[Pabsu]

If you can find an Andro Gold, especially a TI, in good condition I would recommend it 10/10. I was super lucky to find one on the classifieds back in 2020 I'll never part with it.

I have one sounds really good, what sources do you use with it?

 

[OhmsClaw]

I have one sounds really good, what sources do you use with it?

BTR7/Mojo2
Mojo2->3.5mm-RCA->Piety
RME ADI-2 DAC->SA-1(Singled Ended output 3.5mm->1/4" due to lower OI than 4.4 and I don't have a 4.4 for it anyways) Using an effect audio Ares 2+cable I got for cheap.

Mojo2 has some low "hiss" (same on the Solaris SE) when audio is paused. But there has to be no ambient noise either to really notice it. It's not an issue tbh.

I enjoy AZLA Earfit lights, Crystals, Divinus Velvets, and currently have Spiral Dot++'s on em. They aren't as sensitive to tips as the RN6/EVO/Mest MK2. But because I'm silly and have that thick cable on em, the crystals (my favorite tips) are slightly better for holding em in ear with the deeper fit and slight sticky/tackiness.

 

[Pabsu]

BTR7/Mojo2
Mojo2->3.5mm-RCA->Piety
RME ADI-2 DAC->SA-1(Singled Ended output 3.5mm->1/4" due to lower OI than 4.4 and I don't have a 4.4 for it anyways) Using an effect audio Ares 2+cable I got for cheap.

Mojo2 has some low "hiss" (same on the Solaris SE) when audio is paused. But there has to be no ambient noise either to really notice it. It's not an issue tbh.

I enjoy AZLA Earfit lights, Crystals, Divinus Velvets, and currently have Spiral Dot++'s on em. They aren't as sensitive to tips as the RN6/EVO/Mest MK2. But because I'm silly and have that thick cable on em, the crystals (my favorite tips) are slightly better for holding em in ear with the deeper fit and slight sticky/tackiness.

I just use an ibasso dx240

 

[BS5711]

Campfire doesn't use linear impedance design and no crossovers. On some amps such as the Schiit Vali 2++ believe it or not Campfire BA IEMs DO NOT HISS all even though it's a tube amp with 1000x worse THD+N than a typical DAP

Thank you,

I assume that design approach is adopted for sonic benefits and results in high sensitivity as a byproduct and isn't done specifically to make them highly sensitive ?

With the Vali comment, I assume you mean that Campfire BA IEM don't pick up hiss while other IEM probably would rather than the Vali having a low noise floor which logically it hasn't. What is the rationale behind that ?

 

[OhmsClaw]

Thank you,

I assume that design approach is adopted for sonic benefits and results in high sensitivity as a byproduct and isn't done specifically to make them highly sensitive ?

With the Vali comment, I assume you mean that Campfire BA IEM don't pick up hiss while other IEM probably would rather than the Vali having a low noise floor which logically it hasn't. What is the rationale behind that ?

It's to illustrate that like the Susvara meme, that they require a nuclear reactor to power... CFA iems don't need a DARPA x NASA x ESA x Wakanda designed amp circuit to avoid hiss. There's even tube amps you can enjoy them on (they are more versatile than you think).

Also IMO, iematch isn't worth the mitigation of some mild hiss on pause to add a bunch of impedance to the OI affecting the FR. If your source is so noisy it gets in the way of normal listening, perhaps consider another source.

 

[BS5711]

It's to illustrate that like the Susvara meme, that they require a nuclear reactor to power... CFA iems don't need a DARPA x NASA x ESA x Wakanda designed amp circuit to avoid hiss. There's even tube amps you can enjoy them on (they are more versatile than you think).

Also IMO, iematch isn't worth the mitigation of some mild hiss on pause to add a bunch of impedance to the OI affecting the FR. If your source is so noisy it gets in the way of normal listening, perhaps consider another source.

I have a number of sources that don't have any hiss with the Solaris, all good there.

I was asking out of technical interest because there seems to be more disadvantages to the extra sensitivity than benefits. Most gear has so much excess of power there seems little practical sense in the high sensitivity. Thus the question, is it a byproduct of design choices and not a design choice in and of itself.

I am listening to them now on a NITSCH Piety and there is only the very faintest hiss that is inaudible unless the pot is up around 3pm which surprised me. They sound good, maybe a Vali 3 might be worthwhile.

I have given up the IEMatch but frankly I don't think the comparatively modest OI increase is especially problematic. I just found that what I initially perceived to be a sonic benefit wasn't upon a lot more experimentation and comparisons. My inaccurate assessment was to do with volume matching error between IEMatch and no IEMatch. I didn't perceive any significant problems with it except like to keep things as simple as possible so prefer to avoid things that are not necessary.

Perhaps Campfire could weigh in about the high sensitivity being a specific design choice or it being a byproduct of other design choices.

 

[theveterans]

With the Vali comment, I assume you mean that Campfire BA IEM don't pick up hiss while other IEM probably would rather than the Vali having a low noise floor which logically it hasn't. What is the rationale behind that ?

