INTRODUCTION

Choosing a portable or transportable set-up can be a daunting choice – especially for anyone new to the audio game.  Do I need an amp?  What are the improvements I can expect? Are there advantages over having a DAC/amp combo? Does spending a lot more guarantee me good sound? What am I missing out on? It can be a minefield with many differing opinions, and a lot of different subjective opinions.
 
In tandem with that is the many opinions tendered on what adding a new amp or amp/DAC can actually bring to the table in terms of clarity! details! soundstage! As I’ve gained a lot more experience, and (more importantly) tested more, I’ve come to realise that many of the differences I thought I’d previously heard are pretty subtle, and mostly occur because I wasn’t volume matching while comparing different amps or sources.
 
I’m a lot older now, and a little wiser, so if you’re interested in reading one person’s view of the FiiO Q1 DAC/amp and how it changed my opinion of my iPhone 5S output, then sit back and relax while we delve into the performance and features offered by this excellent little device. I’ve tried to mix a little objectivity in along with my subjective impressions – and hopefully this will combine to give you a fair and balanced view of my experience with the Q1.
 
ABOUT FIIO
By now, most Head-Fi members should know about the FiiO Electronics Company.  If you don’t, here’s a very short summary.
 
FiiO was first founded in 2007.  Their first offerings were some extremely low cost portable amplifiers – which were sometimes critiqued by some seasoned Head-Fiers as being low budget “toys”.  But FiiO has spent a lot of time with the community here, and continued to listen to their potential buyers, adopt our ideas, and grow their product range.  Today, their range includes DAPs, portable amps, portable dac/amps, desktop dac/amps, earphones, cables and other accessories.
 
FiiO’s products have followed a very simple formula since 2007 – affordable, stylish, well built, functional, measuring well, and most importantly sounding good.
 
DISCLAIMER
The FiiO Q1 was provided to me gratis as a review sample.  I have made it clear to FiiO that I still regard any product they send me as their sole property and available for return any time at their request. But I thank them for the ability to continue use of the Q1 – both for follow up comparisons and also for my own personal use.  The FiiO Q1 can be sourced from Amazon for approx. USD 70.
 
I have continued to use the Q1 for follow up reviews, and I recently inquired if I could purchase the device from FiiO.  They have insisted I keep the Q1 for my own use. So I acknowledge now that the Q1 I have is supplied and gifted completely free of any charge or obligation.  I thank FiiO for their generosity. 
 
PREAMBLE - 'ABOUT ME'.
(This is to give any readers a baseline for interpreting the review).
 
 
For the actual listening part of this review I used the Q1 both with my X3ii, stand alone with PC and netbook (to test the DAC), and also paired with my iPhone 5S. This is a purely subjective review - my gear, my ears, and my experience.  Please take it all with a grain of salt - especially if it does not match your own experience.
 
FURTHER NOTES

1. Volume matching was done with a calibrated SPL meter and test tones (1 kHz) when required for comparison.
2. Frequency response and distortion measurements were taken using a relatively cheap Startech USB soundcard, which I know gives me a pretty good measure of objective data – but is somewhat limited by the card itself. By that I mean that I’m measuring the limit of the Startech’s performance on THD, and I believe FiiO’s published figures are more accurate. 
3. FiiO's Q1 product page can be found here

 
WHAT I WOULD LOOK FOR IN A PORTABLE DAC/AMP
I thought I’d list (before I start with the review) what I would look for in a portable DAC/amp. This is useful to remember when looking at my reasoning for scoring later in the review.

1. Genuine portability
2. Good battery life
3. Clean, neutral signature
4. Easy to use
5. Low output impedance
6. Reasonable output power – should be able to drive IEMs and earphones up to 300 ohms
7. Good gain control
8. Hardware EQ if possible
9. Easy installation of DAC drivers
10. Value for money

 
PORTABLE AMP/DACs I HAVE EXPERIENCE WITH

1. Previous = FiiO E7, Beyerdynamic A200p
2. Current = FiiO E17K, Q1, K1, IMS-HVA, Cozoy Aegis, iFi Micro iDSD

 

THE REVIEW

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES
 
 
The Q1 arrived in FiiO’s standard retail packaging – a white, red and black box measuring 130 x 130 x 24mm. The front had a picture of the Q1, and the rear has some specs and other information in English and Chinese.
Opening the outer retail box reveals an inner box with two compartments – one holding the Q1 and underneath an envelope containing the silicone pads and paperwork. The other has the remaining accessories.  The accessories include:

1. 1 x 3.5-3.5 mm “mini” inter-connect cable (35mm from jack to jack!)
2. 2 rubber stacking bands
3. A USB to micro-USB recharging cable
4. 2 x silicone “stacking” pads
5. Warranty and instructions

 
 

Two things I’d like to mention in particular are the silicone stacking pads and also the inter-connect cable. The pads are 80 x 45mm, a little over 1mm thick, soft, flexible, and are “grabby” enough to bond to both surfaces of the source and amp you are stacking.  The physical size is perfect – large enough to protect (from abrasion or scratching), but small enough to not be noticeable between the two devices. They are absolutely perfect for use with FiiO’s stacking kits for their own DAPs.
 
 

The inter-connect cable is wonderful. I’ve wanted a short cable for some time, and was going to probably order the one JDS stocks – but the one included by FiiO is fantastic. At just 3.5mm in length (measured from centre of one jack to the other), it is just long enough to comfortably fit between two devices with no overhang. As with all FiiO accessories, it is simple, sturdily built, and has good connectors.  This has helped make my portable rigs much lower profile, and is excellent for use with FiiO’s E17K also.
 
The entire package is very practical, covering everything you initially need for the Q1.
 
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
The table below lists most of the relevant specifications for the Q1. As it is similar to the E17K, I have listed the specifications for this also.
 
 
BUILD / DESIGN
The Q1 is rectangular shaped with very slightly bevelled edges, and a slightly oval shaped mainly body – reminiscent of a very small hip-flask. The body consists of a top and bottom silver plate with a one piece matt black hollow aluminium body.  Although there is no rounding of major corners, there is enough softening of the edges to avoid very sharp corners. The size and shape is perfect for FiiO’s X1 and X3ii DAP’s – same W and L dimensions. My one reservation with the actual design of the Q1 is with stacking – the slight flask shape is not as practical as having a completely flat top/bottom.  However with the silicone pad fitted this issue is largely negated, and there are no problems using with FiiO’s stacking kits. The slightly curved surface of the Q1 does feel nice when handled by itself.
 
 

The front face of the main body simply has the word FiiO in the bottom centre. On the opposite side is the Q1, model number, short description and mandatory input and regulatory information. The top panel has a 3.5 mm headphone out socket on the left hand side, as LED light (operation / charging status), central TOCOS analog pot, and on the far right is the bass boost button. The LED glows an azure blue when in use, red when charging, red/blue when in use and charging, and green when on the charger (fully charged but not in use). The TOCOS pot has a very smooth action, and there is extremely low channel imbalance (0.2 dB or less), and my only issue is that the volume markings on the pot are virtually unreadable (white on silver).
 
 

On the bottom panel is a 3.5mm input/output socket (left hand side).  Next to this is the gain switch (hi/lo), and micro USB port for charging and digital access to the DAC.  At the far right is a switch to turn USB charging on or off. I’ll go into these features later in the review.  The switches are easy to operate, firm without being too hard to push or too loose, and again my critique would be that some form of black labelling might be easier to read rather than the descriptions etched into the silver of the end panel.
 
Overall the external build quality is essentially faultless.  It feels really good in the hand – solid and dependable, and has virtually no scratches after around 5 months of use. Using FiiO’s HS12 stacking kit, it is an ideal companion to FiiO’s X1 and X3ii.
 
 

Internally, the Q1 uses TI’s PCM5102 DAC chip which has impressive S/N ratio and low distortion measurements, but more importantly is quite linear and neutral sonically (to me there is a very slight touch of warmth). Using the PCM5102 means that the DAC is limited to 24/96, but this is also a driverless solution and uses Windows generic drivers. So for ease of use, this is a good solution for the price point IMO. Coupled with this is Maxim’s MAX97220 amplifier, which according to the specs is a differential-input DirectDrive® line driver/headphone amplifier. The Maxim chip is rated as 125 mW into 32 Ω with a 5 V supply, so its clear FiiO has been able to boost this to the specified 190 mW listed.
 
HEAT AND POWER
So far I’ve noticed no heat build-up at all with the Q1.  Even after hours (driving my HD600s), it’s still cool to touch.
 
FiiO rates the target headphone impedance as 16-150 ohm, and I think that maybe a lot of people see this and automatically assume this little unit can’t drive a headphone like the HD600 (300 ohm properly). But FiiO in the past have been notoriously conservative with their published data (a good trait in my opinion), and the Q1 (like the E17K) has reasonable power output to drive even my HD600 reasonably well. FiiO lists the specs as 190 mW into 32 ohm and 75 mW into 150 ohm. This should put the output around 20 mW into the 300 ohm HD600.
 
 

To put this into a real world test – using my iPhone 5S, digital out to the Q1, using low gain, and volume at max – I’m measuring mid to high 80 dB average readings with peaks in the early 90dB range. Add high gain, and that average is in the high 90’s and peaking over 100dB.  This was taken with real music and a calibrated SPL meter.  With very dynamic classical you may struggle a little more, but for me, the iPhone 5S + Q1 + HD600 nets me a really nice listening experience with most music at around 4/9 on the pot on low gain (mid 70db).
 
On the reverse side, with sensitive IEMs (and this speaks to the versatility of the Q1), with the 14 ohm 113 dB SPL/mW Campfire Audio Orion, around 2/9 on the digital pot is ideal (again around mid 70dB), and there is room to go lower if desired.
 
FEATURES / USEABILITY / SONICS
The Q1 is a very simple amplifier to use. Simply plug your source into the input socket, headphones into the headphone out, press play on the source, and adjust the volume on the Q1 to suit. The Q1 has a very low output impedance (<0.2 ohm) so it should suit even the most sensitive earphones. A note on this while I’m thinking about it – I detected no hiss even with the very sensitive 2000J, but take this with a grain of salt, because I know that my tinnitus can mask very faint hiss, so I am less sensitive to it than others. For the record, my wife (who has super sensitive hearing) couldn’t pick up any hiss either.
 
Gain
I mentioned the gain earlier, and FiiO has an interesting way of approaching gain with the Q1. On low gain, they’ve actually dropped the volume -7dB with high gain netting +4.5dB.  This gives a stated swing between high and low gain of around 11.5 dB – which is what I measured when I was testing.  I can only guess that this was to give more play on the pot with the implementation of the Max97220 amplifier chipset.
 
The one thing I have to congratulate FiiO with is implementing a decent gain increase.  Too often I have seen other amplifiers with quite small gain differentials – and this essentially nets no practical use. The other thing I’ve noticed with the Q1 via the headphone out is a decently black background from the headphone out in both high and low gain. I’ve noticed no increase in the noise floor using either of the gain settings and no real difference in sonic performance (volume matched direct comparisons).  So use the gain which is best suited to the load you are driving.
 
Interestingly, engaging the gain when using the DAC has different gain settings (-3.5 dB / +8 dB).  Still the same 11.5 dB gain swing though.
 
 

Bass Boost
The Q1 comes with a more traditional bass boost. Engaging the switch nets a gradual EQ gain in the mid and sub bass.  This gives just under +2dB at 200 Hz, +3 dB at 100 Hz, +4.5 dB at 50 Hz and close to + 6 dB at 20 Hz. I really like this implementation as it doesn’t make the overall signature too thick or overly dark, but does give some heft in an area which can be rolled off in some headphones (the sub-bass region).
 
Interestingly – the bass boost (when engaged as a DAC and measured via line-out - see graph) starts at roughly 1 kHz, but has no change from 1 kHz to 20 kHz.  From the headphone out (i.e. as amp only) actually increases the loudness of the entire signal by about +1dB.  Not sure why this is – but interesting to note.
 
Use as a DAC (PC/Laptop)
The Q1 can also be used as a DAC for your PC, Linux box or MAC. The nice thing about this is that it is a driverless solution for all 3 OS platforms (well it needs drivers, but uses the generic inbuilt drivers in both Linux and iOS kernels, and the generic drivers within Windows also).  On my Windows 10 box, resolution and bit rate are capped at 24/96 max. On plugging the Q1, all of the devices tested recognised it as a FiiO USB DAC Q1.
I tried the Q1 with a YouTube video, and also with some basic gaming, and both times there was no latency or lag.
 
Whilst I wouldn’t think of using the Q1 as part of my main system, as I have access to any number of DACs, and it simply does not have the resolution or power of my iDSD, I did try it with my netbook (now quite aged, but still going strong).  The netbook, an ASUS 1015 PED EeePC has a very noisy Intel integrated sound card, and the Q1 makes a very noticeable difference – cleaning up the erroneous noise, and also adding a (subjective) depth of layering to the sound which I find excellent. I’ve also used it at work on my generic work PC, and had a similar experience. Whilst the DAC on the Q1 is never going to be a world beater – for the mere cost of $70 it is absolutely excellent as either a starter DAC/amp for a PC/laptop, or simply for a portable solution when you are on the road.
 
Use as a DAC (iPhone 5S)
So where has the Q1 made the biggest difference for me? Although I didn’t expect it, the biggest difference has been using the Q1 with my iPhone 5S – actually using the DAC and amp on the Q1, and effectively using the iPhone as merely a transport. And it is the implementation of being able to turn USB charge off that has made all of this possible. By engaging this switch, when plugging the Q1 to the iPhone 5S (using either CCK or equivalent cable), the Q1 is no longer using any battery power via the USB, and all it is doing is pulling the digital signal.  This then stops the iPhone from complaining about power – and allows the digital transfer to take place.
 
So Brooko – I’ve read before that you regard the iPhone 5S as being a great sounding device – what has changed? I’m glad you asked.  Nothing has changed really – the iPhone 5S still sounds great – very linear, very flat.  But adding the Q1 (again subjective) brings a slight touch of warmth, and again a depth of layering into the presentation of the music which I’ve found very enjoyable.
 
So – why don’t you just use lineout or headphone out to the Q1’s line-in then?  Well here’s the thing.  I’ve tried both, and volume matched over a period of an hour – I compared iPhone by itself, vs iPhone headphone out to Q1 and finally iPhone digital out to the Q1 – and time after time I was getting more enjoyment from the iP5S > Q1 with the Q1 doing the work as both DAC and amp.  In fact – if the iPhone was a decent size (say 128 Gb), and I didn’t mind the stack, I could be very happy with this set-up as my main portable.  Yep – it really is that good. But sadly – the iPhone is only 16 Gb (it’s a work phone) – and I have a lot of other dedicated DAPs – but I’ve been surprised how often I’ve continued to use the iPhone and Q1.
 
 

So which cable am I using?  Well for start off – I’ve been using the CCK and suitable adaptor cable.  It’s unwieldy but works without a hitch. I next had Head-Fier Vidal send me one of his home made cables – and while this is the perfect size, and “often works” – it is a little more temperamental than Apple’s CCK set-up, and occasionally will refuse to work (at least until I restart the music app, or phone). I suspect it may be the lightning connector.  If you’re interested in trying it though – I’d suggest dropping him a PM – as the cable does work and all he’ll wants is to cover materials and his time. Lately I’ve been using another cable which is flawless – but I’m testing it for someone else, and until they give me the OK I have to stay quiet on it. It’s now my go-to though.
 
Lastly – I haven’t tried the Q1 with Android – you’ll find other reviews that have though, and they can fill you in with their successes.
 
Line-out Performance
This is the one area of the Q1 I’m a little less enthused about – and I really don’t know why. With the Q1 as DAC, I’m perfectly happy with the headphone-out, and this is repeated with using the line-in from my X3ii (again using the Q1 headphone out).  But using the Q1 as DAC and then line-out to another amp (tested with the iDSD) I’m simply less enamoured with the output.  It’s also interesting to note that when I tried testing this to measure distortion, THD and THD+N both increased.  I haven’t shown the graphs for this one, as it could be my equipment.  But for me anyway, I have personal question marks about the line-out performance.  This could simply be placebo on my part, but I have noted it and would appreciate if anyone finds similar.
 
Other general notes
In the graphs I used above you can see that as a pure amp, the headphone out is extremely linear – basically measuring flat on my equipment from 20 Hz to 20 kHz. To perform these checks I used a calibrated sound card (calibrated to measure completely flat), ARTA and a loopback. So for all intents and purposes the Q1 is providing “wire with gain” – a very neutral amplification not adding or taking away anything.
When we move to the DAC, and again measuring from the headphone out, the first thing to notice is a very slight roll off in the upper treble.  But the roll-off is minute and the reality is we won’t hear it (even slightly).
When I measured THD and THD+N (distortion readings) they were below the realms of audibility, and although higher than FiiO’s readings, I did suspect that I was measuring the limits of my sound card rather than the Q1.
 
Comparisons
I thought at this stage it would be a good idea to try and compare the Q1 with some alternatives.  My prerequisite was that the comparable units should all be portable DAC/amp devices – so I’ve used the ones I have at my disposal – FiiO K1 (USD 40), FiiO Q1 (USD 70) vs FiiO E17K (USD 139) vs IMS Hybrid Valve (USD 270). For testing I’ve used either my iPhone 5S or PC, headphone out of the device in question, and my AKG K553 Pro to evaluate. I also tested with the Campfire Audio Orion and VE Zen1 - but for the comparisons below the tests were actually performed with the AKG. All devices were volume matched with my SPL meter at 1 kHz with a constant test tone.
 


K1 vs Q1
The two devices are really chalk and cheese.  The K1 is 1/10^th of the weight, 1/5^th of the size and ½ of the price of the Q1, but really speaking it is the features which are the major difference here. Both are native/driverless DAC solutions – so ideal for laptop use.  Both have a max resolution of 24/96.  But the Q1 has 2-3 times the power output (depending on load), a volume pot (very important for me), a gain switch, and the ability to switch off USB charging during playback. The last feature means that the Q1 can be used with my iPhone 5S – the K1 can’t (it uses too much power) – which is a real pity. Sonically (tested with the PC), the Q1 sounds very slightly warmer than the K1 – but both have very good clarity.  The K1 actually sounds (subjectively) slightly more holographic. For my own particular needs – it is no competition.  While the K1 is a great sounding budget option – it simply does not have the features.
 
Q1 vs E17K
For this test I was able to use my iPhone or PC – and both work faultlessly. Size and weight are very similar with the E17K being marginally larger and heavier. Both are native/driverless solutions.  The Q1 has max resolution of 24/96 while the E17K is 32/96. Power output is practically identical, gain settings (E17K has 3 vs Q1’s 2), hardware EQ (E17K has full tone controls vs Q1’s bass boost), and both have ability to turn of USB charging – so they will work with the iPhone 5S. Both have volume controls.  E17K has the ability to take a coax input. E7K battery life is rated at approximately 15 hours or half of the Q1’s 30 hours. Sonically the two are very close, with again the Q1 being perhaps ever so slightly warmer than the E17K (which to me is very neutral). Again (subjectively) there is a feeling of a slightly more spacious or holographic feel – but this time with the Q1.  This is extremely slight though, and I really don’t know if I could pick it up consistently if blind tested. On the question of my personal preferences – paired with the iPhone it is close, but ultimately the E17K wins for me with its added features – and especially for the tone controls (check my E17K review for better idea of how good these are). For others – it will depend on the feature set vs your budget.  Both are excellent – it simply depends where your priorities lie.  One final note – the E17K can dock with the K5 desktop amp, the Q1 cannot.
 
Q1 vs IMS Hybrid Valve amp
This is a bit of a mismatch – in price and somewhat in features, but worth looking at nevertheless. Both are similar in physical size – with the IMS-HVA being slightly thicker, but also considerably heavier at 150g vs 100g. Both are driverless when used with my iPhone 5S – but I have to note here that the only reason I am able to use the IMS-HVA with my iPhone 5S is due to the “special cable” I’m testing – even with the CCK, it won’t work. With the PC, the IMS-HVA will go to a maximum resolution of 32/384 (vs Q1’s 24/96) but requires installation of the Bravo HD drivers. The Q1 outperforms the IMS-HVA by 3:1 in battery life, and also has hardware EQ (bass-boost), whereas the IMS-HVA has none. The IMS-HVA also has an unfortunate issue with input signal – if it is too high it will overdrive the valves, and cause distortion.  Because of this, if using the iPhone, PC, or other source with full line-out, I have to drop the line-out volume of the source to around 75% (depending on the signal).  All my FiiO DAPs have the ability – so it is not a huge issue, but it does make comparison of output power difficult. The IMS-HVA will “just” drive my HD600s to my preferred volume (I am a low volume listener ~ low to mid 70dB) – but ultimately the Q1 has better control of total output power, and has more usable output power (the output gain on the IMS-HVA is very similar though). Sonically – because of the tubes – the IMS-HVA is warmer, but also seems to be able to resolve better and has more overall depth sonically. If I was personally judging purely on sonic ability (and it would depend on headphone pairing), I would probably pick the IMS-HVA despite its limitations and price difference (the sonic footprint is wonderful – somehow both smooth and resolving). However as soon as price, power, and full feature set comes into play, it would be extremely difficult to go past the Q1 – especially if you are on a tighter budget.
 
BATTERY LIFE
Prepare to be amazed.  FiiO rates the play time on a full charge at better than 30 hours and recharge at around 3½-4 hours. For my use I’d suggest that time is pretty accurate. It’s hard to monitor when you have a device with this much battery life, and I’d set-up to measure more than a few times, only to have the battery on the DAP die, or forget to check the device at around the 29-31 hour mark.  What I can tell you is that the one time I had the K553 Pros running (paired to E17K running off mains) and managed to measure non-stop (from the Q1 having a full battery), I know it passed the 30 hour mark, and died sometime before the 30hr 44 min mark.  Recharge back to full (mains power) was 10-15 minutes short of 4 hours.
 
 

And like the E17K, the other feature I haven’t mentioned is the effect on battery life with the X3ii when using the Q1 with it.  Normally I’ll get around 10-11 hours with the X3ii by itself. Introducing the Q1 extends that to around 15 hours – just simply by taking the load off the X3ii’s amplifier. While I still use the X3ii mainly with the E17K, for anyone with any of the FiiO DAPs – but especially X1 or X3ii, the Q1 makes a great battery extender.
 

VALUE & CONCLUSION

So how do we sum up the Q1, and did it meet my expectations of what constitutes a good portable DAC/amp?
 
The Q1 brings to the table a light-weight medium sized portable footprint which should pair well with most DAPs or smartphones (check other reviews for compatibility with Android devices).  It has a very sturdy build, and quality accessories which are suitable to the device and its intended use. In particular I really like the included silicone pads (for stacking) and the short inter-connect cable.
 
Battery life (30 hours) is exceptional, and output power is ideal for most IEMs or portable headphones, and depending on the source (and your listening level), is also capable of handling headphones up to 300 ohms (my HD600 and Zen/Zen2 earbuds both were well driven by the Q1).
 
The features are excellent for the price point – and include a well implemented bass boost, very good gain differential, and the ability to turn off USB charging while connected via USB – which made pairing with my iPhone 5S possible.
 
Separate DAC drivers are not required with the Q1 which makes it an ideal pack-and-go solution for most portable devices, and although output is limited to 24/96 – for playback this is more than enough for most of us.
 
Sonically the Q1 has a quite neutral signature with a slight touch of warmth (it definitely isn’t sterile or flat sounding), and the very low output impedance makes headphone matching very easy.
 
At the $70 price point, if you’re after an entry level DAC/amp, or simply a portable only device, the FiiO Q1 represents excellent value for money in my opinion, and it has my recommendation.
 
My thanks to FiiO for arranging the sample unit so that I could evaluate it.

