfectly acceptable if included with the top of the line products I've been covering recently. While it follows a trend I dislike, that being loose braiding, the quality of the braid is flawless with none of the usual oddities I've seen from other brands. The sheath is impossibly soft and flexible with little noise transmission when rubbing against your clothing. The hardware is top tier too, from the compact metal, BQEYZ-branded straight jack to the comfortable pre-formed ear guides that lead into compact 2-pin plugs adorned with clear channel labels. Strain relief at the jack is mediocre and absent at the y-split, but this style of cable doesn't really benefit from it anyway so no big loss. Lastly, a bead-style chin cinch can be found resting just above the y-split and does a stellar job of tightening up the fit when necessary.
While the Spring II is a comfortable earphone, ergonomics feel just a little “off”, at least for my ears. I'm not sure if it's the nozzle length, angle, or maybe just the half-moon shape. Whatever it is keeps the Spring II from feeling 100% stable at all times, particularly in my left ear which requires fairly regular fiddling to return a proper seal. All that said, there are no sharp edges or hot spots that cause discomfort and I can wear them pretty much indefinitely without issue, save for the fiddling with fit.
Isolation is slightly below average, not completely unexpected given the shallow fit and ample ventilation. With no music playing, I can clearly hear chatter nearby, the snicking of key caps on my laptop while I type, and other ambient noise. It's all dulled somewhat, just never fully blocked. Turning music on obviously helps, but in particularly noisy locations like a busy coffee shop, I found a bump in volume necessary to counter the noise. As expected, foam tips also help to improve passive isolation and work wonders in making the Spring II more suitable for use outside quiet environments.
In The Box BQEYZ has certainly stepped up their packaging game since I last reviewed one of their products (KC2). The exterior sheath has a tasteful design. Dead centre on the front is Spring 2 with Spring written in slender cursive and placed at a 45 degree angle along side a large 2. In the top left corner is the BQEYZ brand name, and in the background what looks like a delicate wisp of smoke. On the back of the sheath is a wire frame image of the ear pieces, a list of package contents, and important specifications.
Sliding the sheath off reveals a textured black box with BQEYZ in silver foil set in the top left. Lifting the lid uncovers the Spring 2's earpieces set within a foam insert, along with a cardboard shield hiding a decently spacious carrying case. Inside the case is all of the accessories. In all you get:
- Spring 2 earphones
- Carrying case
- 0.78mm 2-pin cable
- Wide bore single flange tips (s/m/l)
- Medium bore single flange tips (s/m/l)
- Foam tips (s) with carrying case
- Cleaning tool
- Velcro cable tie
Final Thoughts The Spring II is the result of a thoughtful production period that has created a well-rounded, versatile earphone. Outside of a desire for additional low end texture, there is little for me to complain about. Detail and clarity is excellent through the treble and mids, vocals are weighty, and there is no lack of sub-bass. A good sound stage is backed by a capable technical performance. Most importantly, the three types of driver technology found within work together in a cohesive manner that was entirely unexpected.
In addition to the Spring II's strong sonic performance, it is well built and comes with a wonderful accessory kit that includes a decent ear tip selection and quality cable, among other items. It doesn't feel like any corners were cut to meet the 169.00 USD price tag which is always a relief. Few products feel as complete as the Spring II in this price range and as a result it gets an easy recommendation from me. Great job BQEYZ!
Thanks for reading!
- B9
Disclaimer A huge thanks to Elle with BQEYZ for arranging and sample of the Spring II for review. The thoughts within this review are my subjective impressions based on a couple months with the Spring II. They do not represent BQEYZ, Amazon, or any other entity. At the time of writing it was retailing for 169.00 USD. You can check it out here: https://www.amazon.com/Equipped-Detachable-Isolation-Audiophiles-Musicians/dp/B089NDGC1P/
Specifications
- Drivers: 13mm coaxial dynamic + nine layer piezoelectric + balanced armature
- Impedance: 32 ohms
- Sensitivity: 110dB
- Frequency Response: 7-40kHz
- Cable: 0.78mm 2-pin connector, 4 core single crystal copper wire with 3.5mm gold jack straight plug
Some Test Tunes
Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark's Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams
Fleetwood Mac – Rumors
Tobacco – screw*d Up Friends
Greetings!
Today we're checking out a neat little accessory from DDHiFi, the TC35B.
As we all know by now, smartphone manufacturers are slowly weeding out the 3.5mm jack in their more premium offerings, forcing users to either go wireless or carry around a cumbersome dongle to add that feature back. Not ideal.
DDHiFi is well known for their various adapters that solve a wide variety of problems. One of them, the TC35B, brings back the headphone jack to those devices the utilize USB type-C and have dropped the venerable 3.5mm port. It also provides additional amplification and improved sound quality to devices that have a 3.5mm jack, but otherwise have fairly mediocre output from their aux port. You might be thinking to yourself that there are plenty of devices that do this. What makes the TC35B special? Easy answer: size. This DAC is by far the smallest I've ever come across, making your typical dongle DAC look and feel massive and awkward in use.
Packaging and Accessories The TC35B arrives in packaging that is in line aesthetically with other products from the brand, but fairly unique among the industry in general. The exterior sheath is mostly plain, uncoloured cardboard with the same black bands we saw used for the C-2019 carrying case, but of course this time around it contains model info and descriptors for the TC35B. Sliding off the sheath reveals a simple, fairly squat wooden box with the DDHifi logo cut into the front. The use of wood gives the TC35B's unboxing experience a premium feel that none of the competition matches.
Opening the box you find the TC35B safely stored in a plastic bag, a silica packet, some balled up paper strips to keep everything from moving around too much, a social media information sheet, and a lone accessory; a small strap with a plastic nub that tucks into the 3.5mm opening of the TC35B.You could use this to attach the DAC to a keychain when not in use, but I'd still worry about losing the TC35B. I'm glad it's included, but I personally prefer to leave the device plugged into my phone, DAP, or attached to an earphone cable since it's so light, compact, and low profile, especially compared to other dongle DACs.
Build Quality/Features The shell of the TC35B is composed of a slab of hallowed out 316 stainless steel. A gold-coloured plate surrounds the 3.5mm opening on the front containing the brand, year, and model information in extremely small but very clear laser-etched writing. Out back is the Type-C USB plug. Everything fits together perfectly. Not much else to say. There are no obvious weaknesses or negatives to the build or design. It is very compact, durable, and with no controls or cables there is no learning curve. You plug it into your device, plug in your headphones or earphones to turn it on, and enjoy.
With Earpods and the TC35B plugged into my laptop, I was surprised to find it would allow me to play/pause music and videos through the inline controls, though the volume controls ceased to function. The experience was the same with my LG Q70. Switching to earphones not specific to Apple, namely the Brainwavz Omega, I had full control over play, pause, and volume on both my laptop and phone. Nice!
Sound and Power The TC35B isn't a powerhouse which shouldn't be expected given the size. That said, it does offer improvements in volume output and driving power when compared to a cell phone like my LG G6 or Q70. I found it more than adequate for most headphones and in-ears, though overly sensitive or demanding units caused issues, such as the Astrotec Phoenix. The Phoenix is absurdly difficult to drive for an in-ear, benefiting from powerful amps. Through the TC35B the Pheonix sounded grainy and the powerful low end lost most of its grunt. There was also noticeable distortion when exceeding even fairly modest volume levels. Flipping over to extremely easy to drive products like the 2020 Campfire Audio Solaris, the experience was also sub-par thanks to plenty of background noise and a minimum volume that was way too high for comfortable listening. With more typical and less picky and/or demanding gear, like those from brands like KZ, Moondrop, BGVP, etc. the TC35B felt much more at home.
The sound signature is fairly neutral and uncoloured with a slight upper end lift that adds a bit of brightness, quite like the Cozoy Takt C. It pairs best with warm-leaning products since it tends to exacerbate the treble and upper mids of bright earphones. End-to-end extension seems quite good. I never felt that sub-bass heavy products like the Dunu DM-480 were being held back. The same could be said for treble focused gear like the EarNiNE EN2J, keeping in mind it and the TC35B are not actually a good pairing due to the treble lift inherent to both products. When it comes to aspects such as texture and overall clarity the TC35B keeps up with the Takt C, though it isn't quite as clean and sharp sounding. The note presentation of the TC35B is slightly thicker and slower, most evident in the midrange where the Takt C comes across somewhat cold and sterile, but with a snappier feel to everything. The TC35B almost feels like a mix of the XDuoo Link and Cozoy Takt C, taking qualities from each without sounding exactly like either. That said, both of those dongles offer additional features, more power, and in my opinion sound better overall, but they are more expensive (the Link by only a small amount) and have a number of other downsides. Those downsides being they are significantly larger and more cumbersome to use with questionable long term durability thanks to their cables. They also generate more heat (Takt C especially) which is uncomfortable in the pocket and hits the battery life of your device harder.
Final Thoughts The TC35B is a very unique product. Sure, it may not be as full-featured as other dongles on the market since it lacks any form of physical control options. Nor is it ideal for pairing with either extremely sensitive or extremely difficult to drive products. What it brings to the table that the competition cannot match is size. If you want the smallest, least obtrusive dongle possible so you can return a 3.5mm jack to your device, or maybe to provide a boost to the volume output of your device without having to carry around a portable amp or awkward dongle DAC like the Link or Takt C, the TC35B is one heck of an option. It doesn't hurt that it is it is wonderfully constructed and quite affordable, aspects that are often sacrificed in the efforts necessary to shrink a device to the extent DDHiFi has.
Keeping in mind the TC35B has some clear limitations on what it can and shouldn't be used to drive, it's an easy product to recommend. It does a good job with boosting the volume of most earphones and headphones, offers a clean, detailed sound, and the size... the small size is its ace in the hole. The last many, many months spent living with with it as one of my daily use devices has shown that the compactness of this DAC cannot be overstated. Heck, you can just leave it attached to the jack of your earphones at all times and forget it's there. I honestly didn't think I would miss the TC35B after switching back to the Link or Takt C, but it didn't take long to tire of the more traditional dangling dongle DAC design. I'm more than happy to give up physical controls and a bit of power for a device that has such a pleasant user experience.
Thanks for reading!
- B9
Disclaimer A huge thanks to Lily with DDHiFi for reaching out to see if I would be interested in covering some of their products, and for sending the TC35B for coverage. The thoughts within this review are my own subjective opinion based on time spent with the TC35B since June (so sorry Lily!). At the time of writing the TC35B was retailing for 52.00 CAD / 39.99 USD: https://www.ddhifi.com/productinfo/1474339.html
Specifications
Today we're checking out a neat little accessory from DDHiFi, the TC35B.
As we all know by now, smartphone manufacturers are slowly weeding out the 3.5mm jack in their more premium offerings, forcing users to either go wireless or carry around a cumbersome dongle to add that feature back. Not ideal.
DDHiFi is well known for their various adapters that solve a wide variety of problems. One of them, the TC35B, brings back the headphone jack to those devices the utilize USB type-C and have dropped the venerable 3.5mm port. It also provides additional amplification and improved sound quality to devices that have a 3.5mm jack, but otherwise have fairly mediocre output from their aux port. You might be thinking to yourself that there are plenty of devices that do this. What makes the TC35B special? Easy answer: size. This DAC is by far the smallest I've ever come across, making your typical dongle DAC look and feel massive and awkward in use.
Packaging and Accessories The TC35B arrives in packaging that is in line aesthetically with other products from the brand, but fairly unique among the industry in general. The exterior sheath is mostly plain, uncoloured cardboard with the same black bands we saw used for the C-2019 carrying case, but of course this time around it contains model info and descriptors for the TC35B. Sliding off the sheath reveals a simple, fairly squat wooden box with the DDHifi logo cut into the front. The use of wood gives the TC35B's unboxing experience a premium feel that none of the competition matches.