INTRODUCTION

Warning – completely subjective views below 
 
I enjoy the second order harmonic distortion from tubes. Very early on when I was getting back into audio, I had the chance to test and review a PortaTube tube based portable amp, and I loved it. It had plenty of power, very good resolution, and a rich tonality which was mesmerising - but without losing any detail. Anyone who knows me well will recognise that the one thing I don’t particularly like is warmth and darkness (i.e. bassy, overly smooth).  I need to be able to also hear detail – and that is what the PortaTube brought to the table. The drawback is that it was large, could get very warm, and was pretty expensive.
 
It wasn’t too long before I then added a Little Dot MkIV to my desktop set-up – and it is affordable, powerful, and depending on the tubes – quite linear and very detailed. In fact the more I’ve listened to some good tube set-ups (NZ local Head-Fi Meet), the more I’ve grown to appreciate their sonic ability.  I’m currently testing a full tube amp from Venture Electronics, and it is sublime.
 
But I’ve always wanted a portable tube amp with a small footprint which wouldn’t cost the earth but would give me that “flavour” of sound which I love. Then April 2015 I was told about a new Kickstarter project for a tube based portable hybrid amp – valves in the path for the signature, and solid state for power, size, portability and linearity. The surprising thing for me was that the developer was also from New Zealand. So I made contact, joined the KS (donation so I could access the comments), and made an introduction to Martin (the developer). This in turn led me to being able to try the prototypes, and conversing with Martin along the way regarding where the issues lay, what could be improved, and what needed to be rethought. The amps are being shipped right now to backers, and while it is still not perfect – we’ll cover that in the review – the end result is a combined high resolution DAC/amp with a really nice tonality.
 
ABOUT IMS 
Martin Young resides in Auckland, New Zealand – and has been working for the last few years on a portable valve amplifier design – which he completed and started selling in early 2015.  It met with some very good reviews, so in order to further expand production, and take the amp to the world he started a Kickstarter project in March/April 2015. I’ve known Martin since then, and we’ve conversed regularly by email and phone – and met last year at our local Head-Fi Meet. It was a good chance to sit down with him, discuss where some of the issues lay, and devise means of correcting them.
 
In the time I’ve known him, Martin has been very responsive to suggestions, meticulous in trying to develop the best product possible, and his only weak point so far has been saying “yes” to too many requested features – and thereby delaying the delivery of his product. I know that he is continuing to work on the current deliveries, and also working on some new ideas for the future.  He is someone who appreciates good music, and good design – which bodes well for his future.
 
DISCLAIMER
The IMS Hybrid Valve Headphone Amplifier was provided to me gratis as a review sample.  I have made it clear to Martin that I still regard any product he sends me as his sole property and available for return any time at his request. But I thank him for the ability to continue use of the HVA – both for follow up comparisons and also for my own personal use.  The IMS-HVA can be sourced from his website for approx. USD 179, with an add-on DAC a further USD 89.
 
PREAMBLE - 'ABOUT ME'.
(This is to give any readers a baseline for interpreting the review).
 
 
For the actual listening part of this review I used the IMS-HVA both with my X3ii, stand alone with PC and netbook (to test the DAC), and also paired with my iPhone 5S. This is a purely subjective review - my gear, my ears, and my experience.  Please take it all with a grain of salt - especially if it does not match your own experience.
 
FURTHER NOTES

1. The unit I have for test and review is the model with both DAC and amp combined.
2. Volume matching was done with a calibrated SPL meter and test tones (1 kHz) when required for comparison.
3. Frequency response and distortion measurements were taken using a relatively cheap Startech USB soundcard, which I know gives me a pretty good measure of objective data – but is somewhat limited by the card itself.
4. I measured the IMS-HVA DAC, but the readings seemed completely off (I really need a much better interface), so I haven’t included them.
5. From this point – I will refer to the IMS Hybrid Valve Headphone Amplifier as simply the IMS-HVA, or HVA.
6. I’ve spent about two weeks with this particular IMS-HVA unit, but previously have spent up to 100 hours testing prototypes of both the amp and the DAC.

 
WHAT I WOULD LOOK FOR IN A PORTABLE DAC/AMP
I thought I’d list (before I start with the review) what I would look for in a portable DAC/amp (YMMV). This is useful to remember when looking at my reasoning for scoring later in the review.

1. Genuine portability
2. Good battery life
3. Clean, neutral signature
4. Easy to use
5. Low output impedance
6. Reasonable output power – should be able to drive IEMs and earphones up to 300 ohms
7. Good gain control
8. Hardware EQ if possible
9. Easy installation of DAC drivers
10. Value for money

 
PORTABLE AMP/DACs I HAVE EXPERIENCE WITH

1. Previous = FiiO E7, Beyerdynamic A200p
2. Current = FiiO E17K, Q1, K1, Cozoy Aegis, iFi Micro iDSD

 

THE REVIEW

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES
The package I have may not be the same as actual customers get. Mine arrived in a silver coloured tin box measuring 145 x 105 x 40 mm. Opening the lid reveals a top foam cover to protect the amp, and underneath this safely nestled in a thick foam form fitting inner compartment is the amp itself.
 
 
Also included with my unit were three short micro USB to USB cables (for charging / connecting to laptops etc), a 3.5mm to 3.5 mm interconnect, and an instruction / specification card. Martin is also looking at including an inter-connect with built in attenuation in future for those having issues with fixed line-outs. We didn’t worry about it for mine, as all my DAPs have the option to set the line-out to variable.
 

  
The entire package is practical, covering everything you might initially need for the IMS-HVA, but I do have a couple of suggestions for Martin. The first would be to think about including a simple protective carry pouch.  FiiO uses one for their E17K which would be perfect.  The second thought would be the inclusion of a shorter interconnect (see photos of FiiO’s latest which is included with their Q1 DAC/amp.  Lastly – and this may be included already in the final packages – a longer micro USB to USB charging / DAC cable. I have plenty already so I’m not worried, but ideally a 1m cable would be good for connecting to a PC.
 
 

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
The tables below list most of the known specifications for the IMS-HVA
 
 
BUILD / DESIGN
The IMS-HVA is rectangular shaped with rounded corners but quite “hard” front and back edges. It is essentially made up of two 59 x 104 x 2mm thick sheets of aircraft grade anodised aluminium (front and back), with a very solid silver one piece aluminium frame 3mm thick to hold the internals. In the front plate is a viewing window sealed by a 40 x 30mm piece of shatter proof plexi-glass, so that the tubes can be viewed. All of the print and graphics on the front and rear plates is laser engraved. The plates are attached by stainless steel hex mini fasteners. All of the internal components (front, sides, and pot) are electrically connected to the PCB’s ground for extra shielding from EMI and RFI.  This must be working brilliantly because there have been no issues at all working with my iPhone 5S.
 
   

On the left hand side is a single gain switch, and at the right hand side is the micro SUB charging port, which doubles as the digital input for the DAC if fitted. At the top left is the 3.5mm line-in, and top right the 3.5mm headphone out.  Between them is the potentiometer – which has a very smooth action.  This is topped by a CNC milled and knurled metal knob.
 
Internally, the IMS-HVA uses two military grade Raytheon 6418 glass vacuum tubes, and these essentially give the IMS-HVA its tonality. I asked martin about their origin, and he told me they are 1984 vintage, and were originally included destined to be included inside the Patriot missiles, so it would be fair to say that long life and top performance was essential with these valves. The valves actually don’t glow when active – which creates an issue for users expecting the amp to have that warm tube glow. So Martin arranged to include two very quiet orange LED back-lights behind the valves which glow when the amp is switched on. The result looks amazing – and I can assure you the tubes are actually working as they are designed. Without the filaments actually glowing, there are no issues with heat either – which makes the IMS-HVA perfect for pocketable use.
 
 

For the amp itself, Martin has used the Burr Brown OPA 2134 – mainly for its renowned low distortion figures. He also uses metal film resisters throughout, low ESR tantalum capacitors, and even the circuit boards have 2 oz. copper tracks to further lower circuit noise.
 
For the DAC section, Martin has used the Savi Audio SA9227 as a master DAC, with the Burr Brown PCM5102 as the slave. This gives a maximum resolution of 32 bit / 384 kHz PCM, and with the right drivers, should also be able to decode both DSD64 and 128.  Note – I have not tested this.
 
 

If I was to describe the build and design in a couple of words I’d say clean and industrial. The finish might not be 100% perfect (the gain switch is slightly low on my unit), but it exudes a feel of robustness / sturdiness which I find oddly endearing.  And knowing how much time went into selecting and testing components (from my various discussions with Martin), I know that although some tough design decisions had to be made, corners were not actually cut during the journey.
 
HEAT AND POWER
As discussed earlier, the Raytheon valves actually run correctly at a very low temperature, so heat is not an issue (at all) with IMS-HVA.  You can happily walk around with this in your pocket all day.
 
Power is something Martin and I have talked about a lot. The battery will provide 4.2 volts, but included in the circuitry is an on-board booster which takes this to 12.5 volts, which is then applied to the anodes to power the valves. And although I listed above the actual power output volumes at full power – they aren’t quite the full story. The IMS-HVA has one big issue at the heart of its design – and that is when you put a full line-out voltage into the amp, it can overdrive the Raytheon tubes into distortion. A solution would be to lower the amount reaching the tubes (via use of resistors), but when we tested that, we then needed to increase the output gain which led to unwanted noise after the tube stage, and also at the low point of the pot. The only other solution would have been to change the tubes, but this would have compromised the entire design – so this is where compromise had to be reached.  Martin did put resistances in before the tubes – but compromised between that and the output stage. For most sources – including PC’s I would recommend keeping the output volume of your source at no higher than 75% - otherwise there is a high chance that the valves will over drive and you will hear distortion (particular in the lower frequencies).  I know some people are going to cry “foul” at this – but it is what it is, and I personally have no issues with it on any of my devices.  If it something that will bother you – look elsewhere.
 

Testing with the 320 ohm VE Zen1 and 14 ohm Campfire Audio Orion - I also used the HD600 (not shown)
 
So how to give you a usable power metric? The easiest way was to measure the IMS-HVA under a demanding load and see how loud it could get.  So I used test tones, set the PC to 75% into the DAC, and measured using a SPL meter.  My readings were 72.7 dB at low gain and 85.4 dB at high gain.  I then measured FiiO’s Q1 using the same metrics, but this time at 100% power from the PC, and it gave readings at 78.9 dB and 90.2 dB respectively.  This was test tones though – not actual music. 
 

Screenshot of the channel matching on my amp - provided by Martin.
 
Martin actually states on the documentation that his target headphone impedance is 4-32 ohms, and I can understand exactly why he’s done this. I can tell you that it drives the 32 ohm 114 dB SPL/V AKG K553 Pro beautifully on low gain at very low on the pot and 75% on the iPhone (digital out).  But how about throwing a much bigger load – the 300 ohm HD600?  Again with the iPhone at 75% the HVA manages to output a very healthy 75 dB ave with peaks at 80-85 dB but on high gain and the pot really doesn’t have anything left to give. So for my listening preferences (low volume listener – low to mid 70dB) the HD600 sounds wonderful. For those wanting more volume the amp will struggle. Based on this I’d suggest the HVA should be OK with most headphones up to around 150 ohms (as long as they have reasonable sensitivity).
 
On the reverse side, with sensitive IEMs with the 14 ohm 113 dB SPL/mW Campfire Audio Orion, I found it necessary to switch to low gain, and actually drop the input volume a little bit more.  The audio is crystal clear – but it just shows the complexity of trying to produce an amp for many different inputs and outputs – especially if you need to take the valves into account as well.
 
FEATURES / USEABILITY / SONICS
The IMS-HVA is a very simple amplifier to use. Simply plug your source into the input socket, headphones into the headphone out, press play on the source, and adjust the volume on the HVA to suit. The only complexity in this equation may be that you’ll have to adjust your source volume as well to find a sweet spot.
 
The HVA has a very low output impedance (<0.3 ohm) so it should suit even the most sensitive earphones without running into damping issues. As usual, I tested for hiss – this time with the 14 ohm Orions. I couldn’t detect any with the Orions but I’m a poor subject because my high freq hearing is masked by my permanent tinnitus. My wife has super hearing though (she can hear our small cat on carpet from about 5-10 meters away).  So she ran the tests for me, and at low gain the amp was very, very silent.  At high gain though, the hissing started at just under the 50% mark on the pot. Given that it would be unlikely anyone is listening to sensitive IEMs on high gain at 50% volume – this should not be an issue.
 
Default Signature
I normally dislike talking about an amp’s signature – and especially trying to break things into bass / mids / treble, and especially about soundstage (which is really a by-product of the recording and transducers rather than the amp).  But in this case it wouldn’t be right without saying something about what you can expect.  This is very subjective. The first thing I’ve noticed using the HVA is that it does have a warm signature – but it’s not warm/dark, and instead more warm/sweet or warm/rich, or warm/vibrant.  It’s really hard to describe, but people who have a tube set-up already will know exactly what I’m talking about.  There is no lack of detail at all, and using the HD600s tonight with the HVA as DAC from my main PC has been thoroughly enjoyable while I’ve been writing the final version and bringing things together. If I had to make an analogy (and probably a  poor one) – it’s a little like the different colouring you can get with lightbulbs. With some straight digital amps, you can get illumination from a cold blue light source – very revealing, hiding nothing, very clinical.  I like this type of presentation too. With the HVA it’s like switching from the cold blue light to a warmer bulb.  You get the same illumination, but it isn’t as stark, or as readily apparent. There is a slightly warmer more natural tinge – and although I know it is a colouration, it is a colouration I really like.  It is relaxing, enveloping, and for my tastes utterly enjoyable. I’m a tube fan – and the HVA just sounds “right”.
 
Gain & Frequency
I mentioned the gain earlier, and so I duly measured the gain from both the amp section (used as amp only) and also as a DAC.  The gain measured on both was pretty close to +13 dB. For martin’s next portable project though, I think a gain solution which allowed for negative low gain (for IEMs), and then the much higher gain for full sized headphones, would be a fantastic solution.
 

 
Measuring the frequency response showed a relatively flat plot from 20 Hz to 20 kHz with a very slight rise in the extreme upper frequencies, and a very slight drop from about 40 Hz down.  Given that these deviations are less than 1 dB, they will not be noticeable – especially at the extremes of frequency.
 
Use as a DAC (PC/Laptop)
The IMS-HVA can be used as a DAC for your PC, Linux box or MAC. I was unable to test this on the MAC but was able to on my EEEpc running Linux.  The DAC was recognised (SA9227 USB Audio) without any need for further drivers, and within a couple of minutes I was up and running. I didn’t try to manipulate it too much within Alsa (due to time constraints), but I have no doubts that the full resolution would have been available. I should also mention that this is a very old, very low powered laptop, and with the HVA combined with the HD600’s and Clementine audio player, I was an extremely happy camper.  The resolution was fantastic, and I really didn’t feel I was missing anything – even compared to my main system.
 
Moving to Windows, and this time you need to have the DAC driver installed.  Interestingly with my netbook, a previous driver I’d used for another DAC utilising the Savi chipset was installed and so it utilised that driver and I immediately had sound and resolution up to 24/192 (if I’d installed the correct driver this would have been at 32/384).  On both Linux and Win 7 starter on the Netbook, the DAC ran with no hitches (both times I had the output set at 75%), and the difference to the on-board  was stark.  The on-board Intel has always been slightly noisy, and like the Q1 I tested recently, the improvement sonically was wonderful.  The difference between the Q1 and the HVA though is in the resolution of the DAC, and the HVA really does sound rather wonderful – even on this very old piece netbook.
 
Lastly I tried the HVA with my desktop, and again after getting the output from PC to DAC correct – PC at 50% output this time (once the drivers were installed), the DAC ran without a hitch (this time with 32/384 full resolution available, and again the actual resolution of the DAC is really very good. I also tried the HVA with a YouTube video and there was no latency or lag. While for me personally I won’t be using the HVA as part of my main system, as I have access to any number of DACs, and it simply does not have the power of my iDSD, its performance with my netbook was so good that it would definitely be an option for me next time I’m heading away.
 
Use as a DAC (iPhone 5S)
I spoke to Martin a couple of weeks ago with the outstanding news that I could actually run the HVA with my iPhone 5S, but with the iP5S running digital out to the HVA DAC! Unfortunately since then I’ve had an update on the phone, and that functionality is no longer there again.  The 5S now gives me the message that the add-on device draws too much power.  Damn!
 
However very recently I’ve had the chance to test a new cable (I can’t say too much about it right now – except to say that it works!), and the functionality is back again.  The downside is that it chews through the battery of the iPhone very quickly (I’d estimate I might get 4-6 hours max).  The solution would for Martin’s next project to have a simple switch to turn USB charging off.  This would then mean that most cables would work – and the next HVA would become a smartphone’s best friend.
 
 
And like I recently wrote with FiiO’s Q1, the ability to actually use a different DAC with the iPhone as transport, has shown me what is available.  The iPhone5S still has a very good DAC – and it does truly sound great. But the HVA adds another dimension – subjectively a richer tonality and resolution that is a little more vivid and alive – and it is mesmerising. I also tested the HVA just by using the iPhones headphone out into the HVA line-in (so as pure amp), and this was also a sonic improvement, adding some warmth – but vibrant warmth rather than simply addition in the low end. If I was to rank the sound from top down, it would be HVA (DAC/amp) > HVA (amp only) > iP5S.
 
So what would make this pairing even better besides the ability to turn the USB charging off – the position of the DAC port.  As you can see from the photos, it isn’t ideal for the iPhones, and the ideal for me would be to have the port on the bottom. I wouldn’t have been worried about this before, but now that I know the DAC can be used quite easily (with the right cable), I’d be keen to find another solution which fits the bill while retaining the excellent sonic signature of the HVA.
 
Other general notes
I also measured distortion with my equipment and was pretty amazed to see that the main body of noise (low gain, but full volume from the amp, and about 75% from the PC) was measuring well under 100 dB down.  Then of course I noticed the signal at 1 kHz was correspondingly starting at about -20 dB, so the SNR was probably around 85dB.  Not stellar, but good enough to be unnoticeable with music playing and to be fair, on low gain, the amp has a pretty quiet background. The second very noticeable thing is the harmonics from the tubes. THD and THD+N both spike to around 3% - but again this will be in ratio to the lower SNR, and exist because of the tubes. The reason many of us use tubes is for the pleasant 2^nd order harmonics.  If this bothers you (the higher THD) then for sure stick to solid state.
 

 
Comparisons
Unfortunately I’m probably going to disappoint with this section. The problem is that I really have nothing even remotely close to this price range or feature set – other than the Cozoy Aegis – and again these two really would be chalk and cheese. To make a valid comparison, I’d really need to be comparing another portable valve amp – and I don’t really have one for comparison. So what I will attempt is a quick comparison with the $140 FiiO E17K.  It may not be useful comparisons – but hopefully you’ll get a feel for overall performance vs price.  At a later stage if I have another suitable am to add for comparison, I’ll revisit the review.
 
IMS-HVA vs FiiO E17K
For this test I was able to use my iPhone or PC – and both work faultlessly. Size and weight are somewhat similar with the E17K being almost the same dimensions but about 40g lighter. The E17K has a driverless solution for the DAC and is pretty much plug and play with any PC, but the cost of this is reduced resolution at the DAC.
 
In the amp section, both have similar total gain settings, and both have similar output power on paper – although the HVA is hampered by the issue with overdriving valves (so effective output on the FiiO is definitely higher by quite a margin).  The FiiO measures better – in linearity, distortion and noise floor (SNR).  It also has a lot more EQ features with the tone controls. Both can be used with the iPhone 5S with the correct cable – but it easier with the E17K due to being able to turn charging off.
 
Sonically, both are wonderful sounding units – but in direct comparison, the E17K is like sitting at the desk with my work light on, everything revealed – sonically wonderful, and this is why it remains my workforce for reviewing with my X3ii.  The HVA with the same music is sitting in the same room, but with the softer main lights on, and in my comfy reading chair rather than at the desk. I love both devices – they are just for different purposes.
 
BATTERY LIFE
The internal battery is either a NiMH (nickel metal hydride) or LiPo (lithium polymer) 1800 mAh long life battery.  I’m not sure why Martin has the two different options, but I suspect it may be to do with different postal regulations around the world.  Mine is the LiPo.  Martin recommends an 8-10 hour first charge, and after that around 4 hours seem to charge from empty to full.  The amp runs at roughly 140mA per hour which should give around 12 hours use – depending on the load being driven.
 
 
When you plug the amp into a power source, there is a little red LED on the far lower right of the plexi-glass window which lights up.  When the amp is fully charged, a green LED is visible.
 
Martin’s estimate for both battery life and recharge time are pretty much spot on. Recharging has generally been about 10 minutes either side of 4 hours for me, and testing under load netted a little over 10 hours for the HD600, and slightly over 12 hours with IEMs.

VALUE & CONCLUSION

So how do I draw a conclusion on the IMS-HVA, and did it meet my expectations of what constitutes a good portable DAC/amp?
 
The HVA DAC/amp has an extremely good build, and I know personally how good the components are which Martin has included – mainly because we’ve discussed many of them. Aesthetically it is a fantastic looking unit, and for lovers of tube visual warmth, you’ll be impressed with industrial looks combined with the warm glow behind the very clear glass. The amp has definitely been a talking point whenever I’ve had it out and about.
 
The accessory package is but a couple of things I’d love to see included would be some sort of soft protective case, shorter inter-connect, and maybe protection for when stacking (a rear pad perhaps).  Including these items would not add a lot of cost but would increase the perception of value.
 
Battery life (10-12 hours) is probably around average, and output power is ideal for most IEMs or portable headphones, and depending on your listening level, is also capable of handling headphones up to 300 ohms (my HD600 and Zen/Zen2 earbuds both were driven reasonably well for my listening levels by the HVA). I think the ideal range is probably going to be more in the 10-150 ohm range though (depending on sensitivity). Gain at +13 dB is practical and useful, but volume output at times may be too much for really sensitive IEMs.
 
Separate Windows drivers are required for the DAC section – and will give resolution up to 32/384. The DAC decoder is capable of handling DSD (64/128) but this was not tested by me. The DAC works natively with Linux, and this should be true of Macs as well (driver support included in the kernel).
 
With the right cable – I was able to get the HVA working natively as DAC/amp with my iPhone 5S, and the sonic improvement (subjective) to me was definitely worth it – but it came at a cost of battery life on the iPhone. And the location of the DAC micro USB port is not exactly friendly for stacking my iPhone.
 
Sonically the IMS-HVA brings together very good resolution with typical rich, warm, and subjectively enjoyable tube warmth (second order harmonics). How good does it sound? Well I’ve been doing the final edit tonight, and I used the E17K for around ½ an hour for the comparison piece (with my HD600s), but as soon as I could, I switched back to the HVA again – and I genuinely like the E17K. If you appreciate the natural tonality a linear tube set-up can bring, you’ll probably like the IMS-HVA.
 
But let’s not forget some of the issues:

1. Due to the tubes having limitations for input power, they can be driven into distortion from a full strength line-out. My recommendation is to run most sources into the HVA at around 75% if using a PC, laptop, or DAP with a variable line-out.  If you only have a fixed line-out, you may be better to avoid the HVA, or be prepared to amp via the headphone out.
2. There is some hiss with sensitive IEMs if you intend using high gain, and the noise floor is also audibly higher at close to high volume on high gain.  This of course will depend on sensitivity of your headphones and hearing (I couldn’t detect it, but my wife could)

 
So we come to decision time, and I’m torn. USD 280 is a reasonably high price to pay for a DAC/amp compared to some of the very good solid state options – and there is the issue of lowering the input (which for some will be unsurmountable). But the build and overall quality of components, the sheer joy of the sonic signature, and the fact that with my gear I can have some of the beauty of a good tube set-up to take with me anywhere – 4 stars from me. And yes – if you like a tube set-up and can live with the caveats, I’d recommend trying the IMS-HVA
 
Finally to Martin, thank you for including me on the journey. It has been inspirational watching you solve the problems as they’ve cropped up.  What you have at the moment isn’t perfect – but at this price point it is going to bring a lot of people pleasure, and it leaves you ground to build upon in the future.
 