Opening the box you find the TC35B safely stored in a plastic bag, a silica packet, some balled up paper strips to keep everything from moving around too much, a social media information sheet, and a lone accessory; a small strap with a plastic nub that tucks into the 3.5mm opening of the TC35B.You could use this to attach the DAC to a keychain when not in use, but I'd still worry about losing the TC35B. I'm glad it's included, but I personally prefer to leave the device plugged into my phone, DAP, or attached to an earphone cable since it's so light, compact, and low profile, especially compared to other dongle DACs.
Build Quality/Features The shell of the TC35B is composed of a slab of hallowed out 316 stainless steel. A gold-coloured plate surrounds the 3.5mm opening on the front containing the brand, year, and model information in extremely small but very clear laser-etched writing. Out back is the Type-C USB plug. Everything fits together perfectly. Not much else to say. There are no obvious weaknesses or negatives to the build or design. It is very compact, durable, and with no controls or cables there is no learning curve. You plug it into your device, plug in your headphones or earphones to turn it on, and enjoy.
With Earpods and the TC35B plugged into my laptop, I was surprised to find it would allow me to play/pause music and videos through the inline controls, though the volume controls ceased to function. The experience was the same with my LG Q70. Switching to earphones not specific to Apple, namely the Brainwavz Omega, I had full control over play, pause, and volume on both my laptop and phone. Nice!
Sound and Power The TC35B isn't a powerhouse which shouldn't be expected given the size. That said, it does offer improvements in volume output and driving power when compared to a cell phone like my LG G6 or Q70. I found it more than adequate for most headphones and in-ears, though overly sensitive or demanding units caused issues, such as the Astrotec Phoenix. The Phoenix is absurdly difficult to drive for an in-ear, benefiting from powerful amps. Through the TC35B the Pheonix sounded grainy and the powerful low end lost most of its grunt. There was also noticeable distortion when exceeding even fairly modest volume levels. Flipping over to extremely easy to drive products like the 2020 Campfire Audio Solaris, the experience was also sub-par thanks to plenty of background noise and a minimum volume that was way too high for comfortable listening. With more typical and less picky and/or demanding gear, like those from brands like KZ, Moondrop, BGVP, etc. the TC35B felt much more at home.
The sound signature is fairly neutral and uncoloured with a slight upper end lift that adds a bit of brightness, quite like the Cozoy Takt C. It pairs best with warm-leaning products since it tends to exacerbate the treble and upper mids of bright earphones. End-to-end extension seems quite good. I never felt that sub-bass heavy products like the Dunu DM-480 were being held back. The same could be said for treble focused gear like the EarNiNE EN2J, keeping in mind it and the TC35B are not actually a good pairing due to the treble lift inherent to both products. When it comes to aspects such as texture and overall clarity the TC35B keeps up with the Takt C, though it isn't quite as clean and sharp sounding. The note presentation of the TC35B is slightly thicker and slower, most evident in the midrange where the Takt C comes across somewhat cold and sterile, but with a snappier feel to everything. The TC35B almost feels like a mix of the XDuoo Link and Cozoy Takt C, taking qualities from each without sounding exactly like either. That said, both of those dongles offer additional features, more power, and in my opinion sound better overall, but they are more expensive (the Link by only a small amount) and have a number of other downsides. Those downsides being they are significantly larger and more cumbersome to use with questionable long term durability thanks to their cables. They also generate more heat (Takt C especially) which is uncomfortable in the pocket and hits the battery life of your device harder.
Final Thoughts The TC35B is a very unique product. Sure, it may not be as full-featured as other dongles on the market since it lacks any form of physical control options. Nor is it ideal for pairing with either extremely sensitive or extremely difficult to drive products. What it brings to the table that the competition cannot match is size. If you want the smallest, least obtrusive dongle possible so you can return a 3.5mm jack to your device, or maybe to provide a boost to the volume output of your device without having to carry around a portable amp or awkward dongle DAC like the Link or Takt C, the TC35B is one heck of an option. It doesn't hurt that it is it is wonderfully constructed and quite affordable, aspects that are often sacrificed in the efforts necessary to shrink a device to the extent DDHiFi has.
Keeping in mind the TC35B has some clear limitations on what it can and shouldn't be used to drive, it's an easy product to recommend. It does a good job with boosting the volume of most earphones and headphones, offers a clean, detailed sound, and the size... the small size is its ace in the hole. The last many, many months spent living with with it as one of my daily use devices has shown that the compactness of this DAC cannot be overstated. Heck, you can just leave it attached to the jack of your earphones at all times and forget it's there. I honestly didn't think I would miss the TC35B after switching back to the Link or Takt C, but it didn't take long to tire of the more traditional dangling dongle DAC design. I'm more than happy to give up physical controls and a bit of power for a device that has such a pleasant user experience.
Thanks for reading!
- B9
Disclaimer A huge thanks to Lily with DDHiFi for reaching out to see if I would be interested in covering some of their products, and for sending the TC35B for coverage. The thoughts within this review are my own subjective opinion based on time spent with the TC35B since June (so sorry Lily!). At the time of writing the TC35B was retailing for 52.00 CAD / 39.99 USD: https://www.ddhifi.com/productinfo/1474339.html
Specifications
Greetings!
Today we're checking out the newest version of Campfire Audio's legendary Andromeda.
My first experience with this well-known model was the 2019 update. I was expecting something fantastic given years and years of glowing commendations from various forums. They certainly didn't disappoint. The Andromeda is a modern classic for a reason. It looks awesome and the sound quality is just that damn good.
When the 2020 Andromeda was revealed to have received a slight re-tune, I was intrigued. The 2019 model was already near perfect. What could Campfire possibly do to improve things? Enough apparently, all thanks to some minor adjustments to the mids and treble. Let's take a closer look, shall we?
What I Hear The Andromeda 2020 doesn't stray far from the 2019's sound, though the adjustments applied result in a product that is clearly superior, at least to my ear holes.
Just as with the 2019 model, I find the 2020 Andromeda's low end perfectly satisfying. That's because I don't really hear much of change between the two models. On Massive Attack's “Teardrop”, the low range armature on both models attacks it with a growly texture and quick slam for each note. The 2019 may be a hint more textured, but it's hard to tell given how similar the presentation is. The snappy decay present on both is realistic with notes hanging around only as long as is required. Not unexpected given the Andromeda is a pure-BA earphone, but I'm left wanting for more presence in the sub-bass regions. Even so, I still come away satisfied with what I'm hearing in most instances. Running the Andromeda through a congested, quick track like Havok's “D.O.A”, rapid double bass hits are clearly defined despite all the chaos going on. As with the previous generation of Andromeda, the low end of the 2020 version won't wow with it's quantity or depth. It instead impresses through it's technical capability and general control. The Andromeda remains one of a select handful of armature only earphones whose low end is tuned well enough to be suitable for my favourite genre of music, liquid drum and bass.
While the low end of the 2020 Andromeda didn't see many changes, if any, the already near perfect treble has somehow gotten even better. Ignoring the measurements, I find the 2020 model just a hint brighter. I suppose it could be that the new model takes even less power to drive, but this impression comes after volume matching. Extension is still excellent and there are no nasty peaks that caused me any form of discomfort, just like the 2019 model. With last years model I was left looking for a teensy bit of extra upper end sparkle, something that I feel the 2020 model provides. This means it loses some of the older Andromedas non-fatiguing nature, but with it comes improved clarity. Everything just sounds that much cleaner and more detailed while retaining the same smooth delivery and tightly controlled notes. That said, The Crystal Method's “Grace feat. LeAnn Rimes”, sounds better through the 2019 Andromeda. The screeching effects that sully the track starting at 1:30 almost sounded good with the 2019 Andromeda. With the 2020 model the shrillness present through nearly every other earphone peeks through. Not much of a negative since this is such an extreme, fringe case, but notable none-the-less.
The Andromeda series is known for their luscious mids and vocals, and the new model continues the tradition. As with the 2019 model, vocals are weighty and lush but now with even better clarity. Daft Punk's “Touch” is a perfect match thanks to Paul William's emotional performance. I'm even more engaged this time around, particularly at the peripheries of the track when the instrumentation backs down and the focus is on Paul, simply because he just sounds that much more crisp and clear. The 2019 Andromeda was no slouch with this track, but the difference is quite noticeable to my ears. Switching gears to Aesop Rock's distorted vocals on Malibu Ken's “Tuesday” or Riya's breathy performance on Lenzman's “Open Page”, the Andromeda 2020 handles it all with ease. Helping greatly is some excellent timbre that avoids the plasticy, metallic edge than is common to armatures. Guitars are property textured with the right bite and pianos light and airy or powerfully punchy. The versatility and accuracy the Andromeda presents in it's midrange keeps it at the forefront.
The 2019 Andromeda's sound stage didn't quite meet my expectations based on what I had read about it. It was good no doubt, but it wasn't the step up I was hoping for. The 2020 model improves upon this and is more what I was hoping for last time around. While the width and depth is only slightly larger and still has an evenly rounded feel to it, the impression of space between individual notes is improved thanks to the cleaner, tighter presentation the 2020 model brings with it. That said, as with last years model the imaging, layering and separation qualities are what really take it to the next level. Imaging is spot on with impossibly smooth, nuanced channel transitions. Tracks sound deep and layered with instruments playing in well defined areas, forward or back on the stage. They never blend and muddy each other, instead remaining separate and clear. This makes live recordings like King Crimson's “Cat Food” and “Indiscipline” a joy, giving you the impression of sitting among the crowd. Just close your eyes, lean back, and listen.
I remain thoroughly impressed with the performance of the Andromeda. While the measurements don't show much in the way of change between the 2019 and 2020 models, listening to the two side-by-side does. The new model displays a bit more energy to the brilliance region, improves upon the already impressive staging, but more importantly, brings forth improvements to overall detail and clarity. The differences aren't sweeping, but they are clearly audible making it hard to go back to the 2019 version, despite how good it may be.
Compared To A Peer (volumes matched with Dayton iMM-6)
Campfire Ara (1,299.00 USD): The Andromeda and Ara certainly sound like sibilings but while there are similarities in how they present, they each have their own character. Starting with upper frequencies, the Ara is the more energetic of the two thanks to additional energy in the brilliance region. This gives the Ara a cleaner, crisper sound and improved clarity. They are both exceptionally quick and well-controlled. Dipping into the mids the Andromeda has more presence with vocals having a thicker, warmer presentation. I also find it has ever so slightly superior timbre thanks to the additional warmth on tap. Bass is where the two are quite similar in terms of quantity, extension, and tonality, though I find the Ara to offer more texture and an even more rapid attack and decay. Sound stage goes to the Andromeda which comes across wider and deeper with more space between layers. That said, I still prefer the Ara's imaging which is somehow even tighter and more nuanced. Instrument separation is similar, as is layering, though the Andromeda has a slight edge in the latter.
When it comes to build I have to give it to the Ara. They use the same cable and have more or less the same shell design. The Andromeda rounds off the edges a touch more though which gives it a slightly softer look and a barely perceptible edge in comfort, also helped along by the lower weight. So why do I prefer the build of the Ara? Well, the materials. The Andromeda is made from anodized aluminum versus the Ara's smooth, unpainted titanium. The Ara's materials are straight up denser and more durable, and will be less likely to show scratches and dents. Plus, paint chips and wear won't be a concern, though I do expect it to weather over time.
Overall they are both amazing earphones. While the Andromeda is no longer Campfire's flagship armature-only model, that takes nothing away from how competent it is. That said, they cater to two different listeners. Go for the Andromeda if you want a neutral-warm earphone with good technicalities. Go for the Ara if you prefer neutral-bright with a focus on detail and clarity.
Campfire Audio Andromeda 2020 (1,499.00 USD): The 2020 Andromeda and 2020 Solaris very much sound like they are cut from the same cloth with the Andromeda's tuning targeting the mids and treble when compared to the Solaris.' more balanced feel. The treble presentation on the Andromeda is slightly more vibrant with some extra sheen up top giving it a hint more energy. The extra presence region emphasis gives it a bit more detail too, particularly in vocal regions. The Solaris' presentation carries more weight, warmth, and density, most notable in the mids. That's likely down to the dynamic driver which shares presentation duties with an armature vs. the Andromeda and it's lone midrange armature. Attack and decay qualities are quite similar in the mids and treble, as is timbre quality. The low end is where most of the differences in presentation lie thanks to Solaris' use of a dynamic driver. While bass quantity and extension is quite similar, I found the Andromeda to lack the visceral punch of the Solaris on the same tracks. On the other hand, while plenty quick and un-phased by complicated passages, the Solaris' dynamic driver lacks the rapidity and effortless control of the Andromeda's low range armatures. When it comes to sound stage the Andromeda 2020 comes across wider and deeper, despite having more forward upper mids. They both image equally well with the Andromeda showing slightly better layering qualities to the Solaris' improved instrument separation.
When it comes to design and build, I'd say the Solaris feels like the more premium product. The weight and feeling of density it carries is not replicated by the equally well constructed Andromeda. Added details like the ribbed interior and vent designs also help give the Solaris an edge. When it comes to visual design, I still prefer the Andromeda. While the angular shells in use are nothing new at this point and have been copied to death by immoral imitators, it is aging wonderfully and remains very eye catching and appealing. To me it is a timeless design that will remain desirable decades from now. The Solaris is beautiful too, but isn't quite as interesting or distinct. If you disagree, good. Like what you like and everyone else be damned. When it comes to cables the Solaris' is basically the same thing. While thicker, it shares all the same hardware. I personally like thin and light cables so I prefer the one shipped with the Andromeda, even if it is clearly inferior. Overall they both come across as the premium products they are with the Solaris exuding just that much more premium juice from it's shapely pores.
In The Ear The machined aluminum housings of the 2020 Andromeda are still adorned with their iconic green anodized finish that looks as stunning in person as it does in images. Just as with the 2019 edition, the quality of their machining and anodized finish is outstanding. The shells are smooth with all machining grooves flattened out, and the paint job remains resistant to the chips that would result from small bumps and knocks on past models utilizing the same shell. The ~6mm long stainless steel nozzles that were new to the 2019 model have been replaced yet again for a slatted design that falls more in line with the rest of Campfire Audio's existing lineup. The same prominent lip that kept tips tightly secured on the previous version remain for the 2020 update. Textured silver screws top things off and attractively accent the green finish. The 2020 Andromeda retains use of Campfire Audio's familiar and extra durable beryllium/copper MMCX connectors. I say extra durable because that's what the marketing blurb spouts, but also my now almost three year old and well-loved Polaris has seen tens and tens of disconnects and the MMCX connectors are just as firm now as they were out of the box. Fit and finish is as to be expected, that is to say it is fantastic. Seams are barely visible and everything lines up perfectly without any gaps or off kilter angles.
The 2020 Andromeda comes with the same Silver Plated Copper Litz cable that was new for the 2019 version. The 90 degree angled jack is smartly designed with an extension to permit compatibility with a wide variety of device cases, though strain relief is still stiffer than I find ideal. That said, I still have yet to experience any issues with it on the numerous cables I've used with it. My experiences with Campfire's cables have shown them to be plenty durable. Within the small, reliefless aluminum y-split, the cable divides sending two strands on each side to the ear pieces. Slotting into the top of the split is a small plastic chin cinch. It moves much more smoothly here than on older Campfire cables and as a result is much more useful. Also useful is the retention of the preformed ear guides we saw on the 2019 Andromeda. While the memory wire used on past Campfire Audio cables worked, I found the “memory” aspect of that title limited at best which led to the wire straightening out over time. Ditching that entirely and sticking with preformed guides has resulted in a much more pleasant experience since I'm not constantly rebending the wire to ensure it stays behind my ear. I am glad Campfire Audio has stuck with this cable and is using it with numerous models in their lineup.
When it comes to comfort you'd be forgiven for assuming Campfire Audio's iconic angular shell design is a pain in the ear. Maybe for some, but not for me. Ergonomics are just right with the low profile Andromeda conforming quite naturally to my outer ear. That plus the use of lightweight aluminum, a small size the belies the chunky appearance, and the stubby nozzle keeps the Andromeda sitting in a way that does not feel out of place. I can wear the Andromeda almost indefinitely without experiencing any discomfort. I also noticed when comparing to the 2019 Andromeda that the edges of the 2020 model's shell have been softened up and rounded slightly. While I didn't notice any difference in wearing comfort, those who have had issues with the design in the past might so it could be worth giving them another try if that was what held you back with past versions of the Andromeda.
When it comes to isolation, the Andromeda is outstanding. The fully sealed housings relegate the sharp tapping of keyboards to a subtle snap and the tire rumble of cars passing by to a dull murmur, though as with the IO vocals seem to cut through the silence surprisingly effectively. It really is an odd experience, though handy if you're listening in an area where you risk being summoned by someone nearby. Of course, should you wish to eliminate this just toss on some foam tips and overall isolation improves even further.
In The Box The packaging for Campfire Audio's 2020 trio follows the format set by 2019's releases with the earphones arriving in a squat, square box, protected by an exterior sheath that is sealed shut by a Campfire Audio seal on the back. While past releases had a clear astronomical theme to them, this year things have gone more psychedelic Hawaiian. On the front of the sheath is a large sticker with an image of the earphones along with the usual branding and model info, all set over top of a vibrantly coloured floral pattern. Another sticker is present around the front edge containing another image of the earphones, some company info, among other details, all set over the same wild background.
Breaking the seal allows the sheath to unfold in four segments revealing the main box within. Lifting it out reveals the same uplifting interior to the sheath that we saw last year; the CA logo dead centre with rays exploding outwards in a dramatic fashion. Looking back at the main box we see Campfire's familiar mountainous scene along with more CA branding. Lift the lid and you're greeted to “Nicely Done” printed on the front flap and their now standard half-moon carrying case, though this time it is made from sustainably harvested cork instead of leather. You also find a smaller cardboard box containing the main suite of accessories. Tucked beneath it all is a warranty card and manual. In all you get:
Final Thoughts While 2020 has been a hell of a year and a complete crap shoot in many regards, not everything about it has sucked the big one. Campfire Audio's new releases are a shining light amidst the smokey skies and masked wastelands. The all-new Ara is a detail monster, the reworked Solaris addresses the main criticisms levied at it's precursor, and the new Andromeda soldiers on as reliable and competent as it's ever been. The updated tuning takes what was already a world class earphone and dials in just a little more goodness, treating those who opt to experience what is pretty much a staple recommendation for many looking to dip their toes into the upper echelon of earphones.
If you already own the 2019 Andromeda you won't need to upgrade to the 2020 version, though you might still want to. For anyone else looking at TOTL portable audio, the 2020 Andromeda should be on your short list.
Thanks for reading!
- B9
Disclaimer A huge thanks to Caleb with Campfire Audio for arranging a sample of the Andromeda 2020 for the purposes of review. The thoughts within this review are my subjective opinions and do not represent Campfire Audio or any other entity. At the time of writing the Andromeda 2020 retailed for 1,099.00 USD: https://campfireaudio.com/shop/andromeda-2020/
Specifications
Some Test Tunes
Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark's Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams
Today we're checking out the newest version of Campfire Audio's legendary Andromeda.
My first experience with this well-known model was the 2019 update. I was expecting something fantastic given years and years of glowing commendations from various forums. They certainly didn't disappoint. The Andromeda is a modern classic for a reason. It looks awesome and the sound quality is just that damn good.
When the 2020 Andromeda was revealed to have received a slight re-tune, I was intrigued. The 2019 model was already near perfect. What could Campfire possibly do to improve things? Enough apparently, all thanks to some minor adjustments to the mids and treble. Let's take a closer look, shall we?
What I Hear The Andromeda 2020 doesn't stray far from the 2019's sound, though the adjustments applied result in a product that is clearly superior, at least to my ear holes.
Just as with the 2019 model, I find the 2020 Andromeda's low end perfectly satisfying. That's because I don't really hear much of change between the two models. On Massive Attack's “Teardrop”, the low range armature on both models attacks it with a growly texture and quick slam for each note. The 2019 may be a hint more textured, but it's hard to tell given how similar the presentation is. The snappy decay present on both is realistic with notes hanging around only as long as is required. Not unexpected given the Andromeda is a pure-BA earphone, but I'm left wanting for more presence in the sub-bass regions. Even so, I still come away satisfied with what I'm hearing in most instances. Running the Andromeda through a congested, quick track like Havok's “D.O.A”, rapid double bass hits are clearly defined despite all the chaos going on. As with the previous generation of Andromeda, the low end of the 2020 version won't wow with it's quantity or depth. It instead impresses through it's technical capability and general control. The Andromeda remains one of a select handful of armature only earphones whose low end is tuned well enough to be suitable for my favourite genre of music, liquid drum and bass.
While the low end of the 2020 Andromeda didn't see many changes, if any, the already near perfect treble has somehow gotten even better. Ignoring the measurements, I find the 2020 model just a hint brighter. I suppose it could be that the new model takes even less power to drive, but this impression comes after volume matching. Extension is still excellent and there are no nasty peaks that caused me any form of discomfort, just like the 2019 model. With last years model I was left looking for a teensy bit of extra upper end sparkle, something that I feel the 2020 model provides. This means it loses some of the older Andromedas non-fatiguing nature, but with it comes improved clarity. Everything just sounds that much cleaner and more detailed while retaining the same smooth delivery and tightly controlled notes. That said, The Crystal Method's “Grace feat. LeAnn Rimes”, sounds better through the 2019 Andromeda. The screeching effects that sully the track starting at 1:30 almost sounded good with the 2019 Andromeda. With the 2020 model the shrillness present through nearly every other earphone peeks through. Not much of a negative since this is such an extreme, fringe case, but notable none-the-less.
The Andromeda series is known for their luscious mids and vocals, and the new model continues the tradition. As with the 2019 model, vocals are weighty and lush but now with even better clarity. Daft Punk's “Touch” is a perfect match thanks to Paul William's emotional performance. I'm even more engaged this time around, particularly at the peripheries of the track when the instrumentation backs down and the focus is on Paul, simply because he just sounds that much more crisp and clear. The 2019 Andromeda was no slouch with this track, but the difference is quite noticeable to my ears. Switching gears to Aesop Rock's distorted vocals on Malibu Ken's “Tuesday” or Riya's breathy performance on Lenzman's “Open Page”, the Andromeda 2020 handles it all with ease. Helping greatly is some excellent timbre that avoids the plasticy, metallic edge than is common to armatures. Guitars are property textured with the right bite and pianos light and airy or powerfully punchy. The versatility and accuracy the Andromeda presents in it's midrange keeps it at the forefront.
The 2019 Andromeda's sound stage didn't quite meet my expectations based on what I had read about it. It was good no doubt, but it wasn't the step up I was hoping for. The 2020 model improves upon this and is more what I was hoping for last time around. While the width and depth is only slightly larger and still has an evenly rounded feel to it, the impression of space between individual notes is improved thanks to the cleaner, tighter presentation the 2020 model brings with it. That said, as with last years model the imaging, layering and separation qualities are what really take it to the next level. Imaging is spot on with impossibly smooth, nuanced channel transitions. Tracks sound deep and layered with instruments playing in well defined areas, forward or back on the stage. They never blend and muddy each other, instead remaining separate and clear. This makes live recordings like King Crimson's “Cat Food” and “Indiscipline” a joy, giving you the impression of sitting among the crowd. Just close your eyes, lean back, and listen.
I remain thoroughly impressed with the performance of the Andromeda. While the measurements don't show much in the way of change between the 2019 and 2020 models, listening to the two side-by-side does. The new model displays a bit more energy to the brilliance region, improves upon the already impressive staging, but more importantly, brings forth improvements to overall detail and clarity. The differences aren't sweeping, but they are clearly audible making it hard to go back to the 2019 version, despite how good it may be.