This is part of a larger retrospective / review I wrote on the HM5 - which can be found here : http://www.head-fi.org/t/748855/review-revisiting-the-brainwavz-hm5-a-retrospective-plus-bonus-look-at-pad-and-cup-options
 

ADD-ONS PART 1 – PADS

Audrey very generously sent me two extra pad options to try with the HM5 – a set of velours (black) and a set of thicker coloured pleather (mine are the dark red).
 
 
The velours are very close in size to the original pads and have equally good comfort and fit. The craftsmanship on the pads is excellent – quality stitching and materials used. My main problem with trying to A/B the pads is the amount of time trying to switch them – I know my sonic memory has the normal human auditory flaws – so please take the following comments with a huge grain of salt. This is what I think I’m hearing – but I wouldn’t swear on it. The velour pads IMO give a slightly airier and brighter presentation with an increase in lower treble. Cymbals seem to have more shimmer and there is more upper energy overall and maybe slightly less bass as well.  If you take my earlier comments on bass into account, you’ll probably guess that I’m not a huge fan of the velours with the HM5. For me – just too much upper end energy, and for want of a better word, too much tizz. Others may love this though and at the reasonable price being charged, they are well worth trying. Even more so – if you are modding other headphones (I understand these may fit some Shures and also the T50RP.
 
 
Moving onto the dark red pleathers, and this time there is more of a physical difference.  These have slightly smaller internal dimensions as they are both wider and deeper (more memory foam). Once again, they are super comfortable. Again the same caveat applies re switching times. This time they are a lot closer to the original pleather – but my impression is of slightly more bass (slightly better fit / clamp?), and to me anyway, they looks lightly better.  Anyway – they are my current go to with the HM5 – and I really do like them.
 
 
One recommendation I would give to Brainwavz when selling these would be to consider including a pair of mounting discs.  I don’t think it would cost too much extra, but would make it a lot easier to switch pads and make comparisons when using the HM5.  I know I’d love an extra pair now, and would definitely be prepared to pay a little extra for the privilege.
 

ADD-ONS PART 2 – 3D PRINTED OPEN CUPS

These have intrigued me for a while, as I’ve often wondered exactly how the HM5 would sound as a semi-open headphone.
 
 
The cups themselves are slightly rougher in appearance that I was expecting, but I’d imagine that from these shells, you could then sand them to your own preference, and paint them if you wish. They also aren’t pre drilled – just have plastic stubs – so you really have to make the holes yourself if you are intending using these full time.
 
Comparisons this time were slightly easier, as I simply removed the screws, then carefully held the stock “backs” in place, and then swapped the semi-open “backs” (again held in place) to compare. So it involved a shorter time overall changing the cup rear cavities in order to get a good impression of the changes.
 
For a start (once I’d removed the backs), I simply held them in place with my fingertips, quickly listened, and then removed them altogether (completely open).  The effect was immediately noticeable with the first change being a noticeably wider soundstage presentation, and less reverb.  It was a change I very much liked. If anything vocals sound a lot more natural – less etching.  Bass didn’t change a whole lot in overall impact or tonality – just slightly cleaner.
 
 
If anything the 3D cups sit partway between the closed and fully open. They give a hint of how good a more open HM5 can be – but unfortunately still keep a certain amount of reverb, and for my tastes anyway, strangle some of the benefits of going as open as possible. For a laugh, I removed my HD600 backs, and held them loosely in place (they don’t fit of course).  IMO this should be Brainwavz next improvement – an almost completely open (i.e. mesh backed) rear cup. IMO it has better sonic qualities, and would also look a lot better than the 3D cups.  They could even use the existing plastic mould for the current cups – just fit a shaped mesh instead of the existing faceplate.  I’d buy them tomorrow – and I’d bet a lot of other HM5, Lindy, FA003 etc. owners would do the same.
 
 
So for now I’m not using the 3D cups – what they provide in sonic improvement is good, but doesn’t go as far as it could, and unless I take the time to “finish” them, they do look pretty “ugly” IMO. One last comment on the 3D cups – because of their increased depth, they don’t move freely under the arms/yokes.  Again this could be fixed with an open “mesh” design.

INTRODUCTION

I posted my RE2000 review just a few weeks ago, and the follow up to that review was always going to be it's sibling – the RE800. When Mark contacted me and asked if I'd be interested in reviewing both the RE2000 and RE800 I went into it knowing I couldn't afford the RE2000 but hoping that the RE800 might hit a sweet spot between sound and affordability. I'd loved the RE400/600? earphone which was included with the HiFiMan SuperMini when I reviewed it, and was expecting that the RE800 might sit somewhere between it and the new flagship RE2000. And after reviewing the RE2000 and hearing how wonderfully tuned, and how responsive the new Topography driver was, I was looking forward to putting it though its paces.

ABOUT HIFIMAN

HifiMan Audio was founded in late 2005 by Dr Fang Bian when he was resident in New York. He started Head-Direct, and in 2007 began use of the HifiMan brand. They started initially with in-ear earphones, branched out into building hi-res portable players, and this was followed by planar magnetic headphones. As the business grew, so did the need to expand, so in 2010 Dr Bian started two small factories in China, and moved the HQ to Tianjin China in 2011. They are now a well recognised brand globally – particularly in the field of portable or personal audio products.

I found most of these short facts from a couple of interviews with Dr Bian posted on line, and among the interviews were a couple of direct quotes which I found fascinating and illuminating:

I started listening to a lot of music when I was in high school. I used a Walkman and Discman all the time because I had nothing else available to me. They were designed more for convenience than great sound. I wanted both- convenience and great sound so that set the stage for my dream to build the best sounding personal audio products.

Starting with me, everyone is passionate about what we are doing at HiFiMAN. We may not always do everything perfectly from the beginning but we try hard to get it right in the end and our track record is pretty good. Most of all, I want our customers to know how much we appreciate them. Their support and feedback is invaluable.[/SIZE]

DISCLAIMER

The HifiMan RE800 that I’m reviewing today was provided to me as a review sample. After I finish with the review, I will arrange a tour through NZ and maybe Australia. At the completion of the tour, I will either return the IEM to HifiMan, or they may allow me to hang onto it for further review comparisons. Either way – they retain ownership.

I have made it clear to HifiMan that I still regard any product they send me as their sole property and available for return any time at their request. But I thank them for the ability to review and possibly continue use of the RE800 for follow up comparisons. I do not make any financial gain from this review – it is has been written simply as my way of providing feedback both to the Head-Fi community and also HifiMan themselves.

I have now had the HifiMan RE800 for just over 3 weeks. The retail price at time of review is USD 699.

PREAMBLE - 'ABOUT ME'. (or a base-line for interpreting my thoughts and bias)

Spoiler: Click here for a summary of my known preferences and bias

I'm a 50 year old music lover. I don't say audiophile – I just love my music. Over the last couple of years, I have slowly changed from cheaper listening set-ups to my current set-up. I vary my listening from portables (mostly now from the FiiO X5iii, and iPhone SE) to my desk-top's set-up (PC > USB > iFi iDSD). My main full sized headphones at the time of writing are the Sennheiser HD800S, Sennheiser HD600 & HD630VB, and AKG K553. Most of my portable listening is done with IEMs, and lately it has mainly been with the Jays q-Jays, Alclair Curve2 and Adel U6. A full list of the gear I have owned (past and present is listed in my Head-Fi profile).

I have very eclectic music tastes listening to a variety from classical/opera and jazz, to grunge and general rock. I listen to a lot of blues, jazz, folk music, classic rock, indie and alternative rock. I am particularly fond of female vocals. I generally tend toward cans that are relatively neutral/balanced, but I do have a fondness for clarity, and suspect I might have slight ‘treble-head’ preferences. I am not treble sensitive (at all), and in the past have really enjoyed headphones like the K701, SR325i, and of course the T1 and DT880. I have a specific sensitivity to the 2-3 kHz frequency area (most humans do) but my sensitivity is particularly strong, and I tend to like a relatively flat mid-range with slight elevation in the upper-mids around this area.

I have extensively tested myself (ABX) and I find aac256 or higher to be completely transparent. I do use exclusively red-book 16/44.1 if space is not an issue. All of my music is legally purchased (mostly CD – the rest FLAC purchased on-line). I tend to be sceptical about audiophile ‘claims’, don’t generally believe in burn-in, have never heard a difference with different cables (unless it was volume or impedance related), and would rather test myself blind on perceived differences. I am not a ‘golden eared listener’. I suffer from mild tinnitus, and at 50, my hearing is less than perfect (it only extends to around 14 kHz nowadays). My usual listening level is around 65-75 dB.

For the purposes of this review - I used the HifiMan RE800 from various sources at my disposal – both straight from the headphone-out socket, and also amplified. In the time I have spent with the HifiMan RE800, I have noticed no change to the overall sonic presentation (break-in).

This is a purely subjective review - my gear, my ears, and my experience. Please take it all with a grain of salt - especially if it does not match your own experience.

THE REVIEW

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES

Front of the retail box	Rear of the retail box

The RE800 arrived in a large retail box (253 x 183 x 70mm) – which consists of a full printed sleeve over a “jewellery type” hinged lid box. The outer sleeve is nicely done in grey with a carbon type pattern, clean white (and easy to read) text, with a picture of the RE800 on the front (as well as a sticker stating that they are electroplated with a fine 24K gold finish). The rear has specifications and contact details.

The inner box is what looks like a wooden/mdf case with a grey contact paper (the sort you cover kids school books with) over the top. It actually doesn't look too bad – but nowhere near the black leatherette that the RE2000 had. In the center is a printed square with the HifiMan logo, the RE800 model number, and their slogan “Innovating the Art of Listening”. The inner box is closed with a polished stainless hasp.

The inner box	First look inside

Opening the box reveals the RE800 and a rather plain looking generic clamshell zip-up carry case fitted into a foam top layer via cut-outs. Opening the case reveals silicone tips, a pair of formed ear guides, and 2 packs of Comply foam tips. In a compartment under the case are contact and warranty cards, and a very informative full colour booklet on the RE2000.

The full package	Excellent full colour guide

The accessories include:

• 2 pairs of black silicone triple flange tips
• 1 pair of grey silicone “flat” dual flange tips
• 1 pair of black silicone “flat” dual flange tips
• 1 pair of grey silicone single flange tips
• 1 pair of medium T400 genuine Comply tips
• 1 pair of large T400 genuine Comply tips
• 1 pair black flexi ear-guides
• 1 black soft shell storage case
• Maintenance and warranty card.
• Full colour booklet/manual

Tip selection	Storage case

The storage case is moderately large, and is not really jeans friendly, but would be ideal for use as a carry case in a larger jacket pocket, loose trousers or carry bag. It is 80mm in diameter, 35mm in height, with a zippered lid, and internally lined with a soft canvas like material. The case looks fairly generic, but should do the job for transport, and should provide a nice mix of portability and reasonably safe storage / protection when on the go.

All in all, the included accessories are fair, but not outstanding for this price point.

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
(From HifiMan’s packaging / website)

Model	HifiMan RE800
Approx price	$699 USD
Type	Single Dynamic IEM
Driver	9.2 mm Dynamic with Topology coating
Freq Range	20Hz – 20kHz
Impedance	60Ω
Sensitivity	105 dB
Cable Type	1.3m, non replaceable
Cable Materials	Silver coated crystalline copper
Jack	3.5mm gold plated single ended, right angled
Weight	27g
Casing material	Brass with electroplated 24K gold finish

FREQUENCY GRAPH

The graphs below are generated using the Vibro Veritas coupler and ARTA software. Ken Ball (ALO/Campfire) graciously provided me with measurement data which I have used to recalibrate my Veritas so that it mimics an IEC 711 measurement standard (Ken uses two separate BK ear simulators, we measured the same set of IEMs, and I built my calibration curve from shared data). I do not claim that this data is 100% accurate, but it is very consistent, and is as close as I can get to the IEC 711 standard on my budget.

I do not claim that the measurements are in any way more accurate than anyone else's, but they have been proven to be consistent and I think they should be enough to give a reasonable idea of response - especially if you've followed any of my other reviews. When measuring I always use crystal foam tips (so medium bore opening) - and the reason I use them is for very consistent seal and placement depth in the coupler. I use the same amp (E11K) for all my measurements - and output is under 1 ohm.

The graphs are provided merely as a point of discussion, and later in the review I've included comparisons to other IEMs for similar reference.

My sonic impressions of the RE800 – written well before I measured, and amended afterwards with frequency information:

• Bass is quite linear, definitely not overly emphasised and tends to sit behind the mid-range a little. Extension is reasonable into sub-bass, and there is audible rumble but it is somewhat subdued. The bass that is presented is quite natural in tonality though.
  
• Lower mid-range is nicely in line with the bass, but recessed compared to upper mid-range. Male vocals are nicely presented with good sense of timbre.
  
• Upper mid-range is emphasised, but it's a really nice gradual rise to between 3-4 kHz and gives female vocals a nice sense of euphony.
  
• Lower treble extension is extremely good, but there is a really large peak at 7 kHz – some 10 dB above the highest mid-range peak and more than 20 dB above the lower mid-range. As a result, the lower treble is quite splashy and brash – especially with cymbals. Softening this peak produces a much better signature in my opinion.
  
• Overall a really nice signature apart from that single peak. It's just too sharp and can get quite harsh/brittle depending on the recording and listening volume. More on this later.
  
• Channel matching is excellent (much like the RE2000) – among the best I've seen throughout the entire spectrum.

BUILD AND DESIGN

Rear view of the shell	Side view

At first glance the RE800 looks quite elegant, shiny, and pretty well built. The outer shell is an all gold electroplated (over brass) two piece shell shaped similar to their RE400 and RE600, and is what I would call a tear-drop or water-drop design. The seam or join where the two pieces meet is visible when looked at closely, but is also very smooth and placed together well.

The interesting thing about the actual housing itself though is some of the research which went into the material to use. HiFiMan went through a very extensive prototyping development stage, and came down to three options – bronze, copper and brass. Bronze proved too hard for forming, and copper was too soft. Brass proved to be the ideal middle ground, and also had the right tonal properties. Now we know that brass is also prone to oxidisation, and this is probably the reason for the additional use of the 24K gold electroplating to finish the shells.

Front view and nozzle	HiFiMan logo and very faint L/R markings

The RE800 is a small IEM with an end to end length/width of just 17mm (from the rear to the front of the nozzle), and a circumference of just 11mm at its widest point. Any edges are nicely rounded, and there are no sharp corners which could end up touching your ear. The nozzle is 6mm in diameter, mesh covered and has an extremely generous lip.

The perfectly symmetrical tear-drop shape means that the RE800 can either be used cable up or cable down, and the shape lends well to a relatively deep insertion.

Y-split	Right angle jack

There are virtually no markings anywhere on the RE800 – except for a small HiFiMan logo on the very base, and also an extremely tiny L/R indicator on each cable exit. To actually work out which ear-piece is which (and remember the two basically look identical), you have to squint to actually try and see the markings. Its just not a good design. Even a little bump on the left or right exit would have made tactile identification possible.

Speaking of the exit, it is simply a hollow tube extending perpendicularly from the main body. The cable is routed through this hollow tube, and there is no strain relief. Given that this is a fixed cable, and this is potentially a point on the IEM where stress could cause cable damage, its simply unfathomable that this was not addressed before release. And especially so when you consider some critique HiFiMan have had on their RE400 and RE600 designs in the past, and also considering this is a $700 earphone. This is a design flaw that needs to be addressed.

Edit : Hifiman have since posted that they are introducing a replaceable cable design now using an MMCX connection (https://www.head-fi.org/f/threads/how-do-you-improve-upon-gold.855108/). Nice job HifiMan.

HifiMan's jack (L) vs Dunu's (R)	New connector (photo courtesy of HFM)

The cable is a crystalline copper wire with a silver coating (SPC), and finished with a quite satiny black overwrap which appears to be a PVC base. The main cable appears to be quite sturdy and strong, but north of the Y-split the cable is quite a bit thinner.

At the Y-split there is no relief, but I don't really think its needed because of the design (generally this area hangs down and there is no constant movement). The lower cable is also strong enough, and the Y-split itself is essentially a hollow tube with a tapered base. It is made of the same material as the shells, printed with the model number, and has an excellent cinch.

The jack is 3.5mm, right angled, and has a quite heavy duty housing. The standard stereo plug is gold plated. An interesting thing about the jack is that despite its heavy duty appearance, unscrewing the cylinder shows the use of electrical tape for insulation rather than the more popular heat shrinking. Both do the same job, but the electrical tape sort of clashes with the price point / build expectation.

Internally HiFiMan uses what they call a 9.2mm Topology driver. They have invested a lot of time into researching advanced depositional technology, and the result is a driver with a nano particle coating applied to it's surface. The distribution of the coating has distinct geometrical patterns, and this allows HiFiMan to manipulate or control the wave patterns to achieve a desired audio effect. According to Dr Fang Bian, “different nano materials have differing structures and each of these materials has its own properties”. Therefore by carefully controlling the diaphragm surface structure, you can yield different results in acoustic performance to a degree previously unobtainable with conventional designs. Dr Bian also says that the Topology driver also reduces uncontrolled diaphragm distortions which occur in both BA and standard dynamic drivers.

HiFiMan also claim that no other driver technology allows for such control and precision resulting in clarity, detail and nuance such that it can best the world's most complicated multi driver set-ups, but with none of the coherency and crossover issues.

FIT / COMFORT / ISOLATION

I'll start with the easy one (isolation), and we can then look at fit and comfort. Isolation will be dependent on tip selection and insertion depth. If you get a good seal, isolation is exceptionally good (definitely well above average for a vented dynamic IMO). While it may not reach the absolute high isolation of sealed BA IEMs, I would have no issues trying these in noisier environments, including long haul flights.

Regarding fit and comfort – and these thoughts can be more subjective, although due to the small size and rounded design, I can't see comfort being an issue for anyone. As I stated earlier, these can be used either over ear or cable down, and because of the diminutive size, insertion is fairly deep which means nothing really touching the outer ear – which equals no discomfort.

I'm going to quote from the manual:
“The shape of the housing is a traditional, rounded bulbous shape taking its design from the RE400 and RE600. Rounded, smooth and simple in its harmoniously elegant symmetry. Smooth and curving it rests gently in the ear and should give users a comfortable fit, worn up or down, as best suits their personal preferences.”

This time HiFiMan are entirely correct in their printed summary. The design is both comfortable and fits snugly no matter which way you orient them. Thumbs up from me.

HFM's triple and single flange	Ostry tuning and modded Spinfit

Like the RE2000, the RE800 also has a generous lip on the nozzle, and this means that practically any tips will fit. Because of the deeper fit, I personally found the triple flanges a little lengthy, but Comply tips and foam modded Spin-fits definitely did the trick for me. I also tried Spiral-dots, Sony Isolation tips, Ostry tuning tips and a number of others.

Spiral dot and Comply	Excellent comfort (they are tiny)

The HiFiMan RE800 sits inside my outer ear when worn, and I can easily wear them for extended time periods (they are quite simply non-fatiguing). I can lie down with them, and sleeping with them intact causes no issues.

SOUND QUALITY

The following is what I hear from the RE800. YMMV – and probably will – as my tastes are likely different to yours (read the preamble I gave earlier for a baseline). Most of the testing at this point (unless otherwise stated) was done with my FiiO X5iii (single ended) and A5 amp, no EQ, and Comply foam tips. I used the FiiO devices simply because paired they give me a very transparent window to the music with low impedance, and more than enough power. With both, there was no DSP engaged.

The X5iii and A5 test combo	FiiO X5iii solo or X7ii were also more than enough

For the record – on most tracks, the volume pot on the A5 (paired with X5iii) was just under one quarter (on low gain) which was giving me an average SPL around 65-75 dB. Tracks used were across a variety of genres – and can be viewed in this list http://www.head-fi.org/a/brookos-test-tracks.17556

Relativities

• Sub-bass – has good extension and even at my low listening levels some rumble is audible, but somewhat gentle. There is not the same impact as the RE2000. There is also no boosted over-emphasis and sub-bass sits extremely well within the overall frequency mix. There is no bleed into lower mid-range. Quality and timbre of the bass is very good (the Topography driver seems to handle bass really well), and the RE800 sub-bass definitely sounds more “reference” to me than boosted.
  
• Mid-bass – has a small but quite natural mid-bass hump – and impact is sufficient but does not go much beyond that. Lovers of a stronger bass will probably need this area boosted, but as a more reference bass lover, I find it fits perfectly in line with both sub-bass and lower mid-range. Again the term “reference” comes to mind.
  
• Lower mid-range – there is virtually no recession at all compared to bass, and overall this area fits pretty nicely between bass and upper mid-range. Male vocals are excellently portrayed, but there is unfortunately some heat coming from the lower treble area which can cause the lower mid-range to almost feel dry and a little thin. I think the lower mid-range is brilliantly tuned – and for the third time the thought that this is truly a reference tuning is what springs to mind.
  
• Upper mid-range – elevated compared to lower mid-range, and there is a gentle but sustained rise from 1 kHz to a first peak at 3-4 kHz, then a slight drop to 5kHz. The result is a clean and clear vocal range, with some very good cohesion and definite euphony for female vocals to sound sweet and elevated. The RE800 has been a relatively flat and well balanced monitor to this point, and this slow rise gives a nice mid-forward tuning. Again though, the issue stems from the lower treble – and its sad that with a lot of music, a dryness and leanness pervades. Its not the fault of the upper mid-range, but the lower treble.
  
• And now we come to the problem area. Lower treble has very good extension, and really is quite sustained from 6-10 kHz. But there is a massive spike at 7 kHz which is a full 10 dB above the upper mid-range, and a scary 20+ dB above the lower mid-range. We know this area has the ability to heighten presence of cymbals and its not unusual to see it boosted – just not to this extent. When you do, there is an unnatural brittleness introduced, and for any music with presence at this frequency, it feels as if somebody has turned a button called “sizzle” on. It's also an area I know where many people have sibilance issues. On an almost perfect reference signature, I simply can't understand why HiFiMan have done this.
  
• Upper treble – rolls off slowly but naturally – but still has some extension through the upper registers. I can't really comment on the sonic signature of the upper treble, as it is rare for me to hear any nuance at these frequencies.

Resolution / Detail / Clarity

• There is no doubt that the RE800 is a very revealing monitor. The reference nature of the bass, coupled with the upper mid-range and lower treble extension will always shine a spotlight on detail. What also helps is the Topography driver. Whatever HiFiMan have developed with this driver is pretty special. Overall resolution is quite incredible with nothing hidden. It is vibrant, clear and articulate (just unfortunately has that sizzle in the upper end). Pink Floyd's “Money” and 10CC's “Art for Art's Sake” both shone with the level of detail presented. This is undoubtedly a cooler, leaner drier signature than the RE2000, but I still like it. Take the annoying etch out (EQ!) and this should prove to be quite the signature.
  
• Cymbal hits have excellent clarity and presence, and this includes decay. The problem though is the brashness or brittleness (which I know is the 7 kHz peak). It's just too much.
  
• Overall I feel as though I'm hearing everything in the recording at my lower listening levels. Turning the volume up can get quite fatiguing though.

Sound-stage, Imaging

• Directional queues are very good – clean and clear and very precise.
  