Compared To A Peer (volumes matched with Dayton iMM-6)
Campfire Ara (1,299.00 USD): The Andromeda and Ara certainly sound like sibilings but while there are similarities in how they present, they each have their own character. Starting with upper frequencies, the Ara is the more energetic of the two thanks to additional energy in the brilliance region. This gives the Ara a cleaner, crisper sound and improved clarity. They are both exceptionally quick and well-controlled. Dipping into the mids the Andromeda has more presence with vocals having a thicker, warmer presentation. I also find it has ever so slightly superior timbre thanks to the additional warmth on tap. Bass is where the two are quite similar in terms of quantity, extension, and tonality, though I find the Ara to offer more texture and an even more rapid attack and decay. Sound stage goes to the Andromeda which comes across wider and deeper with more space between layers. That said, I still prefer the Ara's imaging which is somehow even tighter and more nuanced. Instrument separation is similar, as is layering, though the Andromeda has a slight edge in the latter.
When it comes to build I have to give it to the Ara. They use the same cable and have more or less the same shell design. The Andromeda rounds off the edges a touch more though which gives it a slightly softer look and a barely perceptible edge in comfort, also helped along by the lower weight. So why do I prefer the build of the Ara? Well, the materials. The Andromeda is made from anodized aluminum versus the Ara's smooth, unpainted titanium. The Ara's materials are straight up denser and more durable, and will be less likely to show scratches and dents. Plus, paint chips and wear won't be a concern, though I do expect it to weather over time.
Overall they are both amazing earphones. While the Andromeda is no longer Campfire's flagship armature-only model, that takes nothing away from how competent it is. That said, they cater to two different listeners. Go for the Andromeda if you want a neutral-warm earphone with good technicalities. Go for the Ara if you prefer neutral-bright with a focus on detail and clarity.
Campfire Audio Andromeda 2020 (1,499.00 USD): The 2020 Andromeda and 2020 Solaris very much sound like they are cut from the same cloth with the Andromeda's tuning targeting the mids and treble when compared to the Solaris.' more balanced feel. The treble presentation on the Andromeda is slightly more vibrant with some extra sheen up top giving it a hint more energy. The extra presence region emphasis gives it a bit more detail too, particularly in vocal regions. The Solaris' presentation carries more weight, warmth, and density, most notable in the mids. That's likely down to the dynamic driver which shares presentation duties with an armature vs. the Andromeda and it's lone midrange armature. Attack and decay qualities are quite similar in the mids and treble, as is timbre quality. The low end is where most of the differences in presentation lie thanks to Solaris' use of a dynamic driver. While bass quantity and extension is quite similar, I found the Andromeda to lack the visceral punch of the Solaris on the same tracks. On the other hand, while plenty quick and un-phased by complicated passages, the Solaris' dynamic driver lacks the rapidity and effortless control of the Andromeda's low range armatures. When it comes to sound stage the Andromeda 2020 comes across wider and deeper, despite having more forward upper mids. They both image equally well with the Andromeda showing slightly better layering qualities to the Solaris' improved instrument separation.
When it comes to design and build, I'd say the Solaris feels like the more premium product. The weight and feeling of density it carries is not replicated by the equally well constructed Andromeda. Added details like the ribbed interior and vent designs also help give the Solaris an edge. When it comes to visual design, I still prefer the Andromeda. While the angular shells in use are nothing new at this point and have been copied to death by immoral imitators, it is aging wonderfully and remains very eye catching and appealing. To me it is a timeless design that will remain desirable decades from now. The Solaris is beautiful too, but isn't quite as interesting or distinct. If you disagree, good. Like what you like and everyone else be damned. When it comes to cables the Solaris' is basically the same thing. While thicker, it shares all the same hardware. I personally like thin and light cables so I prefer the one shipped with the Andromeda, even if it is clearly inferior. Overall they both come across as the premium products they are with the Solaris exuding just that much more premium juice from it's shapely pores.
In The Ear The machined aluminum housings of the 2020 Andromeda are still adorned with their iconic green anodized finish that looks as stunning in person as it does in images. Just as with the 2019 edition, the quality of their machining and anodized finish is outstanding. The shells are smooth with all machining grooves flattened out, and the paint job remains resistant to the chips that would result from small bumps and knocks on past models utilizing the same shell. The ~6mm long stainless steel nozzles that were new to the 2019 model have been replaced yet again for a slatted design that falls more in line with the rest of Campfire Audio's existing lineup. The same prominent lip that kept tips tightly secured on the previous version remain for the 2020 update. Textured silver screws top things off and attractively accent the green finish. The 2020 Andromeda retains use of Campfire Audio's familiar and extra durable beryllium/copper MMCX connectors. I say extra durable because that's what the marketing blurb spouts, but also my now almost three year old and well-loved Polaris has seen tens and tens of disconnects and the MMCX connectors are just as firm now as they were out of the box. Fit and finish is as to be expected, that is to say it is fantastic. Seams are barely visible and everything lines up perfectly without any gaps or off kilter angles.
The 2020 Andromeda comes with the same Silver Plated Copper Litz cable that was new for the 2019 version. The 90 degree angled jack is smartly designed with an extension to permit compatibility with a wide variety of device cases, though strain relief is still stiffer than I find ideal. That said, I still have yet to experience any issues with it on the numerous cables I've used with it. My experiences with Campfire's cables have shown them to be plenty durable. Within the small, reliefless aluminum y-split, the cable divides sending two strands on each side to the ear pieces. Slotting into the top of the split is a small plastic chin cinch. It moves much more smoothly here than on older Campfire cables and as a result is much more useful. Also useful is the retention of the preformed ear guides we saw on the 2019 Andromeda. While the memory wire used on past Campfire Audio cables worked, I found the “memory” aspect of that title limited at best which led to the wire straightening out over time. Ditching that entirely and sticking with preformed guides has resulted in a much more pleasant experience since I'm not constantly rebending the wire to ensure it stays behind my ear. I am glad Campfire Audio has stuck with this cable and is using it with numerous models in their lineup.
When it comes to comfort you'd be forgiven for assuming Campfire Audio's iconic angular shell design is a pain in the ear. Maybe for some, but not for me. Ergonomics are just right with the low profile Andromeda conforming quite naturally to my outer ear. That plus the use of lightweight aluminum, a small size the belies the chunky appearance, and the stubby nozzle keeps the Andromeda sitting in a way that does not feel out of place. I can wear the Andromeda almost indefinitely without experiencing any discomfort. I also noticed when comparing to the 2019 Andromeda that the edges of the 2020 model's shell have been softened up and rounded slightly. While I didn't notice any difference in wearing comfort, those who have had issues with the design in the past might so it could be worth giving them another try if that was what held you back with past versions of the Andromeda.
When it comes to isolation, the Andromeda is outstanding. The fully sealed housings relegate the sharp tapping of keyboards to a subtle snap and the tire rumble of cars passing by to a dull murmur, though as with the IO vocals seem to cut through the silence surprisingly effectively. It really is an odd experience, though handy if you're listening in an area where you risk being summoned by someone nearby. Of course, should you wish to eliminate this just toss on some foam tips and overall isolation improves even further.
In The Box The packaging for Campfire Audio's 2020 trio follows the format set by 2019's releases with the earphones arriving in a squat, square box, protected by an exterior sheath that is sealed shut by a Campfire Audio seal on the back. While past releases had a clear astronomical theme to them, this year things have gone more psychedelic Hawaiian. On the front of the sheath is a large sticker with an image of the earphones along with the usual branding and model info, all set over top of a vibrantly coloured floral pattern. Another sticker is present around the front edge containing another image of the earphones, some company info, among other details, all set over the same wild background.
Breaking the seal allows the sheath to unfold in four segments revealing the main box within. Lifting it out reveals the same uplifting interior to the sheath that we saw last year; the CA logo dead centre with rays exploding outwards in a dramatic fashion. Looking back at the main box we see Campfire's familiar mountainous scene along with more CA branding. Lift the lid and you're greeted to “Nicely Done” printed on the front flap and their now standard half-moon carrying case, though this time it is made from sustainably harvested cork instead of leather. You also find a smaller cardboard box containing the main suite of accessories. Tucked beneath it all is a warranty card and manual. In all you get:
- Andromeda 2020 earphones
- Cork carrying case
- Smoky Jacket Silver Plated Copper Litz Cable
- Final Audio tips (xs/s/m/l/xl)
Campfire Audio Marshmallow tips (s/m/l) - Medium bore single flange silicone tips (s/m/l)
- Campfire Audio lapel pin
- Cleaning tool
- Mesh accessory case (x3)
Final Thoughts While 2020 has been a hell of a year and a complete crap shoot in many regards, not everything about it has sucked the big one. Campfire Audio's new releases are a shining light amidst the smokey skies and masked wastelands. The all-new Ara is a detail monster, the reworked Solaris addresses the main criticisms levied at it's precursor, and the new Andromeda soldiers on as reliable and competent as it's ever been. The updated tuning takes what was already a world class earphone and dials in just a little more goodness, treating those who opt to experience what is pretty much a staple recommendation for many looking to dip their toes into the upper echelon of earphones.
If you already own the 2019 Andromeda you won't need to upgrade to the 2020 version, though you might still want to. For anyone else looking at TOTL portable audio, the 2020 Andromeda should be on your short list.
Thanks for reading!
- B9
Disclaimer A huge thanks to Caleb with Campfire Audio for arranging a sample of the Andromeda 2020 for the purposes of review. The thoughts within this review are my subjective opinions and do not represent Campfire Audio or any other entity. At the time of writing the Andromeda 2020 retailed for 1,099.00 USD: https://campfireaudio.com/shop/andromeda-2020/
Specifications
- Frequency Response: 10Hz – 28kHz
- Sensitivity: 94dB SPL @ 1kHz 7.01mVrms
- Impedance: 12ohms @ 1kHz
Some Test Tunes
Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark's Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams
Tanalasta
Fabulous and comprehensive review. I found the ARA detail lovely and more neutral compared to the Andromeda. It was a personal preference but in the end I decided they were a little too bright without EQ. Andromeda 2020 benefits greatly from a cable upgrade. The Super Litz silver balanced improved the clarity in the mids, added brightness but still retained a lukewarm neutral.
Greetings!
Today we're checking out Campfire Audio's new top of the top of the line model, the revised Solaris 2020.
The original Solaris was a stunner in all aspects. The large, gold-plated housings drew in the eye while a bold tune pleased the ear. However, the black and gold colour scheme and fairly massive housings earned it some critics. The new Solaris addresses those complaints quite competently with a 20% size reduction and stealthy, all-black look. Along with the visual and ergonomic updates, internally the Solaris has seen some changes with the introduction of Campfire's new 'Solid-Body' technology that houses all four drivers to produce an even more coherent and refined sound.
Did all of these changes take away from what made the Solaris a modern classic, or did they simply add to and further refine an already impressive product. Let's take a closer look, shall we?
What I Hear The Solaris 2020 is a more balanced and refined take on the original. While the low end and upper ranges have remained relatively unaltered, the midrange has been pushed up and upper mids smoothed out leading to a sound that is more even and coherent when listened to as a whole.
The 2020 sees a fairly restrained boost in the low end, especially compared to other models in Campfire's lineup. Extension is excellent with a fairly linear move from sub- to mid- and upper-bass regions. As with the 2019 version, the Solaris 2020 seems to go for a smooth, uber-refined presentation. That said, texturing is still quite good giving it the grittyness needed to properly represent grungy basslines like those from Tobacco and The Prodigy. That said, the sort of slick, squeaky clean bass lines you hear in synth pop and from artists like DJ Fresh feel a little more in line with what the Solaris 2020 excels with. This earphone also doesn't lack whatsoever when it comes to speed and control, as evidenced using it with speed metal such as Havok's “D.O.A.”. Rapid notes remain well-defined without any blurring or smearing of detail. Each hit comes through loud and clear.
The treble region remains as energetic and vibrant as it was on the 2019 model, if not just a hint more so. The dual armatures display the same snappiness and rapid decay with tightly formed, splash-free notes. This is evident comparing the 2020 Solaris to the 2019 model on Havok's “Scumbag in Disguise” and the chaotic cymbal work present on that track. While lower treble in the 2019 Solaris saw a dip in emphasis, things are much more even on the 2020 model. In addition to a pleasing level of shimmer and sparkle, the bumped presence region sees a logical but subtle increase in resolution over last years offering. Everything sounds just a little more detailed and present through the Solaris 2020.
The midrange of the 2020 Solaris sees the most change compared to it's predecessor with the midrange taking on a more even presentation thanks to a rise between 1k and 2k and a smoothing out of the old model's dip at 4k. This results in more prominent, cleaner sounding vocals with better texturing and bite on instruments. I also found they injected a hint more warmth into the presentation which betters the already impressive showing of the 2019 model with Paul Williams' performance on Daft Punk's “Touch”. The 2020 Solaris also removed the occasional tendency towards a hollow or echo-ey sound on some tracks, like Aesop Rock's “Racing Stripes”. I actually enjoyed this quality because it complimented the 2019 model's airy staging, but I can't argue that a more accurate presentation is anything but positive.
Speaking of airy staging, the 2020 Solaris still impresses, BUT, I find it is a small step back from the previous version. While on more intimate tracks like Culprate's “Undefined” it still brings vocals into an uncomfortably tight position, on more spacious sounding tracks like Infected Mushrooms “Converting Vegetarians”, sounds don't spin and flit off into the distance quite to the same extent. The more forward vocal presentation supports this impression, closing in the staging somewhat. The Solaris 2020 still has an exceptional sound stage with plenty of width and depth on tap, it's just less extreme than the previous version. It's a worthy trade off given the improvements found elsewhere, like a smaller size and enhanced ergonomics. The 2019 model's outstanding imaging, layering, and separation qualities thankfully remain unhindered by the more compact staging and are present in full force with the Solaris 2020.
Overall I think Campfire's engineers did a stellar job of updating and improving upon the 2019 Solaris, without sacrificing the qualities that made the original version so good. While the adjusted midrange balance and 20% size reduction likely had a hand in shrinking the sound stage, the trade offs were well worth it in my opinion.
Compared To A Peer (volumes matched with Dayton iMM-6)
Campfire Audio Andromeda 2020 (1,099.00 USD): The 2020 Andromeda and 2020 Solaris very much sound like they are cut from the same cloth with the Andromeda's tuning targeting the mids and treble when compared to the Solaris.' more balanced feel. The treble presentation on the Andromeda is slightly more vibrant with some extra sheen up top giving it a hint more energy. The extra presence region emphasis gives it a bit more detail too, particularly in vocal regions. The Solaris' presentation carries more weight,warmth, and density, most notable in the mids. That's likely down to the dynamic driver which shares presentation duties with an armature vs. the Andromeda and it's lone midrange armature. Attack and decay qualities are quite similar in the mids and treble, as is timbre quality. The low end is where most of the differences in presentation lie thanks to Solaris' use of a dynamic driver. While bass quantity and extension is quite similar, I found the Andromeda to lack the visceral punch of the Solaris on the same tracks. On the other hand, while plenty quick and un-phased by complicated passages, the Solaris' dynamic driver lacks the rapidity and effortless control of the Andromeda's low range armatures. When it comes to sound stage the Andromeda 2020 comes across wider and deeper, despite having more forward upper mids. They both image equally well with the Andromeda showing slightly better layering qualities to the Solaris' improved instrument separation.
When it comes to design and build, I'd say the Solaris feels like the more premium product. The weight and feeling of density it carries is not replicated by the equally well constructed Andromeda. Added details like the ribbed interior and vent designs also help give the Solaris an edge. When it comes to visual design, I still prefer the Andromeda. While the angular shells in use are nothing new at this point and have been copied to death by immoral imitators, it is aging wonderfully and remains very eye catching and appealing. To me it is a timeless design that will remain desirable decades from now. The Solaris is beautiful too, but isn't quite as interesting or distinct. If you disagree, good. Like what you like and everyone else be damned. When it comes to cables the Solaris' is basically the same thing. While thicker, it shares all the same hardware. I personally like thin and light cables so I prefer the one shipped with the Andromeda, even if it is clearly inferior. Overall they both come across as the premium products they are with the Solaris exuding just that much more premium juice from it's shapely pores.
HiFiMAN RE2000 (2,000 USD): The RE2000's tuning follows a similar trajectory as the Solaris with a reasonably balanced, u-shaped sound. Treble on the RE2000 doesn't extend to the same extent but sees more upper treble emphasis that gives it a bit more sparkle and shimmer in general. Detail, control, and speed are similar, though the 2020 Solaris' lower treble adjustments give it a clear edge. The 2020 Solaris' mid-range is more forward and linear with a similar warmth. The tuning adjustments ensure it remains overall a cleaner, crisper sounding experience as we heard with the previous model. It is also more detailed than the RE2000. Bass on the RE2000 is more evenly balanced between mid- and sub-bass regions versus the Solaris which is still quite linear, but ever so subtly skewed towards sub-bass regions. The extra mid-bass of the RE2000 gives it's low end a fuller appearance and more punch. The Solaris' sub-bass provides more physical rumble on the lowest notes. Texture is similarly presented between the two. While the RE2000 has a well above average sound stage that fell behind what the 2019 model output, the 2020 Solaris is much more in line in every direction. Where the Solaris retains the edge is the technical qualities. Tracks display improved layering over the RE2000 and instruments are better separated with more space between them.
While I thoroughly enjoy the sound of the RE2000, build quality has almost always been a criticism of their iems. Pitting it against the 2020 Solaris makes this very apparent. Unlike the Solaris which is all metal, the RE2000 uses a mix of plastic and gold-plated brass, the latter of which is already showing wear. The 2020 Solaris' all-black paint job application feels a lot more durable, though it's not as eye catching as either the RE2000 or 2019 Solaris. The Hifiman logo is printed onto the plastic face plate, unlike on the Solaris where it is part of the machining process and integrated into the face plate. The 2-pin input on the RE2000 extends off the top of the earpiece and isn't a seamless aspect of the design like it is on the Solaris. The cables are not comparable at all. Like the Solaris' cable, the RE2000's features silver-plated copper wiring. However, it is stuffed into a fairly generic black rubber sheath and poorly relieved everywhere. It would feel more at home on a budget friendly earphone than a 2,000 USD flagship. Overall, the 2020 Solaris' design and build feels every bit the 1,499.00 USD it costs whereas the RE2000 fails to meet basic expectations for a 2,000 USD product.
In The Ear While the Solaris 2020's shells look very similar to the original at first glance, peer closer (or put them side-by-side) and you will noticed that the changes are drastic. First off, the new Solaris is 20% smaller than the original model. While that may not sound like much, the result is a much more compact earphone that no longer dwarfs similarly equipped products. It is also particularly impressive because the new Solaris retains the four driver hybrid layout and previous tech (ex. T.E.A.C), all while incorporating Campfire's new solid body design. This smaller size has gone a long way towards improving ergonomics, as has the new nozzle angle. For me at least, they have the Solaris sitting much more naturally in the ear. The fairly sharp rake of the original nozzle's angle has been toned down to an almost 90 degree angle that keeps the body pressed tightly against the ear, and nestled comfortably in the antitragus and concha. Still, even with all these improvements the general shape of this earphone isn't quite as ergonomic as some of the competition resulting in the occasional need to re-seat for a good seal.
Build quality is as expected from the brand. That's to say, it's basically flawless. Fit and finish of the three pieces that make up the Solaris, those being the stainless steel nozzle and two body components, are without any gaps or misaligned segments. The CA logo on the faceplate is neatly recessed and well-defined. While I miss the two-tone gold and black look of the original Solaris, the mono-tone look of the new model is more sleek and focused. The piano black paint is neatly applied and even across the entire surface and has held up well to bumps and scrapes with no discernible damage gained over the last few months. The sea-shell like ribs that adorned the inner body of the 2019 Solaris return for the new model, adding some flair to an otherwise fairly straightforward design. Along the top of each housing is a reasonably wide vent and a tiny Torx screw holding on the face plate. You also find Campfire's beryllium/copper MMCX ports, which in my experience are the most durable and reliable in the business. The ports on the gen 1 Polaris I've been using for years, that has seen countless cable swaps, are just as tight and secure as they were on day one. I have no reason to believe it would be any different here.
The included cable is very similar to that of that on the original Solaris. The thickness, metal y-split and chin cinch, and the 90 degree angled y-split all return, though their colouring has been darkened to match the smoky look of the new sheath. The new sheath is slightly more flexible than before, though it still lightly retains bends and kinks and never quite straightens out. I also appreciate that the memory wire used in the past is gone. It has been replaced with flexible preformed ear guides that, for me at least, help significantly with general fit and stability of the Solaris 2020.
When it comes to isolating you from the outside world, the Solaris 2020 is pretty average at best. With the stock silicone tips in place and no music playing, I can hold a conversation with someone easily enough and hear the snicking of the key caps on my laptop as I type, no problem. Campfire's Mushroom foams tips go a long way towards improving the passive isolation of this earphone, and are recommended should you be planning to listen in noisy environments.
In The Box The packaging for Campfire Audio's 2020 trio follows the format set by 2019's releases with the earphones arriving in a squat, square box, protected by an exterior sheath that is sealed shut by a Campfire Audio seal on the back. While past releases had a clear astronomical theme to them, this year things have gone more psychedelic Hawaiian. On the front of the sheath is a large sticker with an image of the earphones along with the usual branding and model info, all set over top of a vibrantly coloured floral pattern. Another sticker is present around the front edge containing another image of the earphones, some company info, among other details, all set over the same wild background.
Breaking the seal allows the sheath to unfold in four segments revealing the main box within. Lifting it out reveals the same uplifting interior to the sheath that we saw last year; the CA logo dead centre with rays exploding outwards in a dramatic fashion. Looking back at the main box we see Campfire's familiar mountainous scene along with more CA branding. Lift the lid and you're greeted to “Nicely Done” printed on the front flap and their now standard half-moon carrying case, though this time it is made from sustainably harvested cork instead of leather. You also find a smaller cardboard box containing the main suite of accessories. Tucked beneath it all is a warranty card and manual. In all you get:
Final Thoughts The Solaris 2020 earns it's keep as Campfire Audio's top dog flagship. Coming hot on the heels of the 2019 model, you'd be forgiven for expecting a warmed over, slightly altered version of the original Solaris. Fortunately, that's not the case. Instead we have a re-imagining of the 2019 Solaris with a 20% smaller, more ergonomically sound shell and updated tuning that retains the magic of the original while eliminating what minor flaws their were. While this does result in a less expansive but still impressive sound stage, it's a welcome trade off for all the benefits to be found elsewhere.
If you're looking for a new flagship earphone and want something capable and full of character, do yourself a favour and audition the Solaris 2020.
Thanks for reading!
- B9
Disclaimer A huge thanks to Caleb with Campfire Audio for arranging a sample of the Solaris 2020 for the purposes of review, and to be sent along to some fellow reviewers afterwards. The thoughts within this review are my own subjective impressions based on more time than expected with this earphone. They do not represent Campfire Audio or any other entity. At the time of writing, the Solaris 2020 retailed for 1,499.00 USD: https://campfireaudio.com/shop/solaris-2020/
Specifications
Some Test Tunes
Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark's Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams
Today we're checking out Campfire Audio's new top of the top of the line model, the revised Solaris 2020.
The original Solaris was a stunner in all aspects. The large, gold-plated housings drew in the eye while a bold tune pleased the ear. However, the black and gold colour scheme and fairly massive housings earned it some critics. The new Solaris addresses those complaints quite competently with a 20% size reduction and stealthy, all-black look. Along with the visual and ergonomic updates, internally the Solaris has seen some changes with the introduction of Campfire's new 'Solid-Body' technology that houses all four drivers to produce an even more coherent and refined sound.