• Presentation of stage is definitely outside the periphery of my head space with binaural tracks. They are expansive but the sense of stage size isn't overdone.
  
• Separation of instruments is also very good, and this seems to be a strong point of the Topography driver. The clear definition of each instrument is quite compelling.
  
• Immersion during the applause section of “Dante's Prayer” was very good, a little more left/right than completely spherical, but circular enough to be thoroughly believable. What wasn't was the heightened harmonics from the clapping sound – again a brittleness which shouldn't be there.
  
• “Let it Rain” is always my next track and it had a wonderful 3D-like sense of spatial presentation – it is the way the track was miked. The issue was an abundance of sibilance with Amanda's vocals – and I know its present in the recording – but this time it is being heightened.

Sonic Strengths

• For the most part, overall tonal balance and clarity
  
• Imaging, separation and sense of space in the staging.
  
• Very good portrayal of both male and female vocals, although can be a little on the lean / dry / cool side of things.
  
• Detailed at low listening levels
  
• Transition between lower and upper mid-range is very good.

Sonic Weaknesses

• This one is easy – the 7kHz peak. Its just too much, too unnatural, and things like natural decay on cymbals should not be this accentuated. When I listen to tracks with a lot of upper end detail, and cringe at some of the heat or sizzle that simply shouldn't be there, I know its a step too far. Some (like my friend George) are going to find this perfect, and good luck to them (we all have different preferences after all). I can adapt to it – but its still like biting on tin-foil at times. And this is from a treble lover who usually doesn't like anything overly smooth.
• At higher volumes the RE800 has the ability to shred the lower treble if you have any music with strong 7 kHz presence.

AMPLIFICATION REQUIREMENTS

The RE800 is an interesting IEM with its 60ohm impedance and 105 dB sensitivity. Looking at the specs, you'd immediately think that this IEM will need extra amplification, and it does need a higher volume from most of my portable devices. To maintain my usual 65-75 dB listening level utilises around 55-60/120 on the X5iii by itself. This equates to almost 50% on my iPhone SE with the same track.

I went back and forth (volume matching with test tones and fixed volume on the A5) comparing the X5iii both amped and unamped, and I couldn't say that there was any change in resolution or dynamics. Both sounded similar. I have been spending a lot of time in the evening with my iPhone SE. Its a very good portable set-up – especially for bed-time listening. Oh BTW – I EQ when using the RE800.

I also with tried with the IMS Hybrid Valve amp and my iDSD but none of them seemed to be adding anything extra (although the tubes on the hybrid did soften that treble just a little). So I'd suggest that amping is not a requirement but for those who enjoy using a stack – definitely it won't hurt anything – and perhaps you'll notice improvements which were lost on me.

I also had my daughter check for hiss, but none was present on any of my sources.

EQ / BALANCED PERFORMANCE

Unfortunately I could not test balanced performance as the cable is fixed and therefore I cannot test. At the price point, and considering they are adding an MMCX connector, I would suggest HiFiMan consider including a balanced cable?

As far as EQ goes, I've obviously been using it for a while. On the FiiO devices I've simply been dropping the 8 kHz slider by 6 dB. Its enough to take the edge off and brings welcome relief to the etch or brittleness. I also used my X3ii + E17K set-up, and utilised the tone controls to try and adjust the peak down to what I would consider a more reference level. I ended up using -10 treble adjustment, and the change was so good (it also drops mid-range a bit) that I thought I'd measure it so others can see the change. This to me would have been a marked improvement. Adding a little extra bass on occasions also helped. Now you get all of the detail, but none of the pain.

COMPARISON WITH OTHER IEMS

This almost seems a little unfair – as I know the issue with the RE800, but I have to compare default sound with default sound. I chose IEMs purely based on comparable pricing (although included the RE2000 as they are from the same stable, and the Alclair Curve because it is one of my “go to” IEMs).

For my source, I wanted something neutral, but with a good digital control, to make sure I could volume match properly, and still make sure there were no questions about power output. So one again I chose to use my old work-horse combo – the FiiO X3ii and E17K. Neutral – check. Power output OK – check. No DSP or EQ was used. Gain was low (I didn't need any more). I volume matched using a calibrated SPL meter and fixed 1kHz test tone first. My listening level was set at my normal 65-75dB.

First up was Alclair's Curve at $250 (chosen because it has a small 7kHz lift but I wanted to show the difference between bump and peak), Jays q-Jays ~$279 Dunu's new DK-3001 at ~$500, Rhapsodio's older ~$555 RTi1 single dynamic, and 64Audio's ~$899 U6 (oh and the RE2000). Hopefully this gives enough insight to anyone interested in this IEM. Here are my very subjective personal thoughts:

HiFiMan RE800 (~USD 699) vs Alclair Curve (~USD 249)
The Alclair Curve is a dual BA universal from Alclair, and one which has consistently been in my top 5 since I got it. In terms of build materials, the gold electroplated brass casing of the RE800 trumps the hard polycarbonate housing of the Curve – but as far as actual build quality, build design, fit and comfort goes, the two are pretty equal. Both are exceedingly comfortable and “disappear” when worn. The accessories go to the RE800 (slightly), whilst the cable quality goes to the Curve (although both are reasonably good at first glance, and we don't know what the replaceable options on the RE800 will be yet).The RE800 requires more power with its lower sensitivity and higher impedance.

Sonically the Curve against the RE800 is an interesting comparison. They both have very similar bass and lower mid-range. Both also have a rise into the upper mid-range, although the RE800's climb is more sustained to a higher peak. Both have a 7 kHz peak, but the Curve's peak is less than half of that of the RE800, and that is where the issue is. The Curve is beautifully reference with a mid-range and lower treble bump which is nicely complimentary to the bass quantity. The RE800 is beautifully reference with a mid-range bump which compliments the rest of the frequency range, but a lower treble spike which dominates. I actually prefer the bass tonality / texture of HiFiMan's Topography driver over the bass on the Curve – but that's where it ends. The Curve does almost everything else better at almost 1/3 the price.

HiFiMan RE800 (~USD 699) vs Jays q-Jays (~USD 279)
Jays q-Jays is another diminutive dual BA universal, and also has a prominent peak in the 7 kHz region. In terms of build materials, I'd rate them evenly. Both are tiny, and both are made of excellent long lasting materials. But again as far as actual build quality, build design, fit and comfort goes, the two are equal (actual overall finish may even go to the q-Jays). Both are extremely comfortable and “disappear” when worn. The accessories go to the q-Jays, as does the cable quality and design (q-Jays is replaceable with an excellent locking mechanism).The RE800 requires more power with its lower sensitivity and higher impedance.

Sonically the q-Jays (like the Curve) is very similar in bass and lower mid-range. The q-Jays are a lot flatter through the upper mid-range (I sometimes bump this up with EQ), and have a peak at 7 kHz which some of my on-line friends tell me can get a little peaky (I don't really notice it). In direct comparison, the RE800 again has that better bass tonality and timbre. If I could get half way between the upper mid-range (drop a bit from the RE800 and add a bit to the q-Jays), both would be improved. But you can again see the difference at 7 kHz where the RE800's “mountain” is more than 10 dB above the q-Jays comparative “mole-hill”. The q-Jays can sometimes appear to flat in the mid-range, but their treble nicely matches the rest of the frequency range. For me – even if I have to EQ both, there is not a compulsion to take the far more expensive RE800 over the better value q-Jays.

HiFiMan RE800 (~USD 699) vs Dunu DK-3001 (~USD 500)
Here we start getting closer on price. Both are built very sturdily with no real weaknesses. But the tiny RE800 is a lot more comfortable than the somewhat unwieldy DK-3001. Accessories are in favour of the Dunu – especially with both balanced and SE cables included – as well as the extra tips and other accessories. The RE800 requires more power with its lower sensitivity and higher impedance.

Sonically these two are similar in same ways, different in others. The DK-3001 has better bass impact, is a little more mid-forward and also a little smoother as far as lower treble goes. The RE800 might still have edge on bass definition and speed, but it would be marginal. The DK-3001 is a touch more V-shaped, but it s also cleaner, clearer, and less etched.

If judging solely on default signature, I'd take the DK-3001 over the RE800. But as I can EQ, and given the greater comfort with the RE800, then its a pretty even match. If comfort wasn't an issue with the DK-3001, I'd choose it every time over the RE800.

HiFiMan RE2000 (~USD 2000) vs Rhapsodio RTi1(~USD 555)
Rhapsodio's RTi1 has yo-yo'd a bit on price lately, but now sits at a quite competitive $555 Build quality is similar in terms of actual materials (longevity), but there is no doubt the RE800 has the slightly better finishing. The RTi1 has the better quality cable, and it is removable. Both were similarly sparse on overall accessories included (considering their respective prices) – perhaps the RE800 edges slightly in front here, but neither offer much above “just enough”. Both are easy to fit and comfortable for longer term wearing. The RE800 requires more power with its lower sensitivity and higher impedance.

Sonically these two have similarities and differences. The Rt1i has much stronger bass and is more of a V shaped monitor. They have extremely similar mid-ranges and transitions through to upper mid-range. Both have their treble peaks, and the peak on the RT1i was one of my critiques when I reviewed them. The RT1i's peak occurs a little earlier and can also be more than a little annoying – despite being smaller than the RE800. Both sound etched and overly hot with some tracks, and for me both require EQ. This is a really hard one to call and comes down to preference. Take the lower treble peaks out of both – and each one shines.

HiFiMan RE800 (~USD 699) vs HiFiMan RE2000 (~USD 2000)
Build quality on both is similar in terms of materials. Obviously the two are very different sizes, and that makes quite a difference in terms of comfort – with the RE800 being an IEM I can wear without any comfort issues for hours, while the RE2000 does have one annoying hard ridge (fixable by tip and angle of wearing). The RE800 has (for now) the fixed cable system, and the thinner wires from y-split to earphone would concern me slightly if there were any longevity issues (unknown at this stage). Both have similar accessory packages (personally one area I find slightly weak with HiFiMan compared to other offerings). The RE2000 and RE800 have almost the same power requirements.

Sonically these two have somewhat similar bass through to upper mid-range, (the RE800 is a little thinner / leaner and cooler comparatively). The RE800 is also a lot brighter in the lower treble with the 7 kHz peak. Compared to the RE2000, the RE800 tends toward glare, and also enhances sibilance. The RE2000 is rich and smooth and has that effortless quality of letting you simply immerse yourself in the music. Both have questionable overall value – and I guess this depends on your disposable income. But I'd take the RE2000 despite the heftier cost.

HiFiMan RE800 (~USD 699) vs 64 Audio U6 + G1 ADEL module (~USD 899)
The U6 is another of my go-to monitors, so please take that into account during this comparison. For this comparison I chose to use the G1 module simply because it elevates the mid-range a little and I prefer a more mid-forward signature.

Build quality (materials) is firmly in the RE800 favour. Its going to last for quite some time with the use of the alloys. Cable quality overall might be questionable on both and you'll note with my U6 that I'm now using the Linum Bax cable (because my 2nd 64Audio cable has broken at the 2 pin connector). I know 64Audio would have replaced it – but this time I wanted a longer lasting solution. Lets hope when HiFiMan move to their replaceable cable that they provide something with quality. Accessories are in the 64Audio camp with the U6 having the ADEL (or Apex) modules and ability to tune. Fit and comfort is shared – both are easy to wear for long periods. The RE800 does again require more power with its lower sensitivity and higher impedance.

Sonically the U6 has the stronger bass overall and has a somewhat warmer tonality. The RE800 is a little leaner and cooler – and also a lot brighter with the more forward mid-range and peaky lower treble. I'd actually prefer it if the mid-range on the U6 was a little more of a natural transition (like the RE800), but it still sounds pretty good. Both earphones have a 7 kHz peak – but again the U6's is far lower, and also has the added warmth from mid and sub-bass to even things out. The U6 is more spacious overall with better width and depth of stage. Despite the higher cost, I'd again take the U6 – even if EQ was an option.

VALUE

The RE800 is a comfortable, well built monitor with a near reference signature, but one very annoying peak. Adding the replaceable cable is going to really help value – but overall I still think it's pitched too high. It may be the gold electroplating pushing things up, and if it is, then at least HiFiMan have some options. Less bling, introduce the replaceable cable, chop the 7 kHz peak, and all of a sudden you have a really good earphone – perhaps even worth around the $600 mark. In its current state though – I simply don't see the value. There are better options out there.

HIFIMAN RE800 – SUMMARY

Its actually quite easy to get used to the RE800 and they have a lot of good points. Sometimes you can even mask that peak – similar to how I mask my tinnitus (the brain is a wonderful filter after all). But in this case, with this earphone, it simply shouldn't be there. Its over-done, and at this price point you expect better. There are a lot of good points though.

The RE800 is generally a well built and presented IEM which has few other flaws. HiFiMan have already said they are making the cable replaceable so that solves one potential issue. If they include a balanced cable as well – then perceived value will go up.

Sonically it is very close to what I would term “reference”, and only hampered by the fact that the mids might be a touch too far forward, and we already know where the treble issues lie, and where they can be solved. With EQ applied, the RE800 is extremely well balanced and really is a delight to listen to. The Topography driver gives a really nice sense of timbre and tonality, and the instrument separation is very good indeed.

But the RRP at USD 699 means that this is getting to the stage where potential buyers will be quite discerning, and for me anyway, they've missed the mark. Three and a half stars for me (although only three will show) – unrealised potential which hopefully they can fix with an update.

Note that with a successful move to a quality removable cable (and including a balanced option), the 7 kHz peak dealt with, and a price around the $600 mark -this would be 5 star IMO.

Again I just want to close with thanking HiFiMan and Mark for arranging the review sample.

INTRODUCTION
 
Because I’ve been involved with some review samples with my Australian brethren in the last couple of years, I’ve had the chance to hear some IEMs I’ve been curious about in the last year or so, but haven’t been able to (or inclined to) purchase for myself. One of these has been the DUNU DN-2000 – and I’d like to take the opportunity to thank my Ozzie mate Vic for the loaner over the last 5 weeks.  I’ve enjoyed the opportunity immensely.
 
For this review – I have abridged it slightly (compared to my normal reviews) mainly because the DN-2000 arrived just as an IEM, with the old case from a DN-1000, and no tips – so I can’t evaluate the packaging or accessories. Also – I have grabbed photos from Penon Audio (to cover for missing packaging and accessory shots).  I thank them for having the photo available – and duly give credit at this time.
 
My introduction to DUNU Topsound (over a year ago) was with their triple hybrid DN-1000, which rapidly became a hit with Head-Fi buyers, and was one of the first triple hybrid IEMs to show that top quality could be achieved at an affordable price. Recently I also reviewed DUNU’s new excellent Titan IEM.
 
For those who aren’t aware, DUNU Topsound was established in 1994 originally as an OEM supplier to other companies. Since then they have developed their own branded line of high quality earphones, and gone from strength to strength with each release.  They currently have their manufacturing plant in China and head office in Taiwan. They now have more than 100 employees, and market their product range all over the world.
 
The name DUNU is simply an acronym of the principle design points that the company strives to implement in their product range

1. Delicate
2. UNique
3. Utmost

 
I thought I’d quote this from their website, as it really does give an insight into what drives the company:

“With advanced technology and hi-end equipments, DUNU desires to be able to provide Delicate, Unique ＆ Utmost products for Hi-Fi embracers. Delicate means extremely quality demanding on product process, from every little component to product manufacturing. DUNU has complete production line and equipments, including precise equipments, B&K frequency machine, IMD sputter, CNC machine, anechoic room, etc. Concerning design of product, DUNU also devotes to create unique outer appearance and balance in all sound frequency.
 
Utmost is not only the expectation on products, but also the pursuit of an Earphone Manufacturer. The founder of DUNU, himself, has years of experience in OEM/ODM earphone products in which many worldwide famous earphone Brands are included. However, in order to create the most enjoyable earphone on his own, DUNU’s president establishes the brand “DUNU” and implants many hi-end equipments and hires talented employees. From then on, DUNU takes the lead in developing the first Chinese made metal earphone, developing 5.8mm Driver unit and produce the very first Chinese Balance Armature Earphone, in 2014 DUNU release China first triple driver Dynamic and Balance Armature Hybrid earphone, All these preparation are to step on the world stage and to challenge renowned earphone brands. The ultimate goal of DUNU is to provide worldwide HI-FI embracers our Delicate, Unique & Utmost earphone products.”

Click to expand...

 
DUNU’s full product catalogue can be found at http://www.dunu-topsound.com/product.html - and their products are supplied through their own storefront (globally) on Amazon.
 
Although the DUNU DN-2000 arrived to me around 5 weeks ago, I’ve had to split my time with various other review units, so I haven’t had as much time with these as I’d like. But they need to go back “over the ditch” this week – so at this stage I’d estimate around 15-20 hours total with them so far. Read on to find out my personal thoughts on the DUNU DN-2000.  I realise I’m once again late to the party on this one.  Does it improve on the DN-1000, and is it worth the heftier price tag?
 
DISCLAIMER
 
I was provided the DUNU DN-2000 as a loaner unit from fellow Head-Fier djvkool. I am in no way affiliated with DUNU and this review is my honest opinion of the DN-2000.
 
PREAMBLE - 'ABOUT ME'.   (or a base-line for interpreting my thoughts and bias)
 
I'm a 47 year old music lover.  I don't say audiophile – I just love my music.  Over the last couple of years, I have slowly changed from cheaper listening set-ups to my current set-up.  I vary my listening from portable (Fiio X5, X1 and iPhone 5S) to my desk-top's set-up (PC > coax > NFB-12 > LD MKIV > HP).  I also use a portable set-up at work – either X5/X1 > HP, or PC > Beyer A200p > HP.  My main full sized headphones at the time of writing are the Beyer T1 and Sennheiser HD600.  Most of my portable listening is done with IEMs - and up till now it has mainly been with the Fidue A83, Dunu Titan and Altone200. A full list of the gear I have owned (past and present is listed in my Head-Fi profile).
 
I have very eclectic music tastes listening to a variety from classical/opera and jazz, to grunge and general rock.   I listen to a lot of blues, jazz, folk music, classic rock, indie and alternative rock.  I am particularly fond of female vocals.  I generally tend toward cans that are relatively neutral/balanced, but I do have a fondness for clarity, and suspect I might have slight ‘treble-head’ preferences.  I am not treble sensitive (at all), and in the past have really enjoyed headphones like the K701, SR325i, and of course the T1 and DT880.
 
I have extensively tested myself (abx) and I find aac256 or higher completely transparent.  I do use exclusively redbook 16/44.1 if space is not an issue.  All of my music is legally purchased (mostly CD – the rest FLAC purchased on-line). I tend to be sceptical about audiophile ‘claims’, don’t generally believe in burn-in, have never heard a difference with different cables, and would rather test myself blind on perceived differences.  I am not a ‘golden eared listener’.  I suffer from mild tinnitus, and at 47, my hearing is less than perfect.
 
For the purposes of this review - I used the DN-2000 straight from the headphone-out socket of my iPhone 5S, X5, and X1.  I also used my Beyer A200p and also the E11K amplifier, but IMO they do benefit from additional amplification.  In the time I have spent with the DN-2000, I have noticed no change to the overall sonic presentation (break-in), but am aware that my impression of their sonic footprint has changed over time with use (brain burn-in).
 
This is a purely subjective review - my gear, my ears, and my experience.  Please take it all with a grain of salt - especially if it does not match your own experience.
 

THE REVIEW

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES
 
As I explained earlier, all I will document here is what the DN-2000 normally comes with, and include the pictures from Penon.  I can’t comment further as I have not seen either the retail packaging or accessory package.
 
 
The DN-2000 are packaged in a black retail “book style”. Inside the box you should get (if purchasing from Penon):
 

1. DN-2000 in-ear earphone
2. 10 sets of Eartips (inlcuing 1 set of foams, and 3 sets of dual flange tips)
3. 1 pair of Earhooks
4. 3.5mm Female to 6.5mm Male Adapter
5. 3.5mm Female to 2-pin Male Adapter (airline adaptor)
6. Aluminum alloy box
7. 6 pairs of metal adjustment rings
8. 4 pairs of rubber fitting ‘fins’
9. 1 Shirt Clip

 
 
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
 
(From DUNU’s website)
 
FREQUENCY GRAPH
 

The frequency graph above is copied from Innerfidelity’s excellent website, and thanks go to Tyll for his ongoing services to the audiophile community in providing these.
 
What I’m personally hearing from the DN-2000 (which doesn't quite match the graph) is a relatively flat but well extended bass (very good extension to the sub bass), a relatively balanced and quite clear mid-range, and very smooth treble with some roll-off .  The only other thing I’d comment on would be that for me the upper mid-range can sound a little subdued (can give some of my female vocalists a slightly darker sound than I’m used to).
 
BUILD & DESIGN
 
The DN-2000 is extremely well made with a polished metal (matte) outer shell in two tone (champagne coloured mid section and silver bass and nozzle).  It is very reminiscent of the DN-1000 both in shape and size. The main body is 12.5mm in diameter (slightly wider at the base), and 20mm from the rear plate to the tip of the nozzle.  The nozzle itself has no lip (to allow fitment of the adjusting rings and is approximately 8mm in length. The nozzle itself is just over 5mm in diameter, and the tip is protected with fine mesh.
 
 

On the rear exterior of each shell is Dunu's logo.  L&R markings are quite small, and located on the protrusions for attaching the fitment “fins”, and IMO could have been more prominent / easier to identify.  This is alleviated somewhat by a small bump on the left hand cable (at the relief exit) – making it also easy for non-sighted people to find left from right (top marks DUNU).
 
 

On the side of each body (attached to the base plate) is a small metal “clip” to which you attach the fin for more stability (when worn cable down), or remove and wear cable up. More about this in the “fit” section below.
 
The cable is a very smooth PVC outer, and appears extremely well put together.  I can't see this breaking any time soon - and it's pretty much tangle free as well.  There is a short (but adequate) cable relief at the DN-2000 shells, Y split, and longer relief at the right angled 3.5mm jack (which is smart phone case friendly).

 
 

The Y split is rigid, metal, sturdy and practical.  One of the great things about the Y split is that there is enough weight in it to keep the cable pulling down slightly.  The other thing I love about this Y split is that the top section of it detaches to become the chin slider.  The design is simple, very elegant, and works incredibly well.  The other fantastic (to me anyway) design element in the cable is the inclusion of an 'on-cable' cinch (or rubber cable tidy) – the same as used on the DN-1000 and Titan.  This is a really simple mechanism that is unobtrusive - but means that whenever it's time to store the IEMs, the cable is always tidily looped.  For me (being slightly OCD), I simply LOVE this inclusion.  So simple - yet so practical.  
 
There is a moderately high amount of microphonic noise present with the upper portion of the cable when worn down – but this can be alleviated by using the shirt clip, or tucking under clothes. The microphonics are considerably lessened when worn over ear.
 
 

Before we go into fit, I'll briefly touch on the inclusion of the coloured rings (or spacers).  The DN-2000 is designed to allow you to fit one of three different sized spacers (or fourth option - use none at all) - that then allow the tips to be closer or further away from the body of the IEM.  Changing this theoretically affects the frequency response, and also the insertion depth.
 
 

As Vic’s DN-2000 didn’t come with any rings, I used the ones from my DN-1000 which are exactly the same. Once again, I tried different settings and different tips - and whilst I like the idea (it definitely has tweaking options for the enthusiasts here), I wonder how effective it is.  I tried all of the different rings, eventually removing them all together - but to be honest I found that any change in frequency response (for me) was marginal and I doubt I could tell anything in a proper blind test.  It's also likely that the few mm change between rings would be nullified by the actual change in fit each time you use them (ie I guarantee that my insertion depth with the same rings will be different almost every time I use them). One other thing I noticed with the rings is that on tips like the JVC FXD tips, the inner sleeve of the FXDs would often slide right over the rings rendering them ineffective anyway.
 