Did all of these changes take away from what made the Solaris a modern classic, or did they simply add to and further refine an already impressive product. Let's take a closer look, shall we?
What I Hear The Solaris 2020 is a more balanced and refined take on the original. While the low end and upper ranges have remained relatively unaltered, the midrange has been pushed up and upper mids smoothed out leading to a sound that is more even and coherent when listened to as a whole.
The 2020 sees a fairly restrained boost in the low end, especially compared to other models in Campfire's lineup. Extension is excellent with a fairly linear move from sub- to mid- and upper-bass regions. As with the 2019 version, the Solaris 2020 seems to go for a smooth, uber-refined presentation. That said, texturing is still quite good giving it the grittyness needed to properly represent grungy basslines like those from Tobacco and The Prodigy. That said, the sort of slick, squeaky clean bass lines you hear in synth pop and from artists like DJ Fresh feel a little more in line with what the Solaris 2020 excels with. This earphone also doesn't lack whatsoever when it comes to speed and control, as evidenced using it with speed metal such as Havok's “D.O.A.”. Rapid notes remain well-defined without any blurring or smearing of detail. Each hit comes through loud and clear.
The treble region remains as energetic and vibrant as it was on the 2019 model, if not just a hint more so. The dual armatures display the same snappiness and rapid decay with tightly formed, splash-free notes. This is evident comparing the 2020 Solaris to the 2019 model on Havok's “Scumbag in Disguise” and the chaotic cymbal work present on that track. While lower treble in the 2019 Solaris saw a dip in emphasis, things are much more even on the 2020 model. In addition to a pleasing level of shimmer and sparkle, the bumped presence region sees a logical but subtle increase in resolution over last years offering. Everything sounds just a little more detailed and present through the Solaris 2020.
The midrange of the 2020 Solaris sees the most change compared to it's predecessor with the midrange taking on a more even presentation thanks to a rise between 1k and 2k and a smoothing out of the old model's dip at 4k. This results in more prominent, cleaner sounding vocals with better texturing and bite on instruments. I also found they injected a hint more warmth into the presentation which betters the already impressive showing of the 2019 model with Paul Williams' performance on Daft Punk's “Touch”. The 2020 Solaris also removed the occasional tendency towards a hollow or echo-ey sound on some tracks, like Aesop Rock's “Racing Stripes”. I actually enjoyed this quality because it complimented the 2019 model's airy staging, but I can't argue that a more accurate presentation is anything but positive.
Speaking of airy staging, the 2020 Solaris still impresses, BUT, I find it is a small step back from the previous version. While on more intimate tracks like Culprate's “Undefined” it still brings vocals into an uncomfortably tight position, on more spacious sounding tracks like Infected Mushrooms “Converting Vegetarians”, sounds don't spin and flit off into the distance quite to the same extent. The more forward vocal presentation supports this impression, closing in the staging somewhat. The Solaris 2020 still has an exceptional sound stage with plenty of width and depth on tap, it's just less extreme than the previous version. It's a worthy trade off given the improvements found elsewhere, like a smaller size and enhanced ergonomics. The 2019 model's outstanding imaging, layering, and separation qualities thankfully remain unhindered by the more compact staging and are present in full force with the Solaris 2020.
Overall I think Campfire's engineers did a stellar job of updating and improving upon the 2019 Solaris, without sacrificing the qualities that made the original version so good. While the adjusted midrange balance and 20% size reduction likely had a hand in shrinking the sound stage, the trade offs were well worth it in my opinion.
Compared To A Peer (volumes matched with Dayton iMM-6)
Campfire Audio Andromeda 2020 (1,099.00 USD): The 2020 Andromeda and 2020 Solaris very much sound like they are cut from the same cloth with the Andromeda's tuning targeting the mids and treble when compared to the Solaris.' more balanced feel. The treble presentation on the Andromeda is slightly more vibrant with some extra sheen up top giving it a hint more energy. The extra presence region emphasis gives it a bit more detail too, particularly in vocal regions. The Solaris' presentation carries more weight,warmth, and density, most notable in the mids. That's likely down to the dynamic driver which shares presentation duties with an armature vs. the Andromeda and it's lone midrange armature. Attack and decay qualities are quite similar in the mids and treble, as is timbre quality. The low end is where most of the differences in presentation lie thanks to Solaris' use of a dynamic driver. While bass quantity and extension is quite similar, I found the Andromeda to lack the visceral punch of the Solaris on the same tracks. On the other hand, while plenty quick and un-phased by complicated passages, the Solaris' dynamic driver lacks the rapidity and effortless control of the Andromeda's low range armatures. When it comes to sound stage the Andromeda 2020 comes across wider and deeper, despite having more forward upper mids. They both image equally well with the Andromeda showing slightly better layering qualities to the Solaris' improved instrument separation.
When it comes to design and build, I'd say the Solaris feels like the more premium product. The weight and feeling of density it carries is not replicated by the equally well constructed Andromeda. Added details like the ribbed interior and vent designs also help give the Solaris an edge. When it comes to visual design, I still prefer the Andromeda. While the angular shells in use are nothing new at this point and have been copied to death by immoral imitators, it is aging wonderfully and remains very eye catching and appealing. To me it is a timeless design that will remain desirable decades from now. The Solaris is beautiful too, but isn't quite as interesting or distinct. If you disagree, good. Like what you like and everyone else be damned. When it comes to cables the Solaris' is basically the same thing. While thicker, it shares all the same hardware. I personally like thin and light cables so I prefer the one shipped with the Andromeda, even if it is clearly inferior. Overall they both come across as the premium products they are with the Solaris exuding just that much more premium juice from it's shapely pores.
HiFiMAN RE2000 (2,000 USD): The RE2000's tuning follows a similar trajectory as the Solaris with a reasonably balanced, u-shaped sound. Treble on the RE2000 doesn't extend to the same extent but sees more upper treble emphasis that gives it a bit more sparkle and shimmer in general. Detail, control, and speed are similar, though the 2020 Solaris' lower treble adjustments give it a clear edge. The 2020 Solaris' mid-range is more forward and linear with a similar warmth. The tuning adjustments ensure it remains overall a cleaner, crisper sounding experience as we heard with the previous model. It is also more detailed than the RE2000. Bass on the RE2000 is more evenly balanced between mid- and sub-bass regions versus the Solaris which is still quite linear, but ever so subtly skewed towards sub-bass regions. The extra mid-bass of the RE2000 gives it's low end a fuller appearance and more punch. The Solaris' sub-bass provides more physical rumble on the lowest notes. Texture is similarly presented between the two. While the RE2000 has a well above average sound stage that fell behind what the 2019 model output, the 2020 Solaris is much more in line in every direction. Where the Solaris retains the edge is the technical qualities. Tracks display improved layering over the RE2000 and instruments are better separated with more space between them.
While I thoroughly enjoy the sound of the RE2000, build quality has almost always been a criticism of their iems. Pitting it against the 2020 Solaris makes this very apparent. Unlike the Solaris which is all metal, the RE2000 uses a mix of plastic and gold-plated brass, the latter of which is already showing wear. The 2020 Solaris' all-black paint job application feels a lot more durable, though it's not as eye catching as either the RE2000 or 2019 Solaris. The Hifiman logo is printed onto the plastic face plate, unlike on the Solaris where it is part of the machining process and integrated into the face plate. The 2-pin input on the RE2000 extends off the top of the earpiece and isn't a seamless aspect of the design like it is on the Solaris. The cables are not comparable at all. Like the Solaris' cable, the RE2000's features silver-plated copper wiring. However, it is stuffed into a fairly generic black rubber sheath and poorly relieved everywhere. It would feel more at home on a budget friendly earphone than a 2,000 USD flagship. Overall, the 2020 Solaris' design and build feels every bit the 1,499.00 USD it costs whereas the RE2000 fails to meet basic expectations for a 2,000 USD product.
In The Ear While the Solaris 2020's shells look very similar to the original at first glance, peer closer (or put them side-by-side) and you will noticed that the changes are drastic. First off, the new Solaris is 20% smaller than the original model. While that may not sound like much, the result is a much more compact earphone that no longer dwarfs similarly equipped products. It is also particularly impressive because the new Solaris retains the four driver hybrid layout and previous tech (ex. T.E.A.C), all while incorporating Campfire's new solid body design. This smaller size has gone a long way towards improving ergonomics, as has the new nozzle angle. For me at least, they have the Solaris sitting much more naturally in the ear. The fairly sharp rake of the original nozzle's angle has been toned down to an almost 90 degree angle that keeps the body pressed tightly against the ear, and nestled comfortably in the antitragus and concha. Still, even with all these improvements the general shape of this earphone isn't quite as ergonomic as some of the competition resulting in the occasional need to re-seat for a good seal.
Build quality is as expected from the brand. That's to say, it's basically flawless. Fit and finish of the three pieces that make up the Solaris, those being the stainless steel nozzle and two body components, are without any gaps or misaligned segments. The CA logo on the faceplate is neatly recessed and well-defined. While I miss the two-tone gold and black look of the original Solaris, the mono-tone look of the new model is more sleek and focused. The piano black paint is neatly applied and even across the entire surface and has held up well to bumps and scrapes with no discernible damage gained over the last few months. The sea-shell like ribs that adorned the inner body of the 2019 Solaris return for the new model, adding some flair to an otherwise fairly straightforward design. Along the top of each housing is a reasonably wide vent and a tiny Torx screw holding on the face plate. You also find Campfire's beryllium/copper MMCX ports, which in my experience are the most durable and reliable in the business. The ports on the gen 1 Polaris I've been using for years, that has seen countless cable swaps, are just as tight and secure as they were on day one. I have no reason to believe it would be any different here.
The included cable is very similar to that of that on the original Solaris. The thickness, metal y-split and chin cinch, and the 90 degree angled y-split all return, though their colouring has been darkened to match the smoky look of the new sheath. The new sheath is slightly more flexible than before, though it still lightly retains bends and kinks and never quite straightens out. I also appreciate that the memory wire used in the past is gone. It has been replaced with flexible preformed ear guides that, for me at least, help significantly with general fit and stability of the Solaris 2020.
When it comes to isolating you from the outside world, the Solaris 2020 is pretty average at best. With the stock silicone tips in place and no music playing, I can hold a conversation with someone easily enough and hear the snicking of the key caps on my laptop as I type, no problem. Campfire's Mushroom foams tips go a long way towards improving the passive isolation of this earphone, and are recommended should you be planning to listen in noisy environments.
In The Box The packaging for Campfire Audio's 2020 trio follows the format set by 2019's releases with the earphones arriving in a squat, square box, protected by an exterior sheath that is sealed shut by a Campfire Audio seal on the back. While past releases had a clear astronomical theme to them, this year things have gone more psychedelic Hawaiian. On the front of the sheath is a large sticker with an image of the earphones along with the usual branding and model info, all set over top of a vibrantly coloured floral pattern. Another sticker is present around the front edge containing another image of the earphones, some company info, among other details, all set over the same wild background.
Breaking the seal allows the sheath to unfold in four segments revealing the main box within. Lifting it out reveals the same uplifting interior to the sheath that we saw last year; the CA logo dead centre with rays exploding outwards in a dramatic fashion. Looking back at the main box we see Campfire's familiar mountainous scene along with more CA branding. Lift the lid and you're greeted to “Nicely Done” printed on the front flap and their now standard half-moon carrying case, though this time it is made from sustainably harvested cork instead of leather. You also find a smaller cardboard box containing the main suite of accessories. Tucked beneath it all is a warranty card and manual. In all you get:
- Solaris 2020 earphones
- Cork carrying case
- Smoky Jacket Silver Plated Copper Litz Cable
- Final Audio tips (xs/s/m/l/xl)
- Campfire Audio Marshmallow tips (s/m/l)
- Medium bore single flange silicone tips (s/m/l)
- Campfire Audio lapel pin
- Cleaning tool
- Mesh accessory case (x3)
Final Thoughts The Solaris 2020 earns it's keep as Campfire Audio's top dog flagship. Coming hot on the heels of the 2019 model, you'd be forgiven for expecting a warmed over, slightly altered version of the original Solaris. Fortunately, that's not the case. Instead we have a re-imagining of the 2019 Solaris with a 20% smaller, more ergonomically sound shell and updated tuning that retains the magic of the original while eliminating what minor flaws their were. While this does result in a less expansive but still impressive sound stage, it's a welcome trade off for all the benefits to be found elsewhere.