Anyway - nice idea - but leads to one of the design issues I have with the DN-2000.  By allowing for the change of rings, they can't accommodate a lip on the nozzle.  Because of this - anyone trying for a really good seal / deep insertion with some of the tips may very well find themselves removing the DN-2000 from your ears, and finding the tips still in your ears.  This doesn't happen for me with comply foams (they stick on the DN-2000 pretty well), but I found that with virtually any silicone tips (including the JVC FXD tips), I often had to go fishing (in my ears) for the missing tips.  It happened often enough to be very annoying.  If I was to have my choice between tip stability and tweakability with the rings, the rings would be discarded.  Others may have different ideas.
 
FIT / COMFORT / ISOLATION
 
I have one ear canal slightly different to the other one (my right is very slightly smaller) - so I tend to find that usually single silicon flanges don't fit overly well. My normal go-to with the DN-2000 would be Comply T400s.  I know they work, and they manage (most of the time) to stay on the nozzles.  However I was recently given a set of JVC FXD tips (L) from another Head-Fier (Bram), and I have to say, these go extremely well with the DUNU earphones (DN-1000 and DN-2000), providing a fantastic seal, and very good sound. So for the remainder of the review I simply used these.
 
 

Either over ear, or cable down, they fit very flush, and would be OK to lie down with – but I couldn’t sleep for long with these.  This leads to the second and third design flaws (IMO). First let’s talk about the fins.  Brilliant idea – and works really well.  Basically they tuck inside the antihelix and help stabilise the DN-2000 inside your ear.  This works wonderfully for me, and the fins provide no discomfort for me personally. My issue with comfort is two-fold.  Firstly the body is quite wide, and after an hour I begin to feel physical discomfort just outside the entrance to my ear canal.  It is the large width that is causing it.  Secondly, in my preferred cable up position – removing the fins allows the metal fastener to be exposed, and this causes some serious discomfort within a relatively short time (within the first hour). I understand the update to the DN-2000 (the DN-2000J) will address the issue of the girth of the body, and I’m really looking forward to the changes it makes.
 
 

Isolation is above average for a hybrid (so far I haven’t seen a vent), and I’d be keen to try these out in an aircraft.  They are not bad in a car with music playing – still some background noise, but not enough to detract from the music. Because of the isolation, there is a bit of bone conduction noise when walking.
 
So good marks on isolation, and OK on fit – but issues with long term comfort.  Now how does the DN-2000 sound? 
 
SOUND QUALITY
 
The following is what I hear from the DUNU DN-2000.  YMMV – and probably will – as my tastes are likely different to yours (read the preamble I gave earlier for a baseline).  Most of the testing at this point (unless otherwise stated) was done with my Fiio X5 as source, no EQ, no spacers, and JVC FXD tips in use with the cable worn down.  For the record – on most tracks, the volume level on the X5 was around 25-30/120 which was giving me around an average SPL around 75 dB and peaks at around 85dB.  I am hitting up to 40 though on tracks with better mastering (eg Tundra).
 

 
Tracks used were across a variety of genres – and can be viewed in this list http://www.head-fi.org/a/brookos-test-tracks.
 
Thoughts on General Signature
 
If I was to describe the signature in a few words/phrases – I’d choose the words “balanced” , “clear”, “smooth” and “detailed”.
 
I’m finding the DUNU DN-2000 to have a nice coherence between bass, midrange and treble – with a quite nice balance overall – just a very slight V shape (mainly sub-bass emphasis). At the ‘sharp end’, I’ve been trying to put my finger on what is happening with the mid-range and treble, because even though it is very clear, and practically grain free (really smooth), I do find it lacking just a little in upper mid-range and lower treble for my tastes.  This gives a very smooth presentation, but can make some of my female vocalists not quite as euphonic as they are on other IEMs (A83), and there is also less sparkle.  On the plus side, male vocals are better, and there is absolutely no sibilance.
 
Overall Detail / Clarity
 
For this I always use both Steely Dan’s “Gaucho” and Dire Strait’s “Sultans of Swing” as there is a lot of micro detail in both tracks, and the recording quality for both is excellent.
 
With Gaucho, this would be quite possibly one of the best presentations I’ve ever heard of this track with an IEM. Sax is detailed, but smooth, vocals are to the front and tonally perfect, and the bass is punchy and well textured. Personally I’d like a bit more cymbal splash – but that is a small critique when the rest of the track is this good.
 
Switching to Sultans of Swing, and once again wow – this is dynamic and hugely enjoyable. Detail is very good.  The constant background sound is again bass guitar – but it’s not overpowering anything.  Snares are crisp and fast – and Knopfler’s guitar is crisp and compelling – with enough edge to keep things lively. Cymbals again are present and polite rather than emphasised. Best of all, Knopfler’s vocals are just wonderful – again tonally brilliant. A great start. 
 
Sound-stage & Imaging
 
For this I use Amber Rubarth’s binaural recording “Tundra”.  I use this because it’s a pretty simple way to get comparative data on sound-stage.
 
It’s usually difficult to get a reasonable stage size from an inner ear monitor.  The stage is often quite small / close – with an average impression of space.  The DUNU DN-2000 has a good sense of spaciousness for an IEM, and whilst I wouldn’t call the stage overly expansive, it is providing reasonable width and some sense of depth with this track. Imaging is excellent – very clean and clear on positioning.
 
I also used Loreena McKennitt’s “Dante’s Prayer” and the DN-2000 gives a nice sense of width, but again not quite the depth which is possible with this track.  Again though – the overall presentation is hugely impressive, captivating, tonally brilliant, and with both piano and cello portraying excellent timbre.  Directional cues are again very good (the cello is where it usually is to the right, and piano slightly off center). Loreena’s vocals are nicely centered – but quite intimate.
 
In this track, the applause at the end is so well presented that with some headphones (HD600) I can actually close my eyes and imagine myself in the crowd.  With the DN-2000, I’m definitely there in the theatre, but maybe not quite in the   audience – they are to the side and front of me. Still it is a very compelling performance, and one I’ve completely enjoyed.
 
Bass Quality and Quantity
 
I’ve been spoilt recently with impactful and good quality bass from my other triple hybrid IEMs (Altone 200, DN-1000 and A83), so I was looking forward to seeing how DUNU had tuned the DN-2000 Titan.  The bass on the DN-2000 reaches impressively low (even with my hearing, I could easily hear 25Hz). The bass is very agile and well defined, and I’ve noticed no mid-bass bloom. Bass impact, texture and speed so far have been top notch.
 
Amongst my test tracks, one of my go-to test tracks is “Bleeding Muddy Waters” by Mark Lanegan.  This blues rock track is dark and brooding – and exposes any mushiness or imbalance in bass cohesion. The DN-2000 was practically perfect with this track, clean and impactful bass, and the gravel in Mark’s voice comes through easily.
 
I wanted to see how low the bass would go in real music – so switched to Lorde’s “Royals” – and the DN-2000 definitely delivered. When the bass guitar kicks in, there is nice rumble, and the best thing is that the vocals remain sweet, clear, and well defined.
 
Female Vocals – A Special Note
 
I have added this section simply because around 60-65% of my music revolves around female vocals – be it jazz, pop, rock, electronic, or even opera.  I’m an unabashed fan.  For me personally, the sign of a successful IEM is how successfully it conveys emotion and timbre with my female vocalists. Other IEMs I’ve owned in the past had sometimes struggled with some of the artists I like – and this includes IEM’s like Shure’s SE535 LE (upper-mids on the SE535 LE were too forward/fatiguing with some tracks).
 
The one thing I’ve noticed so far has been how well the DN-2000 has handled vocalists like McKennitt and Lorde. But how would it handle some of the tougher artists like Agnes Obel – as some of her recordings can become quite strident or shouty if the mids aren’t quite right.  With the DN-2000, her vocals aren’t as perfectly euphonic as the Fidue A83 or Altone200 (missing some of the upper mid-range maybe) – but the overall presentation while darker than I really prefer is still good enough to be enjoyable.
 
I then proceeded to play a medley of my other tracks from artists including Christina Perri, Gabriella Cilmi, Florence and the Machine, and Norah Jones. The DN-2000 portrays my female artists very well, again very slightly darker than I’m used to, but nothing onerous or uninvolving. Standout for me was Feist (The Bad In Each other) – the bass was just so dynamic, and the resulting contrast with her vocals was sublime. Quickly summarising, I’d say that while the DN-2000 doesn’t quite beat my Altone or A83 for female vocals, neither does it perform poorly.  Respect from me for well-tuned BA drivers.
 
Male Vocals
 
At the other end of the scale sits a lot of my rock tracks. 
 
The continued theme here was coherence, balance, clarity and impact. The only problem I normally have with my Altones is that whilst they are brilliant with female vocals, they sometimes aren’t so good with male vocals (just don’t convey the lower male vocal range).  Here is where the DN-2000 shine, great tone and timbre on all my rock tracks – and that sub-bass impact just really helps rock overall. 3 Doors Down, Green Day, Breaking Benjamin, Seether – all sound excellent and the vocal quality is superb. When I played Diary of Jane (Breaking Benjamin), there was no guitar distortion (this track can overwhelm some drivers), and the DN-2000 remained clear and detailed.
 
My litmus test still is Pearl Jam (huge fan). Once again, wonderful vocal presentation, and excellent overall – but missing just a little more cymbal emphasis which I know is there with my HD600s (and definitely with my T1s). This isn’t at all bad though – I’d just love that last little bit of sparkle.  I guess it’s a small price to pay though for the rest of the presentation.
 
Genre Specific Notes
 
Again for tracks, albums, artists – please refer to this list:  http://www.head-fi.org/a/brookos-test-tracks
 
Rock – Covered this one above.  In a word, excellent.
 
Alt Rock – First up (in my usual test rotation) is Pink Floyd’s “Money”, and the DN-2000 delivers pretty good clarity but I’d personally prefer just a little more sparkle. Next is Porcupine Tree’s “Trains”, and this track is very good – not missing anything. The bass impact is wonderful, and the speed and definition of the bass is incredibly good. PT on the DN-2000 is a winner for me.
 
Jazz / Blues / Bluegrass – Portico Quartet’s “Ruins” is very good displaying nice dynamic contrast, and very good clarity. I did find the sax just perhaps lacking a little body (exhibited a touch of hollowness and stridency), and this was repeated with Miles Davis trumpet in the track “So What”.  Otherwise though, the detail was very good, and the double bass presentation was fantastic. Classic Jazz gets a tick.
 
Switching to blues, and Bonamassa’s vocals and guitar have always been a favourite of mine. The DN-2000 is stunning with Bonamassa, perfectly blending the emotion of his vocals and the magic of his guitar. I then briefly played Union Station’s “Dust Bowl Children”, and it was very enjoyable. Once again for my own personal preferences though, I’d like just a smidge more upper mid-range and lower treble (a little more sparkle).
 
Rap / EDM / Pop / Indie – Eminem’s “Lose Yourself” surprised me.  I was expecting to maybe be left wanting on the bass impact, but the quality of the bass is so good that it just perfectly fits with this track. It is in’t bass head quantity by any means – but it definitely has slam. I’m again impressed. Sticking with the bass heavy tracks, and queueing some Trance (Armin), and EDM/Electronic (Linday Stirling & Little Dragon), once again the overall quality of the bass, and the fact that it is sub-bass oriented makes it eminently enjoyable.
 
Straight Pop is next – and the DN-2000 easily delivers wonderful renditions of Adele and Coldplay. The stand out once again though is Amanda Marshall’s “Let it Rain”, and (like the Titan) this was a genuine “wow” moment.  This track has a holographic feel to it (the way it was recorded). The DN-2000 really does go nicely with Marshall’s vocals, and there is nothing in this track that feels out of place or contrived. I could listen to this sort of presentation for hours (comfort aside).
 
For Indie, I listened to both Band of Horses and Wildlight. The DN-2000 was brilliant with the former, and just a little short of perfect euphonic sweetness with the latter (close though).
 
Classical / Opera – I’ll keep this short as it is more of the same. Wonderful sense of space, dynamics, timbre and tone. Standouts for me – Kempff’s solo piano and Keating’s cello. Pavarotti was also extremely good, while Netrebko and Garanca (with the Flower Duet) were just a hint darker than I’m used to.
 
AMPLIFICATION REQUIREMENTS
 
I covered this in the introduction – but to me the DN-2000 definitely doesn’t need any extra amplification. They were easily powered out of all my portable devices.  I also performed my standard test – volume matched, and then compared the X1 and X1+E11K. There was no real change in dynamics to these ears. 
 
QUICK COMPARISON OTHER IEMS
 
I’ll make this quick as the review has already become overly long. I’m anticipating questions regarding the DN-2000 in comparison to my other triple hybrids (Altone 200, DUNU DN-1000 and Fidue A83), so here are my very quick (very subjective) thoughts:
 

• DN-2000 vs DN-1000
  
  Similar balance. But the DN-1000 actually sounds a little brighter in the upper end (more sparkle), whilst the DN-2000 sounds just as clear, but a little more refined and smoother. DN-1000 seems to have slightly more bass impact, but DN-2000 has more bass quality/definition.
   
• DN2000 vs Altone200
  
  Altone is much more V shaped, bassier and brighter. DN-2000 sounds fuller, darker, but overall more balanced. Altone has more comparatively bass impact, and sounds slightly clearer – but also thinner. The Altone is much more comfortable to wear – it isn’t close!
   
• DN2000 vs A83
  
  The contrast between these two is interesting.  For overall balance I’d give it to the DUNU. The A83 is still full bodied, but you really notice the dip in the lower mid-range after listening to the DUNUs for a while. The A83 comparatively are brighter, and also bassier.  When listening to male vocals, the DN-2000 sound more coherent and more realistic. When listening to female vocals though, the A83 are still stunning, and for my tastes the tables are completely turned.

DUNU DN-2000 - SUMMARY

I’d been looking forward to trying the DN-2000 for a while.  I’d read some of the reviews when they first came out, and hoped to be able to review them, but up until now, the opportunity never presented itself. I’m so glad I’ve had the chance though, and my sincere thanks goes to Vic for giving me some quality time with them.  Once again the generosity among fellow Head-Fiers (and within the Head-Fi community) is wonderful.
 
To sum up -
 
The DUNU DN-2000 is a relatively well balanced (both frequency and tonality) hybrid IEM.  It has excellent bass quality and quantity, good clarity, and vocal presentation (both male and female), and exhibits reasonably good sound-staging, and very good imaging. Its treble is very smooth and grain free – but I personally find it lacking a tiny bit of sparkle. In short, it is a genre master, and very enjoyable IEM sonically to listen to.
 
Its build and innovative features are on the most part excellent – with very good implementation of the new ear stabilising fins, and I think everyone already knows that I love the attached cable tie.
 
Where the DN-2000 misses the mark for me is in overall comfort (too big, with a sharpish edge), and also with the nozzle having no lip.  I love the sound of the JVC FXD tips on the DN-2000 but unless I’m very careful, they invariably stay in my ears if I’m taking them out in a hurry. Given the arguably insignificant benefits of the spacers, is it time to go back to something more conventional?
 
So big question – would I recommend the DUNU DN-2000?
 
On sonics alone – yes.  It is one of the best sounding earphones I’ve heard in this category.  The A83 and DN-2000 are natural competitors on this turf – with both having wonderful SQ performance. However for current long-term comfort issues, I’d be cautious – and I’m afraid even if I could currently afford the DN-2000, I’d be ultimately saying no. Others may not have this problem – but for me it is very real.
 
Thanks again to Vic for the opportunity to try them.  4 stars from me – based on sonics, build, and innovation.  Only points off really are for my personal comfort issues and those darn nozzles.
 
RECOMMENDATIONS TO DUNU
 
I know you are currently working on the DN-2000J – with a smaller overall body, and titanium drivers (which will hopefully give it a little more upper end sparkle).  I look forward to trying these when they are released because you have made a really wonderful sounding earphone with the DN-2000.  If you did want a solution for the nozzles – can I suggest going with a screw in nozzle in 3 different lengths (interchangeable).  It would give people the ability to tune the sound – but allow you to go back to incorporating a lip on the nozzle again. It also then gives you a chance to look at internal filtering options as another attraction.  The combination of mozzle length and internal filter would be unique, and fit your Company motto well.
 
This idea given freely, and if adopted the only thing I’d like would to be to try the new release.
 

INTRODUCTION

The one piece of gear I’d been extremely interested in, but still hadn’t found, is a decent portable wireless headphone or earphone.  I’ve tried some decent sounding earphones over the last year, but they’ve all had issues – with either Bluetooth cut-outs, or battery life, or comfort, or sonics.
 
So when I started seeing comments about a new player in the market, I approached Ausdom, to ask if it would be possible to get one of their units for review.  Grace contacted me back and suggested they would be arranging a review thread – where 5 chosen reviewers would have a chance of listening to a pair, and providing feedback.  I duly applied, and was lucky enough to be chosen.
 
I received the M05 two weeks ago, and have used them a lot – at home, out and about, and at work. I’ve also had others try them, so I could get others opinions. I’ve thoroughly enjoyed my time with the M05, and it has given me a new appreciation on how good Bluetooth can be.  To find out more – read on.
 
ABOUT AUSDOM
 
Ausdom is owned by Shenzhen Ausdom Cloud Technology (a Chinese based company specialising in IP Surveillance equipment and systems). Their main product lines at this time are in two main lines – IP cameras (both fixed and automobile based), and also audio solutions (predominantly Bluetooth / wireless headphones, but also Bluetooth speakers).
 
With more than 10 years in the Wireless IP business, Ausdom have a lot of experience with the management and development of high quality video products, and fortunately for audio enthusiasts that also extends to wireless technology. Ausdom have 6 R&D teams at their disposal, and this includes more than 60 professional innovative designers and engineers – and it really does shine through in the M05.
 
From the Ausdom website:
For each product, our designers and engineers will carefully study the user's habits, and use their creativity and experience to provide the consumers with convenient, efficient and valuable products. Every AUSDOM product is made with care, every detail counts to impress our customers. Giving our customers the perfect experience has always been AUSDOM’s goal. The recognition of our customers and their suggestions are our driving force.
AUSDOM is a team dedicated to design. They are not afraid to follow their dream.
 
And I really like their by-line / company slogan – because it does seem to capture their ethos (from the limited time I’ve had with Ausdom so far):
Enjoy Smart Life
 
And isn’t that ultimately what we’d all like to do?
 
DISCLAIMER
 
I was provided the Ausdom M05 as a review unit. I have no other association or affiliation with Ausdom.  I do not make any financial gain from this review – it is has been written simply as my way of providing feedback both to the Head-Fi community and also Ausdom, themselves.
 
I have now had the Ausdom M05 since early December.  Price on Amazon at the current time of writing this review is just under USD 47.00
 
PREAMBLE - 'ABOUT ME'.   (or a base-line for interpreting my thoughts and bias)
 
 
Over the last two weeks – I’ve used the Ausdom M05 both wired and wireless from a variety of sources, but for main body of this review, I’ve used it primarily with both my iPhone 5S (wireless Bluetooth) and Fiio X3ii combined with the E11K amp (wired). In the time I have spent with the Ausom M05, I have noticed no change in the overall sonic presentation.  Listening time with the M05 would now be around 40-45 hours (I’ve just started my third full charge)
 
This is a purely subjective review - my gear, my ears, and my experience.  Please take it all with a grain of salt - especially if it does not match your own experience.
 

THE REVIEW

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES
 
 
The Ausdom M05 arrived in a black, but relatively compact retail box measuring 185 x 215 x 55 mm. This was my first inkling as to how compact this headphone is. On the front of the box is a side-on image of the M05, and aptX/CSR logo, the Ausdom company name/logo (in silver), and 4 lines of white text explaining the main points of the head-set:
 

1. Hands-free
2. Deep Bass
3. High Sensitivity
4. Stereo Wireless

 
The sides simply mention compliance with the Bluetooth 4.0 standard and hint at the long life lithium battery. The rear has the main features and also box contents – in 6 main languages. Missing is the actual specifications (they are in the manual) – personally I would prefer to have these included on the box itself.
 
 
 
Opening the retail outer you are greeted with a simple grey plastic formed tray, with the M05 nestled safely inside. At first glance the M05 looks really amazing – I definitely like the aesthetics. Underneath the grey tray is a mesh carry bag, the USB charging cable, a 1.5m 3.5-3.5mm connection cable for wired listening, and a small operating manual/booklet. The charging cable is fairly generic but well-built and reasonably supple.  The mesh bag is actually quite thick and much stronger than it looks.  It closes with a draw-string, and because of the overall build of the M05, I’ve had no qualms about using the mesh carry case, with the M05 folded flat inside, and then just taking it with me in my lap-top bag.
 

 
The 1.5m cable for wired use is again fairly generic looking, quite thin, but very non-microphonic. It’s not one I’d trust for long term use – but let’s face it you’re going to be using the Bluetooth anyway.  The good news is that it is available in a pinch (if the battery flattens), and even better, the sonics between wired and wireless sound the same to me (no difference at all).
 
The manual is in small booklet form, printed in six languages, and covers pretty much everything you need to know for operating the M05 – from pairing, through to LED status lights and button controls.
 
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
 
(From Ausdom)
 
FREQUENCY GRAPH
 
The graph below is generated by a new measuring system I’m trialling – using the Vibro Veritas and ARTA software.  I don’t have the calibration for the microphone 100% correct yet – but the graphs I am getting are relatively close to Innerfidelity’s raw data (when measuring IEMs). For measuring full sized headphones, I do not have a dummy head (I use my own crude hand-made rig), so what you are seeing is purely raw uncalibrated data with no HRTF adjustment or compensation.  I used these when trying to work out my EQ compensation, and they came in really handy.
 
 
So for the purposes of this review – the graphs are shown merely as a data point, and I have shown comparisons later in the review with other headphones I have so you can see comparative data.
What I’m hearing:

1. Full, clean and deep bass, a little more mid-bass than sub-bass, but with bass being the dominant feature of the default signature
2. Relatively clean and clear mid-range, but with some bass bleed into the lower mid-range
3. Reasonably good vocal clarity
4. Slight lift in upper mid-range which lends particularly well to harmonics with female vocalists
5. Relatively detailed treble – but somewhat masked by the dominant bass
6. Quite a V shaped default sound – but with the dominance of the bass comes some hollowness in the vocal area, and occasional stridency with female vocalists

 
BUILD QUALITY / DESIGN
 
I already hinted at how good the M05 looked when in its packaging – so let’s take a much closer look at the build. The build is predominantly black matt plastic, but with a metal inner headband strut which extends down to the cups and provides good stability.
 
The headband itself is nicely curved and extremely well padded with foam and pleather.  The padding is soft and for me the headband is distributed very evenly with no pressure points. The top has the same carbon fibre pattern as the earcups, and in my opinion, whoever designed these aesthetically knows what they are doing – they look really smart.  The carbon fibre print looks neither cheap nor tacky.
 

 
The arm extenders are very firm, and allow the cups to be extended a little over 2.5mm (or one inch) on either side. I’m just a shade under 6ft tall with a solid build, and with the extenders at 1 cm both sides I have a very comfortable fit. The L/R are on the outside of the arms, just below the swivel mechanism.  They are slightly raised (but same colour as the headband), so a little difficult to see – but the cable socket and microphone mesh is a dead giveaway on which cup is which (it is on the left).
 

 

The cup mechanisms swivel to allow the cups to be stored completely flat, but also angle slightly in the opposite direct to allow a perfect fit to any head shape.  They also swivel up and down on a gimbal/yoke arrangement. The cups are oval and have pleather pads over soft memory foam. The pads are definitely soft enough to be quite comfortable, but seem hardy enough to be durable.  They have an outer measurement of approximately 95mm x 75mm, and inner dimensions of 55mm x 35mm, and a depth of approximately 16-17mm.  For me, this means they are completely circumaural, although my ears do touch the inner walls of the cups. The pads are also replaceable – can be slipped on and off. The driver is protected by a thin mesh cover.
 
The outer cup is again matt plastic, but this time there is a soft carbon fibre pattern on the outer cup.  This is very tastefully done, and looks really smart with the matt black of the rest of the headphone, and also the same pattern on the headband.
 

 

On the left cup are controls for on/off (which also doubles for pairing), and volume up and down. The on/off button is smooth while the volume buttons have raised bumps for easy location.  My one preference change would be for the on/off button to be centrally located between the two volume buttons so that it is easier to locate up and down – but this is a minor nit-pick. The microphone is located toward the front of the left cup, and toward the back is the 3.5mm socket for the wired connection. My only gripe on build would be that while the socket is firm, there is no reassuring click on insertion of the jack, light but firm pressure will pull it out.  IMO the socket and jack need to be looked at for a more secure connection.
 
On the right hand cup at the rear is the micro USB charging port which has its own rubber protection cap (nice firm fit), and at the bottom of the headpiece are the buttons for play/pause, forward and back. The buttons are quite firm, with reassuring tactile feedback, and aside from taking a while to learn (locations), I’ve found them to be both sturdy and intuitive to use. Like the left hand cup, the right hand forward and back buttons have the raised bumps for unsighted location, while the play/pause central button is smooth.
 

 

When I first saw the M05 I was immediately reminded of the similarity in shape to my Bose QC25s. Impressions after two weeks are extremely good build, very nice looking, and for the current sub $50 price, far exceeding what you would expect from a head-set at this price.
 
 
FIT / COMFORT / ISOLATION
 
Although the cups themselves are reasonably small, they are circumaural for me, and even after a couple of hours, I haven’t had any of that itchy / burning sensation of being too cramped for space.  The earpads are soft enough to create a good seal, and the ability to adjust on all access means finding a comfortable position to mould to my head has been easy. The headband is flat enough to avoid pressure points, and the padding is generous and comfortable. With their light weight, I find the Ausdom M05 to be extremely comfortable, and even wearing glasses I have no issues with too tight clamping.
 
 
As far as isolation goes, they are about average.  They isolate internally pretty well with very little leakage.  I can still hear a bit of ambient sound around me though – so I probably wouldn’t use these in high noise areas or in public transport.
 
HEADSET / COMMUNICATIONS
 
I’ve used the M05 for a couple of calls – one to my wife (who said that she found my voice to be a little distant), and one to a client – who said that I was pretty clear – she just had to turn her headset up a little at her end. The on head-set controls are pretty easy to use – a single press of the power button answers a call, and a single press again hangs up. Double tapping the on/off button allows you a quick redial.
 
PAIRING AND HEADSET CONTROLS
 
The general use of the media controls on the M05 is designed to be as simple as possible.  To turn the M05 on or off, simply hold the power button for a couple of seconds.  When pairing – make sure your source is in active Bluetooth mode, and continue holding the on/off button after you get the audible “power on” notification.  The blue LED (which is always lit when the M05 is powered) starts flashing red and blue.  At this stage look for the “Ausdom M05” listed as source in your Bluetooth menu, choose “pair” and you are up and running.
 
After that, operation couldn’t be easier. The buttons do exactly as advertised – play, pause, next previous.
 
 
The LED status indicator is always lit blue when active – apart from pairing or when the battery is starting to get low (it slowly flashes red).  During charging, it glows solid red, and you know charging is complete when the light goes out altogether.
 
On my iPhone 5S a battery indicator for the M05 is active in the status bar when connected – really handy.
 
Simple – yes.  Practical – yes. Anything missing – not for my needs.
 
BLUETOOTH PERFORMANCE  / BATTERY LIFE
 
The Bluetooth performance on the Ausdom M05 is nothing short of incredible.  The only dropouts I’ve had in two weeks have been when I exceeded the wireless range.  And the range is impressive.  Ausdom lists the effective range as 10m, but the consistent measured range I’ve had has been up to 18m before audio starts cutting out.  And that 18 metres is with 3 walls between me and the iPhone.  The M05 has (by a huge margin) the best connective stability I’ve ever experienced in a Bluetooth device.  This is one of the best features by far on the M05 – and something I’d only expect on a device costing many times more.  Even in high traffic areas, the signal remains solid. To say I am impressed does not even begin to cover how highly I rate the M05’s Bluetooth performance.
 
So what about battery life?  Again – impressive.  From my first full charge I achieved approximately 19 hours playtime / talktime – with some stand-by time on top.  So Ausdom have nailed it when they listed the up to 20 hour figure in their specifications.  The other really nice thing is that the charge time is pretty short – for me 2.5 hours using an adaptor and wall-wart. For a portable device, I haven’t seen much better.
 
POWER REQUIREMENTS
 
I’ve listed this mainly for the wired connection – which sounds exactly the same to me as the Bluetooth connection.  So if you are forced to use wired – fret not, your music quality will not suffer. From my iPhone 5S using the default music app and Dire Strait’s Sultans of Swing, 6 clicks (or about 1/3) was more than enough volume to have a good listening level.  So with Bluetooth inactive, the M05 are easy to power and won’t need additional amplification. For the record, I also tried the M05 with my usual test gear (Fiio X3ii + E17K) and there was no noticeable improvement or change – until you use EQ, but more on that in a minute.
 
SOUND QUALITY
 
So if I was marking the Ausdom M05 out of 100 up to this point, they would be in the high 90’s – practically perfect.  But here comes the crux – how do they sound?
 
The following is what I hear from the Ausdom M05.  YMMV – and probably will – as my tastes are likely different to yours (read the preamble I gave earlier for a baseline).  The first part of the testing at this point (unless otherwise stated) was done with my iPhone 5S connected via Bluetooth using the default music app and no EQ.
 
Tracks used were across a variety of genres – and can be viewed in this list http://www.head-fi.org/a/brookos-test-tracks.
 
Thoughts on Default Signature
I covered some of this above when I posted the frequency graph.  If I was to describe the default signature, I would call it V shaped, bassy, warm, a little muddy, and a little strident at times in the mid-range.  It isn’t a signature I would gravitate to.  And although I got accustomed to the default signature over time, I can’t say I ever really enjoyed it (although it was pretty good with some genres).
 
Overall Detail / Clarity (Default)
Tracks used: Gaucho, Sultans of Swing
 
There is still a lot of mid-range detail present but the bass guitar dominates, and there is obvious bleed and masking of the lower mids. The usual detail (including cymbals and snare hits) is subdued, and tonally Mark sounds like he is singing in a tunnel (quite hollow sounding).  The guitar comes through clear – so there is a really nice mid-range hiding back there – but everything is masked unfortunately
 
Sound-stage & Imaging
Tracks used: Tundra, Dante’s Prayer, Let it Rain
 
The binaural track Tundra is my go to for testing sound-stage width, depth and imaging.  As expected with a closed headphone, the stage is relatively intimate and close – but imaging is largely OK (just muddied up by the dominant bass). All in all though, there are signs that all is not lost.  The M05 just needs a chance to let its mid-range shine.
 
With Dante’s Prayer again the overpowering bass is simply masking things.  Loreena’s vocals are actually pretty good, but there is a cloudiness present that is hiding the best parts of the track. The applause at the end of the track with a really good earphone / headphone can totally immerse me with a few select earphones.  With the M05 and its default signature, there is no involvement.
 
Last up was Let It Rain, and this time there is a really good holographic feel to it – it is naturally present in the recording, and the M05 sounds pretty good with this track.  The track is recorded relatively brightly – and this is really helping.  Again signs that beneath the bass, there is a very capable headphone.
 
Bass Quality and Quantity
Tracks used: Bleeding Muddy Water, Royals
 
I use Muddy Waters mainly to test for bass texture and mid-bass bleed. What I’m hearing is not good.  The bass is booming but it is one dimensional, very thick, and bleeds all over the vocals. Marks vocals are competing with the bass and they’ve lost their usual texture.  Too dark, too warm, and simply unengaging.
 
Next up was Lorde’s Royals – and it is a repetitive theme.  The M05 can hit stunningly low and with copious amounts of sub and mid bass – but there is just too much there.  Even Ella’s vocals sound “off”.
 
General Comments on Performance with Default Sonics
I thought I’d cut this short, because you’re going to get more of the same. With any recording I tried (male or female) with a warmer default sound, the M05 just sounded too dark for me. The bass clouded the vocals I am used to hearing, and the bleeding into the mid-range caused issues with stridency for some of my artists. The times the M05 sounded really good was with any music that was bass light or bass neutral, and recorded brighter than normal.  This included some of my older classic rock (10CC, Jethro Tull). Nils Lofgren’s acoustic guitar was pleasant but not outstanding.  Forget Jazz, Blues or Classical – all the detail and air is lost. I even struggled with electronic and trance.
 
At this stage if I was grading the M05 purely on default sonics – I’d honestly give them a 2/5.
 

 
So – what to do?  The simple fix is to remove the problem (mid-bass) – which shows both on my graphs and in testing.  So I used my measurement system and a system wide EQ programme to build an EQ to cut some of the mid-bass and let the mid-range and lower treble breathe. If you click on the images, you can see what I’ve used.
 
 
I then transferred similar settings to the Equaliser app on my iPhone 5S and reran my listening tests.  So without further adieu …….
 
EQUALISATION – THE M05 TRANSFORMED
 
 
Thoughts on EQ’d Signature
What a transformation.  The bass is still there, but this time the bleed is gone, and it has had a double effect of both allowing the mid-range to shine, and also removing most of the hollowness and stridency which was there formerly. The overall signature is far more balanced, and I think this will appeal to a far wider audience.  There is enough bass to allow impact, and to be fair, I’d probably take it back a smidge further for my own personal tastes – but for a wider audience this EQ should be a lot more appealing.  Gone is the dark, overpowering, hollow sounding default – and reborn is a nicely balanced, nicely detailed, and indeed lovely sounding earphone.
 
Back to Dire Straits, and this time the detail is present.  It’s still smooth, but this time Mark’s vocals are clean and clear, and I can hear the upper end detail.
 
Redoing my sound-stage tracks, and this time the imaging is spot-on.  The M05 still gives an intimate presentation, but directional cues are spot-on and there is a better sense of overall depth.
Bass still has impact, but Lannegan shows no sign of bleed any more, and Lorde’s Royals still has impressive low extension – but this time her vocals are allowed to shine sweet and clear.
 
So let’s continue under EQ and cover a few Genre topics
 
Female Vocals
Tracks used : Aventine, Strong, For You, Human, The Bad In Each Other, Howl, Safer, Light as a Feather, Don’t Wake me Up
 
What a change!
 
Female vocalists now are beautifully clear and have a hint of euphony in presentation, just the way I like them.  The vocals are able to come forward in the mix a little more, and this time the bass is a complimentary rather than a dominant feature.
 
In fact one of the standouts for me was Feist due to the contrast of dynamic bass and gorgeous vocal presentation. London Grammar’s Strong was captivating with just the right mix of vocals (love Hannah’s voice), and Norah covers the usual lushness and smoky sultry performance I could listen to for hours.
 
Male Vocals
Track used: Away From the Sun, Art for Art’s Sake, Diary of Jane, Hotel California, Keith Don’t Go, Elderly Woman Behind the Counter in a Small Town.
 
And there is no loss in male vocals with the new EQ either. 3 Doors Down is dynamic yet detailed, impactful, yet retaining a captivating mid-range & perfect mix of vocals and guitar.
My “go to” (Vedder) was simply sublime.  If this was the default signature – after listening to the entire Rear View Mirrror album (I got side-tracked OK) – I’d be giving these a perfect score.  They really are that good.
 
Other Genres
Everything I tried under EQ from this point was brilliant IMO. Practically every track I listened to from Alt Rock, to Jazz, Blues and Classical was delivered with brilliant balance and tonality. Jazz in particular (Portico Quartet) was excellent – especially the tonal contrast between cymbals and double-bass.
 
EDM hadn’t lost its appeal either after the bass cut, and Trip-Hop with Little Dragon, or Trance with AVB, was equally impressive.  Good bass, great detail, nothing overpowering – clarity and power makes for an addictive combination.
 
COMPARISON GRAPHS
 
I’ve included this section mainly so you can see a couple of comparative measurements using my crude system on other headphones.  It’s more to give anyone interested a look at comparative signatures so they can make more sense of the M05 graphs.
 
 

 
Above - M05 original vs the Brainwavz HM2, UE6000, and Momentum On Ear.  You can see how bassy the default signature of the M05 is - especially when you consider all of these closed headphones have slightly above neutral bass.
 

 
Just for interests sake - the M05 original vs the Brainwavz HM5, HD600 and AKG K553.  All of these cans are more neutral - some may consider them bass light.  There is a massive difference with the bass on the M05 however.
 

 
And this time we have the original M05 (red) with the EQ'd M05 (slight reduction - orange) - which really has a massive effect on the sound signature.  The purple setting is one I've used for a while (much bigger bass reduction), and one I like a lot - but I feel that others may find a little light on the bass.  Personally the orange (closer to Nick's settings) are good - but I think the best setting would be somewhere between orange and purple. 

AUSDOM M05 – SUMMARY

First up I want to take the chance to thank Grace from Ausdom for giving me the opportunity to try the M05. I’d also like to shout out to some fellow Head-Fiers – especially Nick and Ian – for assisting with their thoughts on EQ.  I believe between us, we got a pretty good mix.
 
Ausdom have given us a bit of a paradox with the M05. If you look at build, comfort, connectivity, battery life and looks – then they are as close to perfect as I have seen in any other portable wireless headphone, and handily beat most wired ones as well.  Yes they really are that good.
 
But the default sonics – for me anyway – are not good.  They’ve made the common mistake of over-doing the bass, and despite the fact that the M05 really does have a glorious mid-range, it is masked by a pretty much monotonous, boomy and dark mid-bass which sadly covers most of the good sonic points of the headphone.
 
However, with EQ the M05 is truly transformed to a beautifully balanced, coherent, and wonderful sounding portable headphone which I would buy in an instant if this was the default – and I’d be prepared to pay a lot more than the asking price too. For the last 3-4 days I have used the M05 with newly EQ’d signature every day, and it has become my preference due to the combination of EQ’d signature and ease of use.
 
 
So how do you rate the M05 given its Jeckyll & Hyde nature? I have to look at it logically, so for build, connectivity, battery life, value (cost) and aesthetics it is almost a perfect score.  For default signature – despite it’s good points – overall I’d rate the M05 as a 2.5.  Under EQ it is an easy 4.5 if not a 5. So the logical mark is a 3.5.
 
Thoroughly recommended if you are open to EQ (and if you are using an iPhone look into the Equaliser app).
 
I really look forward to what Ausdom brings us I future.
 
RECOMMENDATIONS TO AUSDOM
 
This is pretty simple Grace – cut the mid-bass and you have a wonderful sounding headphone.  I’d also like to see the wired jack and socket have a little more solid click / connection. And finally – keep doing what you are doing – the Bluetooth on the M05 is in a class of its own.
 

INTRODUCTION

This was the 2^nd round of the HifiMan review tour of the two new DAPs in their portfolio. I posted the review of the SuperMini earlier this week – and it proved to be reasonable value with a balanced output, excellent power, small form factor, easy to use UI, and 15 hour real time battery life. Combine it with the excellent IEMs bundled, and you effectively have a pair of IEMs worth $150-200 and a DAP worth $200-$250 – which made the package overall a good value proposition. And this was particularly so if you were looking for a synergistic total package.
 
This time we're looking at the sibling – which is effectively one tier down. And at $249 and without the IEMs being included, I kind of expected it to struggle just a little against the more expensive (but better value) package deal. But I went into the test with an open mind – and there are some things I like about the MegaMini. Read on to get my thoughts on how the MegaMini performs, and how its value stands up against similar peers.
 
ABOUT HIFIMAN
HifiMan Audio was founded in late 2005 by Dr Fang Bian when he was resident in New York. He started Head-Direct, and in 2007 began use of the HifiMan brand. They started initially with in-ear earphones, branched out into building hi-res portable players, and this was followed by planar magnetic headphones. As the business grew, so did the need to expand, so in 2010 Dr Bian started two small factories in China, and moved the HQ to Tianjin China in 2011. They are now a well recognised brand globally – particularly in the field of portable or personal audio products.
 
I found most of these short facts from a couple of interviews with Dr Bian posted on line, and among the interviews were a couple of direct quotes which I found fascinating and illuminating:
 
I started listening to a lot of music when I was in high school. I used a Walkman and Discman all the time because I had nothing else available to me. They were designed more for convenience than great sound. I wanted both- convenience and great sound so that set the stage for my dream to build the best sounding personal audio products.
 
Starting with me, everyone is passionate about what we are doing at HiFiMAN. We may not always do everything perfectly from the beginning but we try hard to get it right in the end and our track record is pretty good. Most of all, I want our customers to know how much we appreciate them. Their support and feedback is invaluable.
 
DISCLAIMER
I was provided the HifiMan MegaMini as a review sample and it will be returned once the review is completed. There is no financial incentive from HifiMan in writing this review. I am in no way affiliated with HifiMan - and this review is my honest opinion of the MegaMini. I would like to thank them for making this opportunity available though.
 
PREAMBLE - 'ABOUT ME'.
For the purposes of this review, I have used the HifiMan MegaMini with a wide variety of headphones including both sensitive and harder to drive IEMs, portable headphones (HD630VB), full sized headphones (HD600 and HD800S), and also the balanced IEMs which were included with the SuperMini.
 
WHAT I LOOK FOR IN A DAP
I thought I’d list (before I start with the review) what I really look for in a new DAP.

1. Clean, neutral signature – but with body (not thin)
2. Good build quality
3. Reasonable battery life
4. Easy to use interface
5. Able to drive both low impedance and (within reason) higher impedance cans without additional amping.
6. Value for money
7. Enough storage to hold either my favourite albums in red-book, or my whole library in a reasonably high resolution lossy format (for me – aac256)

 
At the completion of the review I’ll refer back to this list and see how the SuperMini performed. This is a purely subjective review - my gear, my ears, and my experience. Please take it all with a grain of salt - especially if it does not match your own experience.

THE REVIEW

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES
The MegaMini arrived in an all white retail box and lid. It (like the SuperMini packaging) is minimal, clean and stylish. The box measures 160 x 100 x 40mm. The lid is simply adorned with the HifiMan logo and name in an orange/gold colour.
 
 
Removing the lid reveals the silver MegaMini safely nestled in a foam cut-out. You see 4 main buttons on the front face, otherwise at first glance it looks pretty similar to the SuperMini. Removing the foam cut-out reveals a warranty card (which also has links to the downloadable manual – http://down.hifiman.com/MegaMini/manual.pdf). Missing this time is the spare screen protector.
 
 
Underneath this is one final compartment which houses a USB to micro-USB cable. To be honest, this package for a $250 DAP is pretty minimal.
 
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
The tables below list most of the relevant specifications. I have (as a comparison) also listed specifications from FiiO's X3ii and X5ii, which straddle the MegaMini in it's price bracket. I have also asked Ryne at HifiMan for further specifications, however have not received a reply at this time. Many critical specifications are unfortunately not stated by HifiMan.
 
 
Feature support
 
I’ll also look further at features as we continue with the review.
 
BUILD / DESIGN
The build on the MegaMini really is very good. Just like the SuperMini, it is tiny compared to a lot of my other DAPs – about the same height (100mm), but super thin (just 9mm) and only 43mm wide – so perfect for slipping into a pocket, or simply holding in the palm of your hand. And at a mere 69g, the MegaMini is brilliant to have for on the go.
 
 
From what I understand, the MegaMini casing is CNC'd from a single block of aluminium alloy. It appears to be two piece – a frame (the sides) including a short plate on the front face, and a full length rear plate. The body is practically seamless though. One thing I noticed immediately after using the SuperMini earlier in the week is that the MegaMini's corners are sharper – where the Super's are more rounded. Anyway – the Super feels slightly nicer to hold overall.
 
The front face top section is dominated by the 2 inch OLED screen, and underneath this resides 4 clickable buttons. These are (left to right) : a back or return button, back, forward, and play/pause/select. The buttons are easy to locate and navigate, and the click is firm and reassuring. The build appears to be good quality overall.
 
 
On the left hand side edge are 2 buttons toward the top – volume up and volume down. On the right hand side edge at the top is the power button (or screen on/off). On the right edge toward the bottom is a reset pinhole. At the bottom from left to right is the 3.5mm single-ended socket, the micro SDXC socket (up to 256 Gb) and micro-USB port for charging and data transmission (loading onto the micro SDXC). The rear of the casing simply has the HifiMan logo and some compliance information.
 
 
The screen is appears to be OLED, colour this time, and is both very clear and also reasonably easy to see in direct sunlight. It has good contrast, and viewing angles are almost 180 deg. The actual screen content is minimalist but effective – we'll go into this shortly. From an overall build and aesthetic standpoint, the MegaMini is well built and apart from the slightly sharp edges, a really nicely sized ultra-portable DAP.
 
DESIGN – INTERNALS
I will add to this section at a later time if I am able to. What we do know is that the MegaMini uses a combined DAC and amp in a single chip. Unfortunately the rest of the actual specifications are pretty much unknown. They've advised a power output of 54 mW @ 1.4V into a 36 ohm load and THD of 0.08%, but there is no mention of specs like SNR or even output impedance (although thatonenoob did measure and the OI appears to be around 1 ohm).
 
I have requested information from HifiMan on a variety of internal information and specifications including the DAC chip used, OP amps, specs like output impedance and more information on power output. Unfortunately so far I have not been able to ascertain any of this information and to date HifiMan's engineers have politely declined, citing proprietary discretion (which I can understand). I will say that it is disappointing that necessary specs like output impedance aren't stated – and also highlight again that other Companies (FiiO, and even L&P) have been far more forth-coming with their specifications.
 
UI (USER INTERFACE) / USABILITY
Please note that this is with the released firmware UI2016-09-22V005Beta.
 
Like with the SuperMini I'm going to choose my words very carefully here – because I don't want to give the wrong impression. The UI on the MegaMini is minimalist, but functional, and easy to navigate. I'm someone who has come from early audiophile DAPs like the HSA V3 Anniversary Edition, and experienced a lot of FiiO's transitions from early betas to more advanced UIs, so I tend to be a little more tolerant of minimalist designs than most.
 
 
When first switching on the SuperMini, you are greeted by a HifiMan splash screen, and then simple hierarchical and quite simple menu system. There is a top status bar, and no matter where you are, this will always display the current volume level and also the battery status. The menu has the following options:
 

1. now playing
2. file explorer
3. artist (ex tags)
4. albums (ex tags)
5. genre (ex tags)
6. favourite (I'll run through this shortly)
7. all songs
8. settings

 
 
The now playing screen takes you to the main screen when a track is playing. The first change you'll note (from the SuperMini) is that there is small album art included this time. The top status bar now shows track number and total tracks, and the play settings (repeat on or off, and also the play-through method / shuffle etc)
 
Below this is the main screen with file name, artist, and album name. Below this is the album art. There is a scrubbing or track position indicator, and a time played for the current track. Slightly above this is the file format and bit-rate for the track. Whilst in this screen you can press and hold the play/pause button for 3s, and when released it allows you to quickly access the play mode (turn shuffle or repeat on) – a nice touch. So minimal but functional.
 
 
The file explorer is simply that – a means of accessing files, and has become my preferred method of playing full albums. My recommendation here (if you have a larger library) is to arrange in hierarchical folders – I use:
/A-C/artist names/ albums/ tracks
/D-F/artist names/ albums/ tracks
/G-I/artist names/ albums/ tracks
etc
This is a pretty simple way of getting to a preferred artist and album in as few clicks as possible.
 