If you're looking for a new flagship earphone and want something capable and full of character, do yourself a favour and audition the Solaris 2020.
Thanks for reading!
- B9
Disclaimer A huge thanks to Caleb with Campfire Audio for arranging a sample of the Solaris 2020 for the purposes of review, and to be sent along to some fellow reviewers afterwards. The thoughts within this review are my own subjective impressions based on more time than expected with this earphone. They do not represent Campfire Audio or any other entity. At the time of writing, the Solaris 2020 retailed for 1,499.00 USD: https://campfireaudio.com/shop/solaris-2020/
Specifications
- Frequency Response: 5Hz–20 kHz
- Sensitivity: 94 dB SPL @ 1kHz: 6.54 mVrms
- Impedance: 15.5 Ohms @ 1kHz Impedance
- Harmonic Distortion: Less than 1%
- Drivers: Dual Custom Balanced Armature Drivers + T.A.E.C. (High), Single Updated Custom Balanced Armature Driver (Mid), Specially Tuned 10mm Dynamic Driver (Mid + Low)
Some Test Tunes
Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark's Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams
Greetings!
Today we're checking out one of KZ's newest releases, the ZAX.
Knowledge Zenith, the mother of all budget brands, has been slowly but steadily moving themselves upscale ever since the release of their first hybrid, the ZST. The ZAX is part of their newest crop of X-branded releases and has some pretty eye-watering specs that we could never have imagined being present in a sub-100 earphone just a few short years ago. Silver-plated, braided, removable 2-pin cable, 8 driver hybrid setup with a dual-magnet dynamic, open back, and a high quality, low profile, metal and acrylic build. It all looks very, very impressive, at least to someone that has been reviewing products for the better part of a decade. Newbies to the hobby have it good right now, jumping in at a time where the vast majority of releases are quite competent and generally quite affordable.
While the ZAX certainly looks good and impresses on paper, does it hold up in the real world as a daily driver? Yes, yes it does. Let's take a closer look, shall we?
What I Hear There is a sense of familiarity to the ZAX, though enough change from the typical KZ formula is present to make it a worthy entry. More refined drivers and a more prominent midrange work wonders.
Bass is a little loose and bloomy, suggesting the driver was not intended to be used with an open back design. Still sounds good, just not as tight as it could. Extension is quite impressive giving the low end plenty of visceral feedback. A midbass hump is noticeable and provides plenty of slam on drops. Texture is smooth but doesn't filter out detail and information enough to be a detriment. The dual magnet driver is also reasonably quick and able to handle rapid transitions fairly well. Unfortunately the looseness present hinders performance leading to mild congestion on particularly busy bass lines.
The midrange of the ZAX is more forward than on prior KZ hybrids giving vocals plenty of presence amid the heavy bass. I found tonality and timbre to be another step in the right direction for the brand. Still a hint bright, but nothing I found particularly distracting. Sibilance is also kept in check, unlike another recent release that ended up bring quite the disappointment, the ZSN Pro X. Where the ZAX really steps up here is in terms of detail which is quite plentiful. This is one of those uncommon earphones that can be both traditionally entertaining (big bass, bright treble), while offering up analytic qualities that can satisfy those looking to analyze lyrics and fine details while they listen.
Treble out of the ZAX is boosted with a presence region bias. This helps drive the detail forward presentation of the ZAX while giving cymbals, chimes, etc. a pleasant amount of shimmer. I haven't been finding it as overbearing and fatiguing as some other recent releases from competing brands, such as the Blon BL-05 or FiiO FH1s. Notes attack and decay quickly with a clean, tight presentation leaving the ZAX in good standing once tracks get particularly busy and congested. King Crimson's “Starless and Bible Black” is reproduced wonderfully out of the thing.
I had high hopes for the ZAX's sound stage, so colour me disappointed when the open back design didn't deliver. Instead of a wide open, deep stage, it sounds quite normal. Sounds are tossed effectively enough into the distance and I'm reasonably well immersed into whatever I'm listening to, or the game I'm playing, I was just hoping for more. Instead, the open back design only seems to produce negatives like the aforementioned loose bass, as well as reduced isolation. On the plus side, imaging is pretty good with nuanced channel-to-channel movement that is competitive with others in the price range. Instrument layering and separation is also a plus, though the wily low end does hinder things somewhat when heavy bass is present.
Overall I quite like the ZAX and find it to be one of KZ's better, more interesting releases of late. If the low end was tighter and the open back design provided some benefit, it would be more impressive.
Compared To A Peer (volumes matched with Dayton iMM-6)
Shozy Form 1.1 (74.99 USD): Both earphones are plenty bassy with a mid-bass focus, though less so on the 1.1. Shozy's entry sounds a bit more linear when moving from sub to mid and upper bass regions. The ZAX provides more texture and a more visceral experience, but lacks the control of the 1.1. As a result it doesn't handle rapid bass notes as well. The ZAX's mids are more forward with a leaner, cooler presentation to them. Detail goes to the ZAX, but the 1.1 is more natural with a more accurate timbre, though the ZAX is still quite decent, especially compared to older KZ hybrids. Treble on both is quite energetic with the Form 1.1 having a more even presentation with no real bias towards brilliance or presence regions. The ZAX on the other hand is similarly emphasized in the lower treble, with less energy up top. The Form 1.1 provides just as much detail and even more air between notes, despite running with a much less exciting 1+1 hybrid setup. When it comes to sound stage, the Form 1.1 sounds wider with a similar depth. Imaging quality on the 1.1 is more accurate while the ZAX offers more competent layering and separation qualities. Overall, I prefer the Form 1.1, but not by a huge margin.
BGVP DMS (159.00 USD): Bass has a similarly boosted, smooth, feel. DMS is a bit less midbassy. You also get less texture and impact/visceral feedback from the DMS. KZ is less well controlled. DMS' midrange is more recessed, though this does help give the presentation a better impression of space. At the same time it sounds less natural and there is a slight hollowness that isn't heard in the KZ. The ZAX is more detailed too. Treble out of the KZ is a bit more aggressive and forward with additional energy in the brilliance region. It sounds more complete, but is also more fatiguing. The ZAX also improves upon the DMS in terms of overall detail and texturing in the treble as well. Sound stage is clearly in the DMS' camp feeling notably wider and mildly deeper. Imaging, layering, and separation qualities are all similarly good, though I'll give the ZAX the edge. Overall I much prefer the ZAX which can basically replace the DMS for me in more aspects. The nice sound stage is about all I'll miss from the DMS.
In The Ear The ZAX uses the same high quality acrylic shell as a number of recent KZ models and as such feels like a more upscale device than the low price tag (for the number of drivers + feature set) would suggest. The new face plate design, which is very much open as you can see when holding the ZAX up to the light, is still metal and both looks and feels excellent in the hand. I still think KZ makes some of the nicest built earphones on the market, particularly in the budget realms. Further adding to the quality construction is the protruding 2-pin setup which is secured in place internally via compact screws, as visible through the clear acrylic body. Also visible through the shells is the plethora of drivers KZ somehow managed to cram into a shell originally designed for a simple 1+1 hybrid setup. 6 tiny armatures surround a 10mm dynamic with one more nestled comfortably within the nozzle. Equally minuscule channels are visible guiding sound from each armature to where sound can be experienced by the listener. I have a feeling they stuck with a familiar shell and selected clear acrylic to avoid a repeat of the “fake driver” fiasco that occurred when an original ZS5 was, uh....“carefully” dissected by a salty Youtuber.
Moving onto the cable, we see the same excellent upgraded offering that comes with the ZSN Pro X and ZST X. The sheath is thicker, more plush, and less prone to tangling above the y-split than past cables included by the brand. The silver-plated wiring within has a nice sheen to it too. It looks and feels quite nice. The hardware falls into the “same old, same old” category though. The VSonic inspired y-split and jack carry over from the ZSN Pro, as do the excellent preformed ear guides. Overall a great stock cable and worthy of the ZAX.
Comfort is outstanding. This earpiece has been a staple for a few different brands with mild tweaks being made to the nozzle angle and quality of the plastics. As with other KZ models that use it, like the ZSN, ZSN Pro X, ZST, ZS10 Pro, etc. , it fits perfectly with little to no effort required to get and maintain a good seal. The preformed guides hold the cable securely around the ear resulting in an earphone that is stable under pretty extreme movement. If you have teensy ears or they're a particularly odd shape you might have issues with fit and comfort, but I expect basically everyone else to find these a pleasant product to wear.
Isolation is pretty poor, and for that we can blame the open back design. With music playing, I can still hear happenings around me. Taking the ZAX out for my nightly stroll results in the sound of cars passing by cutting through pretty clearly. You can compensate with MOAR VOLUME!!! and somewhat with foam tips, but even so, these are best used indoors or somewhat calm areas. On the plus side, they don't bleed much sound out, so the leakage issues seem to be one-way only.
In The Box The ZAX arrives in the same compact, slightly more upscale packaging as the AS06. A glossy KZ logo can be found on the lid while the left panel contains a couple stickers with model info and contact information for KZ. The lid is still weighted with a dense cardboard plate containing the following slogan that I love; “Don't forget. The original intention is to use headphones to enjoy music.” KZ kept the cool metal plaque they included with the AS10 and BA10, though now it is tailored to the ZAX. While it doesn't add any real value to the package, it does serve to elevate the earphones that utilize this packaging style as the most premium of products in KZ's dense catalogue.
Lifting out the foam insert the ZAX's earpieces are nestled into, I noticed that the earpieces were situated left on the left, right on the right, with small cutouts in the cardboard insert below to make room for the nozzles with medium tips installed. Past versions of this packaging had the left earpiece on the right, right on the left, which is more visually appealing in my humble opinion, and didn't require additional cutouts to accommodate the nozzles. But alas, some of KZ's stronger skeptics took the previous design to mean they didn't know left from right. It seems KZ gave in to please the heathens. Beneath the foam insert you find the accessories beneath. In all you get:
Final Thoughts While Knowledge Zenith seems to have moved away from the unpredictable and creative nature that I fell in love with in their pre-ZST days, those qualities have been replaced with consistency and quality. The ZAX doesn't really bring much new to the table in terms of general tuning. It again just iterates and improves upon past hybrid offerings with more refined, capable drivers, and greatly improved detail and clarity. Unfortunately, the decision to go open back has not really benefited the ZAX at all, leaving the low end feeling loose and slightly uncontrolled. This is particularly unfortunate given the stellar low end performance of the much more affordable EDX and ZST X models. That looseness, and an averagely sized but still competent sound stage are about my only complaints surrounding the sound. The amount of detail and impressive clarity on offer makes up for it, as does the pushed up midrange which is a refreshing alteration to what is otherwise a fairly typical KZ sound.
The outstanding build quality of the ZAX continues KZ's tradition of shaming the competition. High quality plastics, nicely formed metal face plates, clean internal construction. It's all there, and it looks great. It fits beautifully too, nestling snugly into the ear with a level of stability I have come to expect from earphones using this style of shell. The new cable is also a plus thanks to a noticeable bump in thickness, along with a softer, more plush and tangle resistant sheath. The only thing missing is a new accessory kit. You still only get a basic tip set and the cable. No carrying case or other frills. I'm looking forward to the day when KZ goes all out with the included extras.
Overall, I quite like what KZ has done here. I've been getting tired of their same-old same-old hybrid releases that just rehash the same thing time and time again. While there are elements of this in the ZAX, enough is new and different for it to be refreshing to an old fan of the brand. KZ is back on my radar.