Using the tagged library (artists/albums/genre) is very simple, but everything is in a longer list. Fortunately pressing and holding the up or down button allows rapid scrolling (although it is not as snappy as the SuperMini) – so this does help navigation. But it is laborious for a larger library. There is a slight delay from selection of song to it playing. One thing to note is that you can't add a track or album to favourites from the explorer or now playing screen – it must be done from within the artist, album, genre, or all songs (tagged) lists. Personally I think it would have been handy to have this function available from now playing also. Pressing and holding the play/pause/select button from any of these lists allows an option to add to favourites.
 
 
The favourites menu allows access to the files you've tagged as favourites. Unfortunately they go in the order you've tagged them and there doesn't seem to be any way to manipulate the files other than removing them (done by pushing the select button when in the favourites men). There is also no option for multiple lists. You have the one favourites list, and that is it. If you're methodical and don't mind spending time setting it up – it can be pretty handy. But for those who use play-lists a lot – the implementation here is likely to drive you mad.
 
The all songs menu allows you to access every song (through the tagged library) and displays them via file name (alpha numeric). This is the easy way to shuffle your whole library. Put it on random/shuffle hit play and press next. The only issue with this of course is that there is no replay gain, so you'll need to be adjusting volume often.
 
 
The settings menu allows you to access:

1. System version
2. Repeat and shuffle settings
3. The back-light (how long it is on)
4. Auto power off (and this is what it says – its basically an off-timer)
5. Screen lock switch (on or off)
6. Language
7. Update database
8. Full reset
9. Format the micro AD

 
Updating the database (with approx 6500 aac256 tracks) takes about 4 minutes, so its not super quick – but once the database is up to date, overall the UI is not too bad to navigate.
 
FORMAT SUPPORT
HifiMan list the supported formats as (see below image):
Lossy – MP3, WMA, OGG and AAC
Lossless – WAV, APE, FLAC, AIFF, ALAC and DSD64
I tested all of the listed formats except for WMA and had no issues with playback apart from OGG files and 24/96 WAV (wasn't recognised). Basically I started with Bob Dylan's album Infidels – I have a copy in 24/96. I didn't buy it for the hi-res, but rather for the mastering. I then proceeded to use dbpoweramp to transcode each track in succession to:
MP3 V0, Ogg -q1, WAV 24/96, APE 24/96, FLAC 24/96, AIFF 24/96, FLAC 24/192 + I added a DSF file from Quires and Cloud to test the DSD.
 
Everything played without a hitch (and sounded good too) apart from the Ogg and the WAV file. Thinking I'd made a mistake with the encoding, I recoded and tried again (no dice). So I tried the micro SD card with my FiiO X3ii – immediate success with Ogg and also WAV. So I'd list the Ogg support as “questionable” - it wasn't working for me. Everything else was as advertised, and the AIFF support was actually better at 24bit rather than 16bit. Not sure what was happening with WAV playback – especially when AIFF worked with no hitch.
 
POWER OUTPUT
HifiMan publishes the output power at up to 54 mW (1.4V @ 36 ohms) – so it's clear that this power output should be targeted more toward IEMs than full sized headphones. It does have the 32 volume steps though so it was a good chance to test real-world how that power translated into actual performance with a wide variety of headphones and earphones.
 
Full headphones
For this part of the exercise I used my full sized headphones, SPL meter position inside the cushions adjacent to my ear, and the track “Joker man”. The SPL meter was set to measure A-weighted, and my aim was to try and match as closely as possible my desired peak listening level at around 75dB. Results listed below. Each time the SPL meter was reset, and peak SPL recorded:
HD630VB => volume 17/32 = 75.2 dB
HD600 =>volume 25/32 = 75.7 dB
HD800S =>volume 25/32 = 75.4 dB
 
 
All 3 headphones sounded pretty good with the MegaMini and I have to admit I was scratching my head a bit as the stated power output didn't seem consistent with what I was hearing (had HifiMan understated the power output?). Anyway I carried on listening to the HD800S for a while afterwards and have to admit that the combo was pretty darn good (but then again the recording is truly excellent).
 
IEMs and Ear-buds
For the next series of tests I simply repeated the same IEM's I originally used with the SuperMini. For this test I used the included RE600 variant, the Campfire Andromeda (super sensitive), the MEE P1 (harder to drive), and the VE Zen2 320 ohm ear-buds.
 

Again I used my trusty SPL meter, “I and I” from the Infidels album, and recorded the following results (once again the dB figures are volume peaks from the same portion of music).
HFM RE600 => volume 13/32 = 75.2 dB
Campfire Andromeda => volume 6/32 = 77.9 dB
MEE P1 Pinnacle => volume 18/32 = 75.1 dB
(With the MEE P1 and the MegaMini at full blast – 32/32 volume with that track will produce peaks of an ear shattering 99.6 dB – so the available power is quite a bit more than I was expecting)
 
With the Zen2, like the full sized headphones, I simply wanted to get to a comfortable listening level, then measure the comparative output. At a volume of 20-21/32 it was pretty close to my normal listening level (peaks of around 75-78dB, but averaging around 70 dB). And in particular with the Zen2, it was clearly obvious that the MegaMini was driving these 320 ohm earphones particularly well. A really good combo.

With all of the earphones tested, the MegaMini went beyond my expectations – and I wish there was more data available for its output (into different loads). You can see from the results above that there seems to be enough output to satisfactorily drive most earphones, and quite a few headphones. The headphones were calibrated to my own volume listening preferences which I know may well be lower than a lot of members here listen at. So take that into account if you prefer to listen at a relatively loud level.
 
I got my daughter (Emma) to test the Andromeda with the MegaMini. I know its really sensitive, and suspected there would be some hissing. I of course would miss this because quite simply my tinnitus masks it. But Emma has excellent hearing (she listens at levels which I can get no enjoyment at – too quiet), and she said that the Campfire Andromeda hiss was noticeable from a very low (1/32) – and still audible at her normal listening volume 3-4/32. So for people with sensitive hearing who own the Andromeda – not the best pairing.
 
Will you need a separate amp for the MegaMini? Pretty much “no” in my opinion – and it doesn't have a dedicated line-out anyway.
 
OTHER ERRATA

1. Updating database – 6500 aac256 tracks – approx 4 minutes
2. Battery life – I tested this with the RE600 IEMs (from the HifiMan SuperMini package), Pearl Jam's album Rearview Mirror in aac256 on continuous loop, and for the majority of the time the screen off (turned on periodically for a few seconds simply to check progress). The battery lasted 9 hours and 16 minutes until full shut-down which is far less than the claimed 15 hours. So like the SuperMini, I can only guess that their stated battery life in in “idle” - with nothing playing in. As it is 9 hours is not bad for such a tiny DAP, but I found some of their campaign messages (what can you do in 15 hours – fly from Shanghai to NY) a little misleading – as it implies you can have 15 hours play time which is clearly not the case.
3. There is no shut-down after inactivity. The screen will switch off but the MegaMini remains on. This is something to consider if you are the forgetful type, as in idle, you will use battery life.
4. Disconnecting the headphones from the socket does not stop the MegaMini playing. I've forgotten this a few times (the FiiO devices I have automatically stop playing, and will go to sleep if left for a while) – and the resultant flat battery if left for a while has been a little annoying.

 
SONICS
So lets talk about how the MegaMini sounds.
 
Some of you may find this section a little limited, so I’ll give you some insight into the way I’ve changed my opinion on how to describe the sound with any competently made DAC, DAP or amplifier. The problem with trying to break the sonics down to bass, mids and treble is that DAP / DAC / amp is designed (or should be designed) to be essentially flat across the frequency spectrum. If it has enhanced bass, then isn’t it adding colouration that should come from the headphones or EQ or recording? Likewise, I won’t comment on sound-stage, as this is primarily a by-product of the actual recording, or the transducers you’re using.
 
So how do I go about describing it? Well I can’t measure it this time (I’d need to be able to isolate the signal from the MegaMini, and it can't be used as a stand alone DAC, nor as a pass through amplifier). I’m pretty confident the MegaMini will be very linear in its measurements, so you’ll be left listening to the recording pure and simple (and isn’t that what we all want?). To my ears it doesn't sound if any frequency is being bumped or is recessed anyway.
 
So instead, I’ll just say that I really enjoy the sound so far from the MegaMini, and give you my (very) subjective impressions of the MegaMini compared to my other DAPs. But if I was to give a one line sentence on the overall sound characteristic, I would say that the MegaMini is very similar to the SuperMini in overall tonality – so again quite linear with maybe the tiniest tilt toward warmth (or in audiophile terms – musicality). There is definitely a nice depth to the sonic signature with the right earphones.
 
With each of these comparisons, I used a 1 kHz test tone to exactly match volume, and used the VE Zen2 320 ohm ear-buds to directly compare to other DAPs in a similar price range. I used the Zen2 simply because I was really enjoying them during the power tests and wanted to continue the listening experience.
 
Warning – very subjective impressions ahead.
 
MegaMini vs SuperMini
The two have very similar build and dimensions with the MegaMini being slightly smaller at 100 x 42 x8.5mm. Button layout is slightly different with the Mega having 4 buttons on the face and 3 on the sides compared to the Super's 3 on the face and 4 on the side (the return button being the point of difference). The Super does have a longer real-world battery life (~15 hours vs ~9 hours), and is also slightly more powerful (although not as much as I expected) – and of course the Super has balanced which yields even higher power output.
 
 
I really think I’d struggle to tell these two apart in a completely blind test. Tonally they are extremely similar, and during the course of the A/B the only feeling I got was that there was slightly more depth or separation to the Super. But this could have simply been the very slight difference in volume (0.2dB), and also natural expectation bias in a sighted test. If I was to choose one purely based on what I'm hearing, I would lean toward the Super. From a recommendation POV, it would come down to what you need. If you value the balanced option, and need a little more power, plus if the included IEMs have value for you – then the choice is an easy one (the Super). If you are simply looking for a great small form factor DAP, don't need balanced, and already have your preferred IEMs, then from a value standpoint the Mega is probably the better option. Looking at value on a whole – the Super would appear to give more bang for your buck.
 
MegaMini vs FiiO X3ii
The X3ii is bigger and heavier being more around twice the weight and twice the mass/size. Battery life is actually in favour of the X3ii which will generally give me ~10 hours even with the Zen2. It would be difficult to talk about power output – as the X3ii has full specifications released for differing loads while the Mega only has output for a 36 ohm load listed. With the Zen2, 20/32 on the Mega is ~ 75/120 on the X3ii, so on a pure volume to available volume ratio they are practically identical. I'd suggest their total power output may be very similar under load – however with the X3ii you do have added gain options which cannot be under estimated. Where the X3ii kills the MegaMini is on its feature set, and also price. At about 2/3 of the cost, you also get true gapless playback, replay gain, searchable database, external play-lists, user configurable equaliser and use as a DAC.
 
 
Sonically I'm finding very little difference between the X3ii and MegaMini during fast switching. They both have very similar overall tonality – and this is one test where I'd suggest I again would have issues telling the two apart if it was a blind test. One thing that is true though is that there is less hiss with the Andromeda (using the X3ii). Both players are brilliant with the Zen2 – and I'd take either one for a long term listening test.
 
So the choices this time are really on size (MegaMini) vs the extra features and slightly longer extra battery life of the X3ii. When you factor in cost – the X3ii is simply the better option IMO.
 
MegaMini vs FiiO X5ii
The X5ii is much bigger and heavier being more than twice the weight and twice the size. Battery life is again in favour of the X5ii (~9 hours vs ~10 hours). Again it would be difficult to talk about power output – as the X5ii has full specifications released for differing loads while the Mega only has output for a 36 ohm load listed. With the Zen2, 20/32 on the Mega is ~ 70/120 on the X5ii, so on a pure volume to available volume ratio they are close to identical (but in favour of X5ii). Where the X5ii is different is the additional output of its extra gain stage which does deliver higher voltage and current. What the X5ii loses on portability (size), it more than makes for on features – including gapless playback, replay gain, searchable database, external play-lists, user configurable equaliser and use as a DAC.
 
 
Sonically, although both are close, I'm finding the X5ii is perhaps slightly cleaner in its output, and there is a little more definition or separation. The differences are tiny and could be more imagined than real. Again they both have very familiar overall tonality. Again both players are sublime with the VE Zen2.
 
So like with the X3ii, the choices this time are on the smaller size of the MegaMini vs the additional power, slightly more refinement, and abundance of features of the X5ii (as well as double the potential storage space). For a mere $50 more – again to me the X5ii simply presents a better value proposition.
 

CONCLUSION / SUMMARY HIFIMAN MEGAMINI

 
It's been an interesting 10 days since the Mega and Super Mini players arrived. And I've been suitably impressed with the SuperMini – from both a performance and value performance. With the cheaper MegaMini – while I think it is overall a really nice sounding player – IMO it will struggle as a value proposition at its price of $249.
 
What you will get is a great footprint (ultra-portable), really good SQ, good power output for its size, and an easy to use simple UI experience.
 
Like the SuperMini, what it lacks is features – and for many these will be deal breakers. No gap-less. No EQ. No DAC mode. No replay-gain. No searchable database. Limited play-list support. And the unfortunate thing is that this time it doesn't have the bundled IEMs, or the balanced output, to help level the overall value. For $249 there are simply better options out there which sound just as good, but give you much better value overall.
 
So would I recommend the MegaMini? – well this time, not really. Despite it being a great sounding DAP, I simply think its over-priced. If the Mega was listed at $150, and maybe $200 at the high end, it would at least stand a bit of a chance. I still regard it as a very good DAP, and it sounds really good too. If you value ultra-portability over everything else, its definitely worth a look.
 
The review sets will both be returned to HifiMan and I am going to miss them both. My thanks to Dr Bian, Peter Hoagland and Ryne from HifiMan for their assistance and for giving me the opportunity.
 
AND WHAT ABOUT MY CHECKLIST
Back at the start I listed what I looked for in a new DAP. So how did the MegaMini go?
 

1. Clean, neutral signature – but with body (not thin)
   Definitely has very good SQ – tick.
    
2. Good build quality
   Extremely good build quality - definite tick.
    
3. Reasonable battery life
   If I'm looking at usable battery life, and considering the overall feature set – then unfortunately this one is not quite ticked for me. Close though.
    
4. Easy to use interface
   Definitely a tick – it may be short on features, but the design of the UI is really good.
    
5. Able to drive both low impedance and (within reason) higher impedance cans without additional amping.
   Definite tick with the headphones I have.
    
6. Value for money
   Sadly no – there are better options out there, and I personally don't see $249 value subjectively
    
7. Enough storage to hold either my favourite albums in red-book, or my whole library in a reasonably high resolution lossy format (for me – aac256)
   Another tick I tested most formats, but most of my listening is usually AAC256, and I had my entire library at my disposal with a 64 Gb card.

 

EDITED AGAIN 4th DEC - FOLLOWING FIRMWARE ADJUSTMENT
Introducing HiSound Audio’s TOTL DAP – The Studio V 3rd Anniversary Edition
 
 
After reviewing many of HSA’s earbuds and IEMs lately, my thoughts turned toward buying a new DAP.  My iPod Touch G4 (32 GB) had been getting pretty full, and I’d been tossing up between simply getting the iPod Touch G5 (64 GB) + an add on amp (probably an Arrow) so I could drive my higher impedance full cans, or buying a DAP that could do an all-in-one job.  I asked Jack from HSA for his opinion, and he steered me toward the Studio V3 A.E.  We struck a deal where I would pay for the device, review it, and if not happy, could return for a full refund.  In this review, I’ve listed the Studio V3 A.E. for its normal list price.  I paid a little under this – but I did pay for the DAP.
 
Disclaimer
I was provided the Studio V3 A.E. as a paid (but discounted) review sample.  I am in no way affiliated with HiSound Audio - and this review is my honest opinion of the Studio V3 A.E.  I would like to thank Jack and the HiSound Audio team for making this opportunity available.
 
Preamble - 'about me'.   (This is to give any readers a baseline for interpreting the review).
I'm a 46 year old music lover.  I don't say audiophile - just love my music.  Over the last couple of years, I have slowly changed from cheaper listening set-ups to my current mid-fi set-up.  I vary my listening from portable (iDevices) to my desk-top's set-up (PC > coax > NFB-12 > LD MKIV > HP).  My main headphones at the time of writing are the Senn HD600, Grado RS1, Shure SE535 Ltd Ed. IEMs, and HSA’s BA-100, Crystal and Living earbuds/IEMs.  I've also just received the Dunu DN1000 Hybrid IEM this week.
 
I have very eclectic music tastes listening to a variety from classical/opera and jazz to grunge and hard-rock.   I listen to a lot of blues, jazz, indie, classic rock, and alternative rock.  I am particularly fond of female vocals.  I tend toward cans that are relatively neutral/balanced - with a slight emphasis on the mid-range.  I am neither a bass or treble head (you could argue that I do like clarity though).  Current amps = NFB12 and LD MKIV.  I also formerly owned several portable amps - the most notable being an Arrow 4G and GoVibe PortaTube.
 
My experience with DAPs in the past have been initially with very cheap Sony offerings, then step-ups to the Cowon iAudio7, and lately to my iPhone4 and iPod Touch G4 – which are both very good sounding and have excellent interfaces.  I've also listened to various other devices along the way - including Cowon's J3.
 
I have extensively tested myself (abx) and I find aac256 or higher completely transparent.  For my portable listening – it is my preferred format (space vs quality).  All of my music is legally purchased (mostly CD – the rest FLAC purchased on-line).
 
I tend to be sceptical about audiophile ‘claims’, don’t generally believe in burn-in, and would rather test myself blind on perceived differences.  I am not a ‘golden eared listener’
 
What I Was Looking For In A DAP
I thought I’d list (before I start with the review) what I was really looking for in a new DAP.

1. Great (neutral) sounding
2. Good build quality
3. Reasonable battery life
4. Easy to use interface
5. Able to drive both low impedance and (within reason) higher impedance cans

​
Did I get all of this with the Studio V3 A.E?  That’s a definite no.  Well - mostly (following some tweaking).  And for me, the two biggest ‘must haves’ were going to be sonic quality and usability.  Do I still have the Studio V3 A.E?  Yes.  No intention of returning.  Read on, and discover with me why I regard this DAP as having a ‘Jekyll & Hyde complex’, but why (for me) it’s remained a keeper.
 
This is a purely subjective review - my gear, my ears, and my experience.  Please take it all with a grain of salt - especially if it does not match your own experience.
 
THE REVIEW
 
Packaging and Accessories
When the Studio V3 A.E. package arrived – before I opened the parcel, my initial thought was that Jack must have sent me something along with it.  The box is big considering the size of the DAP – but I have to admit it does give an impression of something “just a little bit special” being inside.
 
On opening the V3 box, the initial impression was “wow this thing is tiny”, and also – it does look very solid and classy.
 
With the V3 you also get:

1. An HSA VIP card
2. Warranty (in Chinese)
3. The Studio V3 manual (in English and Chinese)

 
The manual itself is fairly basic – but also pretty easy to follow.
 
Underneath the display tray is a second compartment with 3 very nicely presented boxes which hold the USB plug and cable, and also a pair of PAA-1 earbuds (which despite their budget appearance actually sound not too bad).
 
 
 
Technical Specifications
There wasn’t a lot of information (technical anyway) on the web – so I’m relying on what was published in the manual.  Relevant details include:
 
 
Build
Four words – solid, classy, high quality.
 
 
The body is a solid piece of machined aluminium with a brushed exterior.  The colour is silvery with a light golden hued tint.  The body has slightly bevelled edges – but it is comfortable to hold.  The buttons are solid, and appear built to last.  The OLED display – while small is relatively easy to read, and can be viewed reasonably easily (dark and light).  It does suffer a little in direct sunlight - but easy enough to shade with a cupped palm.  The USB cable fits snugly, and headphone socket is tight and feels well put together.  On the bottom of the player – next to the USB port – is a micro SD expansion slot.  For this review I’m using a Sansa Ultra microSDXC class 10 card.  The card is easy to fit and is solid once input.  One note here – you’ll need to format the card to FAT32.
 
 
On the top of the unit is the headphone out, and also another plug so that the Studio V3 A.E. can also be used as an amplifier for another source.  I have tried this feature – and while it works, I can’t say that it’s a feature I would ever see myself using.
 
 
The only issue I have with the build is that I’m always worried about scratching it because it looks so classy.  It’s already received a lot of comments from my work mates – and has been instantly a topic of conversation when I’ve had it out.  Quick thought for Jack – it would be nice to include some type of soft cover (or pouch) as an added accessory for the future.
 
UI (Universal Interface) / Usability
 
With pre-loaded firmware DT-DYNAMIC 2013.01.15
Ok – here is where we meet Dr Hyde.  So far my initial impressions were very good.  First I charged the battery for the initial recommended 8 hours, and then began loading some music.  The USB interface is really good.  On plugging I got two Windows Explorer windows – the first the 4 GB internal memory, and the second had access to the 64 GB card.  Putting music on the player was simply a matter of drag and drop.  So far, so good.  When I had the card loaded with about 45 GB of HQ aac files (around 4000 tracks), I unplugged and turned the unit on.
 
 
I’d already read a lot of the threads on the V3 A.E. – so I was expecting a slow start-up.  Initial boot took around 5 minutes.   The disconcerting thing was watching the screen initially scroll the boot messages – then seem to freeze.  Don’t panic if this is happening to you – it’s normal for everything to freeze while it’s initialising the card.  Once it starts scrolling again you notice the card is loaded and you’re ready to go.
 
 
Here’s where things started to get flaky.  Although the card had loaded – the player was extremely laggy moving from menu to menu.  Scrolling was an absolute chore – and sometimes despite clicking repeatedly, it was not scrolling at all.  For anyone at this stage – patience.  What I found out later - through trial and error – is that this player does not like a big library of tracks, and that it gets more responsive around the 3000 track mark or lower.  I also found that leaving the player for about another minute after it’s initially loaded also speeds up the responsiveness.
 
 
Anyway – initially I had ~4000 tracks loaded and the player was extremely laggy.  Not used to the interface, and coming from the excellent UI in all the Apple devices – this made me very impatient, and it was at this point I discovered one of the major flaws in the V3 A.E. UI.  The central button acts as a select option, play/pause, and back option – depending on how long you hold it.  Unfortunately it also acts as the power off button.
 
So imagine if you will – laggy menus, trying to back out of a directory, buttons unresponsive because of the lag – so press the central button either repeatedly or longer (because of the lag) – and you suddenly get the “Bye” notification and the device powers off.   Aaaargh!!!  Wait 5 minutes to power on again.  Repeat process etc.  It was at this point after a further 15-20 minutes that I was ready to just box the whole thing up and return it to Jack.  At this stage I hadn’t even been able to have a decent listening experience.
 
Anyway – fast forward now 3 weeks – and things are much different.  The UI still sucks could be better – but it’s usable.  It’s extremely basic – and Jack’s advice to me (via email) was invaluable.  He advised patience and that eventually I’d get used to working the buttons – the length of time to press etc, and I have.  Like I said earlier – the secret is not to overload the player with files – and to be patient with loading.
 
The menu itself is simple – but effective.  You can either browse by selecting the music option or file browser mode.  Using the music option – your tags need to be correct.  Interesting note here (just another quirky observance) – if you have no music files on the 4 GB internal memory, the player won’t recognise tags on the files on the removable micro SD card.  For me it simply showed ‘no file’.  Once I added files to the internal memory – they reappeared.
 
Main menu options include “Now Playing”, “Music”, “Resource Manager”, and “Settings”.
 
The best part about the UI is that it’s very simple to use once you get accustomed to it.  The worst parts are:

1. Player lag
2. No back button (apart from the central one) and having it double as on/off.
3. Every time you exit a menu you have to relocate that folder again (no memory of where you last were).  This is extremely annoying – especially when browsing by folders, or if you have artists with multiple albums.
4. If you have a lot of folders – you can have a lot of clicking to get to the one you want – there is simply no easy way of getting there in a hurry.
5. No true gapless
6. It has lossless support – but does not work with 24/96 files (have to resample these)

 
One recently discovered fault (could be just my unit) is that sometimes when I power on – the volume either appears to be slightly muted, or louder than it ought to be.  This doesn’t happen very often – and usually just repowering the device of and on again puts things back to normal.  It’s happened only a couple of times in the last 2 weeks – but it is repeatable – so could be an issue just with my unit.

---

UPDATE 28/11
So in an attempt to get better response from the player - I decided to try removing all of the tags from my files.  I use folder browsing anyway - so no biggie.  I fired up MP3tag - deleted the tags, and tried again.  Still a very slow boot, and still some lag in the UI.   Hmmmm ....
 
Next - wiped the player - got rid of the albums I'm least likely to use - so now I was only loading about 2300 tracks (mostly full albums).  This time all of the albums loaded as FLAC - but after I cleaned up all the tags (deleted any ID3V2 tags, deleted artwork, deleted all other eroneous info except for Artist, Album, Genre and Track (title and #).  Reloaded and an instant improvement.  Load time is now about 3.5 minutes (it's pretty consistently around this time) - but a lot of the lagginess is now gone from the menus.  It;s actually pretty snappy, and a lot easier to use!  Now that I'm not having to fight the player all the time - I can have a look around.  Discovered folder play - works really well, and there is an option in settings to randomise the play (nice).  Genre tags work, as do artist and album - so if you want to create playlists you can - just by arranging desired tracks in a common folder.  The good news is that if tagged properly - you can then use the normal 'tagged playing options' to play by album - and the folder option to arrange playlists if you need to.  Takes a little managing the set-up, but all in all - the more I use the player, the better it's becoming.
 
Would I like the UI fixed - YES!  Biggest one for me would be boot time.  But it's very usable at the moment - and it's not a chore as it was in the beginning.  My Hyde is now more of an annoyance than a raving beast

---

UPDATE 04/12
Following Lee730's advice - I finally bit the bullet and reverted to firmware version DT-DYNAMIC 20111223.  I now consider the UI to still be a little primitive but very usable (no longer the Mr Hyde it once was).  Boot time with a fully loaded internal and external memory is now just a little over a minute (approx 74 seconds), scrolling is dynamic, and most of the lag is gone.  I really don't know why this version is not the default one for the player.  All in all now - this has gone from a good DAP to a great DAP in my estimation.  Sonics (as you'll read further) are outsanding, as is the build.  Now the UI is functional as well.

---

 
I could go on a lot more about the UI – but it’s time to move on.  The important thing is that I still have, and use this DAP daily.  And that’s simply because of the sound …..
 
Sound
Let me preface this section by making sure you know where I’m coming from.  I like the sound of my iPhone.  It’s linear – sounds great, low distortion, essentially flat frequency response.  I did not expect the Studio V3 to sound superior – yet it does.  I level matched, got my wife to assist with swapping blind, and tried it with a number of different headphones.  The V3 A.E. to my untrained ears sounds phenomenal.
 
 
It’s essentially pretty colourless – maybe has a very slightly brighter than neutral signature.  It’s either that or most of my other gear has been slightly darker than normal.  I won’t go on about bass, mids or treble – as that won’t get to the heart of the matter.  The V3 A.E. has a very black background.  I’ve noticed no hiss (or other noise) with even my very sensitive SE535 Ltd Eds.  The main difference between the iPhone 4 and Studio V3 A.E. (sonically) is in a greater sense of ‘air’ or ‘space’ with the music.  I know this sounds like stupid audiophile speak – but it’s the best way I can describe it.  Side by side (and volume matched to the best of my ability) – in direct comparison – the iPhone 4 sounds quite flat after listening to the V3 A.E.  If I had to guess – I’d say it was something to do with the crossfeed set-up maybe?  Anyway – the Studio V3 to me simply sounds wonderful – which is why I’m keeping it.
 
Update - spent the evening with Dunu's DN1000 Hybrid and the Studio V3 A.E.  To my ears, these were made for each other.  Crystal clear, gorgeous mid-range, punchy and hard-hitting (dare I say 'magical') bass - and I am definitely not a basshead.
 
 
And to those who are maybe scoffing at this point (like I used to with others) – remember that I have every reason to return the player for a full refund.  The UI is not good not as good as I'm used to, I can’t store all of my music (like I wanted), and features are missing that had grown to be 2^nd nature on my iDevices.  I’m keeping this because it sounds great – despite everything else.
 
Power
HSA claim (on the rear of the device) that it is Class A inside – and this is one of the reasons I looked at it originally.  I wanted a DAP that I wouldn’t have to carry a separate amplifier with (a truly portable device).  And it doesn’t disappoint.  It’s perfect with my sensitive IEMs, and can still drive (with no issues) my HD600.  It sounds great with the RS1 – and when I had my K702 I even tried it for a while.  Whilst the K702 was lacking a small bit of power (didn’t quite have the bottom end that I was used to from a more powerful set-up), volume and general sonic signature on the K702 was far better than from the iPhone – and was very listenable.
The Studio V3 has 31 different settings in its volume scale – and so far I’d never had any issues with headroom.  On the HD600’s I sit close to 20.  With my IEMs – around 8-10.  There are no issues with channel imbalance.
 
 
Battery Life
HSA claim up to 100 hours playing lower bitrate MP3 files in saver mode (ie screen turned off).  I’m guessing from a full initial charge – that could be achieved.  But as far as real world usage goes – I’m probably using the player around 6 hours a day (playing music), and sometimes longer if I leave it in stand-by.  I have no problems getting at least 2-3 days, so I’d say minimum 30 hours with higher resolution files and normal use – probably longer – is achievable.  Anyway – given that it powers all my headphones (portable and full sized) and has very long life – no amp required – I’m very happy with its battery life so far.
 
Summary
So there we have the Studio V3 A.E.  A real Jekyll and Hyde dilemma for prospective buyers.  On the positive side:

1. Truly excellent sonically
2. Wonderful build
3. Powerful enough to use without an additional amplifier
4. Very good battery life

 
On the negative side:

1. A crude and frustrating UI (until you learn it's oddities, and get your library tweaked to overcome the issues)
2. Laggy if used with too many files (becomes snappier with fewer files + also correct tagging)
3. Significant start-up delays (hope they fix this with firmware eventually) - unless you revert back to the older stable firmware.

 
Is it worth the full retail price (USD 450)? – I’ll leave that up to the individual.  For the discounted price I paid – it is my favourite player sonically, and I use it in preference to my iPhone 4 now.  It wouldn’t take much to make the Studio V3 A.E. an absolutely excellent DAP.  Here are a few ideas …..
 
Suggestions for HSA

1. Separate on/off button (absolutely necessary IMO)
2. When back button used – it needs to go back one step only
3. Keep expansion slot – but increase onboard memory.  If the memory was even 32 GB onboard (64Gb would be ideal) – this should significantly increase the responsiveness (I’d forgo the expansion card altogether), and negate the lag from having too many files.
4. Think about adding a lock button/switch.  I had it in my pocket yesterday (jeans) and I seemed to drain the battery quite quickly.  Assume that the buttons may have been inadvertently being pushed (in my pocket) which led to screen being on almost all the time - and resulting in a big battery drain.
5. Revert back to original firmware DT-DYNAMIC 20111223 or at least make the most current firmware as stable and with the same shorter boot time.

 
Thanks again Jack for the opportunity to purchase and review this unit.  I won’t be sending it back – it sounds too good to part with.

INTRODUCTION

I’ve only recently heard about thinksound™ audio, and before Head-Fi user d marc0 contacted me, I’d never heard any of their products. So always keen to hear something new, I agreed to be part of a mini tour.
thinksound™ audio is the brainchild of Aaron Fournier and Mike Tunney. They are a small company started in 2009, and based in Somersworth, New Hampshire (USA). They formed the company to (and this is from their website):

create incredible sounding headphones with the smallest eco-footprint possible. Our headphones are made with real wood, creating a more natural resonance and unparalleled acoustics.

We take our environmental impact as serious as we do our audio products. Our packaging is crafted from recycled materials, with minimal plastic components. We also use PVC-free cables and choose our wood from renewable sources. The result is great sound that you can feel good about.

For the last several years, thinksound™ engineers and designers have been perfecting their unique line of earphones. Each and every component and material has been chosen with care. Only the finest quality components make it into a thinksound™ product.

Our Green Initiative
thinksound™ headphones are designed with the following features to reduce its overall environmental impact:

* Wood is from renewable sources
* Packaging is made from recycled materials
* Bleach-free packaging materials
* Smaller packaging size = less materials used
* Elimination of plastic bubble insert
* Cotton carrying pouch is sewn from renewable sources
* PVC-free cables

Click to expand...

Their current catalogue encompasses 4 base IEMs (ranging from USD 75 – 120), and one full sized set of headphones – the On1 @ USD 300. Today I’ll be reviewing the rain2 – which is described by thinksound™ as “having a clean, clear and warm sound for the average listener”. The rain2 arrived 2 weeks ago, and since it arrived, I’ve spent as much time as I could manage coming to grips with its signature – for me that has been around 20 hours of listening time.

DISCLAIMER

I was provided the rain2 (as part of a tour) from d marc0. I am in no way affiliated with thinksound™ - and this review is my subjective opinion of the rain2. I’d like to take this opportunity to thank Mark for giving me the opportunity. It’s great that we have such a wonderful community here at Head-Fi - able to share our gear so as enthusiasts we can experience a lot more audio gear than many of us could otherwise afford.

PREAMBLE - 'ABOUT ME'. (or a base-line for interpreting my thoughts and bias)

I'm a 48 year old music lover. I don't say audiophile – I just love my music. Over the last couple of years, I have slowly changed from cheaper listening set-ups to my current set-up. I vary my listening from portable (Fiio X5, X3ii and iPhone 5S) to my desk-top's set-up (PC > coax > NFB-12 > LD MKIV > HP). I also use a portable set-up at work – either X5/X3ii > HP, or PC > Beyer A200p > HP. My main full sized headphones at the time of writing are the Beyer T1 and Sennheiser HD600. Most of my portable listening is done with IEMs - and up till now it has mainly been with the Fidue A83, Dunu Titan and Altone200. A full list of the gear I have owned (past and present is listed in my Head-Fi profile).

I have very eclectic music tastes listening to a variety from classical/opera and jazz, to grunge and general rock. I listen to a lot of blues, jazz, folk music, classic rock, indie and alternative rock. I am particularly fond of female vocals. I generally tend toward cans that are relatively neutral/balanced, but I do have a fondness for clarity, and suspect I might have slight ‘treble-head’ preferences. I am not treble sensitive (at all), and in the past have really enjoyed headphones like the K701, SR325i, and of course the T1 and DT880.

I have extensively tested myself (abx) and I find aac256 or higher completely transparent. I do use exclusively redbook 16/44.1 if space is not an issue. All of my music is legally purchased (mostly CD – the rest FLAC purchased on-line).

I tend to be sceptical about audiophile ‘claims’, don’t generally believe in burn-in, have never heard a difference with different cables, and would rather test myself blind on perceived differences. I am not a ‘golden eared listener’. I suffer from mild tinnitus, and at 48, my hearing is less than perfect.

For the purposes of this review - I mainly used the rain2 straight from the headphone-out socket of my Fiio X3ii, but also used (at different times) my iPhone 5S, and Beyer A200p when at work. I did not further amp them, as IMO they do not benefit from additional amplification. In the time I have spent with the rain2, I have noticed a significant change in the overall sonic presentation, but am aware that this is simply that I am becoming more used to the signature of the rain2 as I use them more often (brain burn-in).

This is a purely subjective review - my gear, my ears, and my experience. Please take it all with a grain of salt - especially if it does not match your own experience.

THE REVIEW

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES

The rain2 arrived in a small to medium sized retail box/sleeve – with a picture of the rain2 on the front, and information on the rain2, and about thinksound™ on the rear. The box is very clean, clear, and the subtle use of the green print does give a hint of the environmentally friendly position of the company.


Opening the sleeve and sliding out the inner container was a revelation. The first thing I noticed was the use of recycled cardboard to house the rain2. This is really clever – and shows commitment to their mission statement. These guys do walk the talk.



The next thing I noticed was the cotton carry pouch and the gorgeous rain2 themselves – but on to them shortly. The accessory package is a little spartan – simply including the cotton drawstring pouch, a cord clip, and 4 sets of silicone tips.



TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

(From thinksound™)

FREQUENCY GRAPH

At the time of writing, I’ve been unable to find a frequency response graph for the rain2 – but what I’m hearing is pretty much what thinksound™ have advertised – a very warm sounding IEM with smooth vocals. For the record – using an spl meter and frequency tones – here’s what I recorded.




The noise floor during the recording was 39.2 dB

BUILD QUALITY / DESIGN

The rain2 is a beautiful looking IEM featuring a practically flawless polished wood rear housing joined to an aluminium front end. At the centre of the rear of the wood housing (partially hidden by the thinksound™ logo) is a single vent for the driver. The aluminium is gun metal in colour, nicely rounded, and has a generous nozzle and lip. The nozzle has a mesh filter. The rain2 is approximately 52mm in length from rear to tip, and has a circumference of marginally under 10mm. The nozzle is approximately 6mm long.



There is generous strain relief at the housing, the Y split is a simple aluminium tube, and the jack is set at 45 degrees, and has a robust build and very good relief. There is a cable clip included – but I would have also liked to have seen some sort of cable cinch. The cable is PVC free, very smooth and very flexible. It is very easy to wear – either straight down or over ear.



So for me, the build quality and attention to detail is very good.

FIT / COMFORT / ISOLATION

I have one ear canal slightly different to the other one (my right is very slightly smaller) - so I tend to find that usually single silicon flanges don't fit overly well. I initially tried the included XL and L silicone tips, and I couldn’t get a decent fit or seal. Not thinksound’s™ fault – just my weird ears. I next tried Sony Isolation tips, and they sealed beautifully, but caused massive driver flex, and every time I swallowed or moved my jaw – I got constant pressure problems in my ear drums. Evidently the driver venting may not quite be enough to cope with a tight seal. This is good for isolation – but for me, limited my tip choice. Eventually I settled on Comply T400 sport foam tips – which gave me a good seal, no flex, and a very comfortable fit.

Isolation with the rain2 is better than average for a dynamic driver (pretty good in fact) – but I do wish that they had better venting to allow me to use the Sony tips.

Comfort is excellent – they are so light that I hardly feel that I’m wearing them. With their small size, they don’t protrude past my ears, and it would be easy for me to lie down or sleep whilst wearing them. The cable is soft, and very comfortable in my preferred over-ear position.

So the rain2 looks good and has good build – how does it sound?

SOUND QUALITY

The following is what I hear from the thinksound™ rain2. YMMV – and probably will – as my tastes are likely different to yours (read the preamble I gave earlier for a baseline). Most of the testing at this point (unless otherwise stated) was done with my Fiio X3ii as source.

Tracks used were across a variety of genres – and can be viewed in this list http://www.head-fi.org/a/brookos-test-tracks.

Thoughts on Default Signature

I need to state this one early, so you can then factor in my bias. This is not my type of signature – I don’t really like the rain2's default signature.

If we look at some of the descriptors thinksound™ gave for the rain2 (clean, clear and warm sound), then they’ve hit some of their intended sound signature – although for my tastes I’d question the “clean and clear” more than a little. If I was to describe the default signature in a few words – I’d choose the words “very warm”, “very smooth” and (subjective speak coming up) “organically dull”. Their problem is simply that there is not enough sparkle, and the lower mid-range and upper bass is so thick that for a lot of my music there is no contrast, and it becomes so non-descript as to be unenjoyable. Like I said – it’s simply not my type of signature.

My very first impressions of the rain2 were very negative (really overpoweringly warm) – but I persevered with them, and gradually became used to their signature – and on some tracks it is actually pretty good (as long as I listen to it, and only it). If I come from a brighter IEM (the Titan, Altone or A83), then I have to go through an adjustment period again – because first impression always resorts back to the very warm and dull impression again.

Overall Detail / Clarity

For this I always use both Steely Dan’s “Gaucho” and Dire Strait’s “Sultans of Swing” as there is a lot of micro detail in both tracks, and the recording quality for both is excellent.

The rain2’s detail retrieval is OK – but I have to listen hard to get all the detail which IEMs like the Titan show easily. Gaucho actually doesn’t sound too bad – smooth sax, a little too much bass coming through, but the shimmer on cymbal hits is AWOL and a lot of the dynamic contrast I’m used to from this track is gone. Sultans of Swing is a little better – but darker than I’m used to – and there is no bite or crunch from guitars. It’s smooth, claustrophobic, uninspiring. These are descriptors I never thought I’d use with this track. It’s clear enough – there just isn’t any dynamic contrast.

Sound-stage & Imaging

For this I use Amber Rubarth’s binaural recording “Tundra”. I use this because it’s a pretty simple way to get comparative data on sound-stage.
It’s usually difficult to get a reasonable stage size from an inner ear monitor. The stage is often quite small / close – with an average impression of space. The rain2 has an intimate stage with this track, and the sense of space is not expansive.

I switched to Loreena McKennitt’s “Dante’s Prayer” but I only got through about 30 seconds of the track. Piano was really nice, as was the Cello, but Loreena’s voice was actually muffled – so in the end I gave up.

Genre Specific Notes

Again for tracks, albums, artists – please refer to this list: http://www.head-fi.org/a/brookos-test-tracks

Rock / Alt-Rock – The rain2 was actually Ok with most rock tracks. Too smooth for my liking – but I could see some people enjoying this presentation. Vocals are relatively clear, and the bass is present enough to give a good beat. The rain2 is once again weak in guitar edge and upper mid-range detail, although acoustic rock did sound pretty good. Seether’s cover of Immortality sounded nicely balanced (again too smooth) – but again cymbals were a flat tap – no air or shimmer. I tried my two usual Alt-rock tracks (PF’s Money and PT’s Trains) – but I can’t say I was impressed with either. Money is supposed to have a lot of changing dynamic contrast – but once again the rain2’s cloying smoothness just pasted a shade of bland over both tracks. Vocals were good and bass was OK – but things shouldn’t stop with the mid-range.

The funny thing was that one of my litmus tests (Pearl Jam) actually sounded pretty good. The rain2 did nail Vedders voice really well – and there was enough detail through the track (including cymbals) to make it a really enjoyable track to listen to.

Jazz / Blues / Bluegrass – Portico Quartet’s “Ruins” is always a first stop for me when testing a new IEM with Jazz, but the rain2has a little too much double bass for my tastes, and the sax just didn’t have the compelling timbre and warble that I know is there in the track. Once again – smooth, smooth, smooth – no real contrast – and it’s just bland.

Switching to female vocal jazz, and Diana Krall’s “Love Me Like A Man” is actually pretty good – the rain2 handles piano pretty well – and Krall’s voice is clear and clean. There is a little contrast with the electric guitar this time – not bad at all.

Onto a bit of Bluegrass, and Dust Bowl Children is OK. Not great – still too smooth, but OK. The banjo doesn’t have its magic – but the mid-range is covering vocals and most instrument fundamentals OK. Blues with Joe Bonamassa’s “India/Mountain Time” was again pleasant, but once again missing something. The normal “bite” from Joe’s guitar was again a casualty – although the rain2 did portray Joe’s vocals pretty well.

Rap / EDM / Pop – Eminem’s “Lose Yourself” is really good with the rain2 – bass hits low and hard – and the vocals this time are very clear. This is the first track I’m genuinely enjoying. Time to switch to some pop and this time Coldplay’s “Speed of Sound”. Again the presentation is mildly enjoyable – I’d prefer more upper end – but I could listen to this type of music portrayal without feeling too claustrophobic.

With electronic – I queued up The Flashbulb, Little Dragon and Lindsey Stirling. Stirling was brilliant with the rain2 – dynamic, fun, a touch boomy – but enjoyable. Likewise Little Dragon’s “Little Man” really hit the spot too – and I think we’ve found a niche with the rain2 that really works rather well.

Classical / Opera – Kempffs Beethoven Sonatas were quite enjoyable, as was Zoe Keating’s Cello performances, but anything else I tried just didn’t gel at all. And the attempt at opera (Netrebko/Garanca) was simply flat – no dynamics, no magic. Avoid.

Indie / Female Vocals – Although this covers a couple of different genres, they make up a lot of my library current listening. First up was Agnes Obel’s Aventine, and I expected the worst (this track needs some reasonable upper mid-range or it sounds hollow). Fears realised – it was horrible – strident, hollow – unenjoyable. London Grammar fared a little better, but still too dark for my tastes, and Gabriella Cilmi’s Safer was actually pretty good.
I finished with Wildlight and Band of Horses. Both Indie groups were actually pretty good. Ayla Nereo’s voice still had some magic – but again a little too warm and smooth. Band of Horses was pretty good though – it’s a brighter sounding track by default which probably helped the rain2. All in all, some hits, some misses.

AMPLIFICATION REQUIREMENTS

The rain2 is easily powered straight out of the portable devices I have, and I haven’t experienced any issues with the iPhone 5S, or any of the Fiio Daps. With typical pop/rock songs on the iP5S I’m usually at a volume level of around 45%. I did try amping with the E11K, but noticed no obvious signs of improvement.

EQUALISATION?

The easiest way to apply quick equalisation for me is with the iPhone 5S and the Accudio Pro app. When I’ve had this problem with excessive mid-bass and lack of treble before, I usually just load the correction for the Sennheiser CX300 (which is one of the worst IEMs I’ve heard for excessive warmth). All of a sudden the rain2 had a veil lifted. It was articulate, nimble, detailed, and clear. I replayed Aventine, and the hollowness was gone. Sultans of Swing had the guitar crunch and its dynamism back. The difference was huge. If this was the default signature, I’d recommend it in a heartbeat.

RAIN2 - SUMMARY

I like the direction Fournier and Tunney have gone with the thinksound™ rain2. It's a very well built, stunning looking IEM which stays true to their eco-friendly ideals and goals. It fits really well, and is extremely comfortable to wear, and for a dynamic driver isolates pretty well.

Unfortunately for me - the rain2 just goes overboard on the warmth, smoothness, and mid-bass, and under performs in the upper mid-range and treble. The end result is an earphone which IMO is very genre dependent, and unfortunately misses the mark on most of the music I listen to. Interestingly, I asked my 13 yo son and 11 yo daughter to have a quick listen - and (maybe because they've both been exposed to more neutral sound headphones) neither were wowed by it.

However, the rain2 responds incredibly well to EQ, and this really transforms it to a pleasant sounding IEM. In fact - whilst I was editing this review, I left the Accudio EQ in place, and spent the next 3 hours listening to the rain2, and it was a very enjoyable experience.

The question is how to rank it? On fit, build, comfort, and ideals (I truly believe we all should be looking after the planet more) - the rain2 would rank really highly. The problem is that for about USD 45.00, I can buy RockJaw's Arcana V2 - another earphone with a gorgeous wooden housing, and warmish signature. The Arcana V2 (without EQ) has what the rain2 is missing - contrast, sparkle, "life".

So for me a 3 star review. I can't recommend it unless you might be very much tied to EDM and Hip-hop/Rap, and like a warm and cloyingly smooth signature. There is better out there. If thinksound™ change the signature for rain3 - I'd definitely be interested to see what they come up with - because the drivers definitely have potential.