Thanks for reading!
- B9
Disclaimer Thanks to OPA Audio Store for reaching out and offering a sample of the ZAX for review. The thoughts within this review are my own subjective opinions based on time spent listening to the ZAX. They do not represent OPA, KZ, or any other entity. At the time of writing the ZAX was retaining for around 85 USD/117 CAD, depending on the colour and selected cable setup (mic or no mic). You can snag a set for yourself here: https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005001353584911.html
Specifications
Some Test Tunes
Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark’s Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams
Fleetwood Mac – Rumors
Tobacco – screw*d Up Friends
Today we're checking out one of KZ's newest releases, the ZAX.
Knowledge Zenith, the mother of all budget brands, has been slowly but steadily moving themselves upscale ever since the release of their first hybrid, the ZST. The ZAX is part of their newest crop of X-branded releases and has some pretty eye-watering specs that we could never have imagined being present in a sub-100 earphone just a few short years ago. Silver-plated, braided, removable 2-pin cable, 8 driver hybrid setup with a dual-magnet dynamic, open back, and a high quality, low profile, metal and acrylic build. It all looks very, very impressive, at least to someone that has been reviewing products for the better part of a decade. Newbies to the hobby have it good right now, jumping in at a time where the vast majority of releases are quite competent and generally quite affordable.
While the ZAX certainly looks good and impresses on paper, does it hold up in the real world as a daily driver? Yes, yes it does. Let's take a closer look, shall we?
What I Hear There is a sense of familiarity to the ZAX, though enough change from the typical KZ formula is present to make it a worthy entry. More refined drivers and a more prominent midrange work wonders.
Bass is a little loose and bloomy, suggesting the driver was not intended to be used with an open back design. Still sounds good, just not as tight as it could. Extension is quite impressive giving the low end plenty of visceral feedback. A midbass hump is noticeable and provides plenty of slam on drops. Texture is smooth but doesn't filter out detail and information enough to be a detriment. The dual magnet driver is also reasonably quick and able to handle rapid transitions fairly well. Unfortunately the looseness present hinders performance leading to mild congestion on particularly busy bass lines.
The midrange of the ZAX is more forward than on prior KZ hybrids giving vocals plenty of presence amid the heavy bass. I found tonality and timbre to be another step in the right direction for the brand. Still a hint bright, but nothing I found particularly distracting. Sibilance is also kept in check, unlike another recent release that ended up bring quite the disappointment, the ZSN Pro X. Where the ZAX really steps up here is in terms of detail which is quite plentiful. This is one of those uncommon earphones that can be both traditionally entertaining (big bass, bright treble), while offering up analytic qualities that can satisfy those looking to analyze lyrics and fine details while they listen.
Treble out of the ZAX is boosted with a presence region bias. This helps drive the detail forward presentation of the ZAX while giving cymbals, chimes, etc. a pleasant amount of shimmer. I haven't been finding it as overbearing and fatiguing as some other recent releases from competing brands, such as the Blon BL-05 or FiiO FH1s. Notes attack and decay quickly with a clean, tight presentation leaving the ZAX in good standing once tracks get particularly busy and congested. King Crimson's “Starless and Bible Black” is reproduced wonderfully out of the thing.
I had high hopes for the ZAX's sound stage, so colour me disappointed when the open back design didn't deliver. Instead of a wide open, deep stage, it sounds quite normal. Sounds are tossed effectively enough into the distance and I'm reasonably well immersed into whatever I'm listening to, or the game I'm playing, I was just hoping for more. Instead, the open back design only seems to produce negatives like the aforementioned loose bass, as well as reduced isolation. On the plus side, imaging is pretty good with nuanced channel-to-channel movement that is competitive with others in the price range. Instrument layering and separation is also a plus, though the wily low end does hinder things somewhat when heavy bass is present.
Overall I quite like the ZAX and find it to be one of KZ's better, more interesting releases of late. If the low end was tighter and the open back design provided some benefit, it would be more impressive.
Compared To A Peer (volumes matched with Dayton iMM-6)
Shozy Form 1.1 (74.99 USD): Both earphones are plenty bassy with a mid-bass focus, though less so on the 1.1. Shozy's entry sounds a bit more linear when moving from sub to mid and upper bass regions. The ZAX provides more texture and a more visceral experience, but lacks the control of the 1.1. As a result it doesn't handle rapid bass notes as well. The ZAX's mids are more forward with a leaner, cooler presentation to them. Detail goes to the ZAX, but the 1.1 is more natural with a more accurate timbre, though the ZAX is still quite decent, especially compared to older KZ hybrids. Treble on both is quite energetic with the Form 1.1 having a more even presentation with no real bias towards brilliance or presence regions. The ZAX on the other hand is similarly emphasized in the lower treble, with less energy up top. The Form 1.1 provides just as much detail and even more air between notes, despite running with a much less exciting 1+1 hybrid setup. When it comes to sound stage, the Form 1.1 sounds wider with a similar depth. Imaging quality on the 1.1 is more accurate while the ZAX offers more competent layering and separation qualities. Overall, I prefer the Form 1.1, but not by a huge margin.
BGVP DMS (159.00 USD): Bass has a similarly boosted, smooth, feel. DMS is a bit less midbassy. You also get less texture and impact/visceral feedback from the DMS. KZ is less well controlled. DMS' midrange is more recessed, though this does help give the presentation a better impression of space. At the same time it sounds less natural and there is a slight hollowness that isn't heard in the KZ. The ZAX is more detailed too. Treble out of the KZ is a bit more aggressive and forward with additional energy in the brilliance region. It sounds more complete, but is also more fatiguing. The ZAX also improves upon the DMS in terms of overall detail and texturing in the treble as well. Sound stage is clearly in the DMS' camp feeling notably wider and mildly deeper. Imaging, layering, and separation qualities are all similarly good, though I'll give the ZAX the edge. Overall I much prefer the ZAX which can basically replace the DMS for me in more aspects. The nice sound stage is about all I'll miss from the DMS.
In The Ear The ZAX uses the same high quality acrylic shell as a number of recent KZ models and as such feels like a more upscale device than the low price tag (for the number of drivers + feature set) would suggest. The new face plate design, which is very much open as you can see when holding the ZAX up to the light, is still metal and both looks and feels excellent in the hand. I still think KZ makes some of the nicest built earphones on the market, particularly in the budget realms. Further adding to the quality construction is the protruding 2-pin setup which is secured in place internally via compact screws, as visible through the clear acrylic body. Also visible through the shells is the plethora of drivers KZ somehow managed to cram into a shell originally designed for a simple 1+1 hybrid setup. 6 tiny armatures surround a 10mm dynamic with one more nestled comfortably within the nozzle. Equally minuscule channels are visible guiding sound from each armature to where sound can be experienced by the listener. I have a feeling they stuck with a familiar shell and selected clear acrylic to avoid a repeat of the “fake driver” fiasco that occurred when an original ZS5 was, uh....“carefully” dissected by a salty Youtuber.
Moving onto the cable, we see the same excellent upgraded offering that comes with the ZSN Pro X and ZST X. The sheath is thicker, more plush, and less prone to tangling above the y-split than past cables included by the brand. The silver-plated wiring within has a nice sheen to it too. It looks and feels quite nice. The hardware falls into the “same old, same old” category though. The VSonic inspired y-split and jack carry over from the ZSN Pro, as do the excellent preformed ear guides. Overall a great stock cable and worthy of the ZAX.
Comfort is outstanding. This earpiece has been a staple for a few different brands with mild tweaks being made to the nozzle angle and quality of the plastics. As with other KZ models that use it, like the ZSN, ZSN Pro X, ZST, ZS10 Pro, etc. , it fits perfectly with little to no effort required to get and maintain a good seal. The preformed guides hold the cable securely around the ear resulting in an earphone that is stable under pretty extreme movement. If you have teensy ears or they're a particularly odd shape you might have issues with fit and comfort, but I expect basically everyone else to find these a pleasant product to wear.
Isolation is pretty poor, and for that we can blame the open back design. With music playing, I can still hear happenings around me. Taking the ZAX out for my nightly stroll results in the sound of cars passing by cutting through pretty clearly. You can compensate with MOAR VOLUME!!! and somewhat with foam tips, but even so, these are best used indoors or somewhat calm areas. On the plus side, they don't bleed much sound out, so the leakage issues seem to be one-way only.
In The Box The ZAX arrives in the same compact, slightly more upscale packaging as the AS06. A glossy KZ logo can be found on the lid while the left panel contains a couple stickers with model info and contact information for KZ. The lid is still weighted with a dense cardboard plate containing the following slogan that I love; “Don't forget. The original intention is to use headphones to enjoy music.” KZ kept the cool metal plaque they included with the AS10 and BA10, though now it is tailored to the ZAX. While it doesn't add any real value to the package, it does serve to elevate the earphones that utilize this packaging style as the most premium of products in KZ's dense catalogue.
Lifting out the foam insert the ZAX's earpieces are nestled into, I noticed that the earpieces were situated left on the left, right on the right, with small cutouts in the cardboard insert below to make room for the nozzles with medium tips installed. Past versions of this packaging had the left earpiece on the right, right on the left, which is more visually appealing in my humble opinion, and didn't require additional cutouts to accommodate the nozzles. But alas, some of KZ's stronger skeptics took the previous design to mean they didn't know left from right. It seems KZ gave in to please the heathens. Beneath the foam insert you find the accessories beneath. In all you get:
- ZAX earphones
- 0.75mm 2-pin cable
- Single flange silicone ear tips (s/m/l)
- Instruction manual
- Warranty card
Final Thoughts While Knowledge Zenith seems to have moved away from the unpredictable and creative nature that I fell in love with in their pre-ZST days, those qualities have been replaced with consistency and quality. The ZAX doesn't really bring much new to the table in terms of general tuning. It again just iterates and improves upon past hybrid offerings with more refined, capable drivers, and greatly improved detail and clarity. Unfortunately, the decision to go open back has not really benefited the ZAX at all, leaving the low end feeling loose and slightly uncontrolled. This is particularly unfortunate given the stellar low end performance of the much more affordable EDX and ZST X models. That looseness, and an averagely sized but still competent sound stage are about my only complaints surrounding the sound. The amount of detail and impressive clarity on offer makes up for it, as does the pushed up midrange which is a refreshing alteration to what is otherwise a fairly typical KZ sound.
The outstanding build quality of the ZAX continues KZ's tradition of shaming the competition. High quality plastics, nicely formed metal face plates, clean internal construction. It's all there, and it looks great. It fits beautifully too, nestling snugly into the ear with a level of stability I have come to expect from earphones using this style of shell. The new cable is also a plus thanks to a noticeable bump in thickness, along with a softer, more plush and tangle resistant sheath. The only thing missing is a new accessory kit. You still only get a basic tip set and the cable. No carrying case or other frills. I'm looking forward to the day when KZ goes all out with the included extras.
Overall, I quite like what KZ has done here. I've been getting tired of their same-old same-old hybrid releases that just rehash the same thing time and time again. While there are elements of this in the ZAX, enough is new and different for it to be refreshing to an old fan of the brand. KZ is back on my radar.
Thanks for reading!
- B9
Disclaimer Thanks to OPA Audio Store for reaching out and offering a sample of the ZAX for review. The thoughts within this review are my own subjective opinions based on time spent listening to the ZAX. They do not represent OPA, KZ, or any other entity. At the time of writing the ZAX was retaining for around 85 USD/117 CAD, depending on the colour and selected cable setup (mic or no mic). You can snag a set for yourself here: https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005001353584911.html
Specifications
- Drivers: 10mm dual-magnet 10mm dynamic + 7 balanced armatures
- Impedance: 24 ohms
- Sensitivity: 113 dB/mW
- Frequency Response: 10-40,000Hz
- Cable: 0.75mm 2-pin, braided, silver-plated
Some Test Tunes
Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark’s Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams
Fleetwood Mac – Rumors
Tobacco – screw*d Up Friends
Attachments