With an excellent tube, I've never heard the Vali++ (I haven't heard the Vali 3 yet) but even the notorious Andromeda CK Blue DID NOT hiss at all. I've also tried the Campfire Vega OG on the Vali++ and that too didn't hiss (then again, Vega didn't hiss on the Mojo 1). I don't think even Jason himself designed the Vali++ to be IEM friendly, just an amusing discovery that Vali is extremely well behaved with low impedance IEMs while other Schiit amps such as the Asgard 3 go limp mode + hissing (protection mode) when driving the Andromeda

I forgot to multi-quote But yes! If you remember how surprised I was at how good the Vali2++ was, I would totally take a Vali 3 (0.5 L/1.8 H) as well for IEM's. I can only get away with the Valhalla 2 using the RN6 (26ohms). Everything else is I have too low impedance even for low gain (5.7 Ohms).

I'll definitely visit Schiitr before it truly dies away just to test the Vali 3 on the hissing aspect! I do hope it behaves extremely well with these super sensitive low impedance IEMs as well

 

[OhmsClaw]

With an excellent tube, I've never heard the Vali++ (I haven't heard the Vali 3 yet) but even the notorious Andromeda CK Blue DID NOT hiss at all. I've also tried the Campfire Vega OG on the Vali++ and that too didn't hiss (then again, Vega didn't hiss on the Mojo 1). I don't think even Jason himself designed the Vali++ to be IEM friendly, just an amusing discovery that Vali is extremely well behaved with low impedance IEMs while other Schiit amps such as the Asgard 3 go limp mode + hissing (protection mode) when driving the Andromeda





I'll definitely visit Schiitr before it truly dies away just to test the Vali 3 on the hissing aspect! I do hope it behaves extremely well with these super sensitive low impedance IEMs as well

It DOES have a lower SNR, but still 117dB? I'm sure they actually have some CFA iem's to pop in there

 

[OhmsClaw]

I have a number of sources that don't have any hiss with the Solaris, all good there.

I was asking out of technical interest because there seems to be more disadvantages to the extra sensitivity than benefits. Most gear has so much excess of power there seems little practical sense in the high sensitivity. Thus the question, is it a byproduct of design choices and not a design choice in and of itself.

I am listening to them now on a NITSCH Piety and there is only the very faintest hiss that is inaudible unless the pot is up around 3pm which surprised me. They sound good, maybe a Vali 3 might be worthwhile.

I have given up the IEMatch but frankly I don't think the comparatively modest OI increase is especially problematic. I just found that what I initially perceived to be a sonic benefit wasn't upon a lot more experimentation and comparisons. My inaccurate assessment was to do with volume matching error between IEMatch and no IEMatch. I didn't perceive any significant problems with it except like to keep things as simple as possible so prefer to avoid things that are not necessary.

Perhaps Campfire could weigh in about the high sensitivity being a specific design choice or it being a byproduct of other design choices.

Sure, on the SA-1 when I pop the High Z for an additional 10Ohms at the output, I have to turn it up a little, but that's a built in feature that does essentially what IEmatch does (a meaningless 10Ohms increase mirrors iFi's functional termination mismatch). Even volume matched I don't care for it, but at least I'm not spending 59-70$ to solve a problem that's inconsequential.

On the piety which gain mode do you prefer? I was having some fun last night between Lo and Hi gain.

I know you want CFA to weigh in, but AN answer, perhaps not THE answer, is the way they wire the drivers leads to high sensitivity and low impedance (i believe it's in series rather than parallel). I don't believe i've ever read they do this as a goal, it's just the consequences of their design philosophy.

 

[BS5711]

On the piety which gain mode do you prefer? I was having some fun last night between Lo and Hi gain.

I know you want CFA to weigh in, but AN answer, perhaps not THE answer, is the way they wire the drivers leads to high sensitivity and low impedance (i believe it's in series rather than parallel). I don't believe i've ever read they do this as a goal, it's just the consequences of their design philosophy.

I only tried low, first time I tried it with IEM so no opinion beyond it sounded good and hiss was not a problem, a scratchy pot wasn’t great but I can live with that. The Piety has sat in a cupboard for months since I didn’t think it brought much to the table versus my other options but it might be worth trying some more.

THE answer was what I was after, just out of curiosity nothing more. What you indicated was my assumption, they are set up a certain way for a specific reason and the high sensitivity is a byproduct.

 

[CFA Chris]

Hey have a question. There has been discussion about what manufacturers do in regards to selling their IEM's with the stock cable, and how that works into the development process. Are your IEM's sold with the expectation that people will upgrade them or do you send a specific cable with x properties out as the stock cable? Or is it just way more casual than that. For example, with any of the new Chromatic series.

Is it safe to assume you make multiple iterations of a IEM to get to or find the sound you want to bring to market? So during this entire process of getting the iEM to where you are happy enough with it to bring it to market, do you maintain a sort of chain integrity throughout this process? From the source to the cable basically. But especially the cable. Do you keep the cable the same during the process or is it just grab any random cable that reaches x spec. how do you decide which cable to ship as the stock cable with your IEMs? Does it relate to the development stage in any way? How similar is the stock cable vs the development process cables, etc...

Would love to get a little insight on this fascinating process. Thanks!

Sure thing! While I can't speak to how other companies handle their cable pairing, but I'll try to provide some info here on our approach.

Our goal is to pair high-quality cables with our earphones that highlight and synergize well with their sound signature. However, having a unique cable custom-made for every earphone is not feasible for a team of our size and from an economic perspective. So this creates a necessity to have a well-balanced cable that can work for a range of models. Currently, this is our TimeStream cable. Sometimes, we find that we want to do a special or alternate cable with a given model, much like users themselves might do, we want to use the cable to accent the tuning in a certain way, or if we find that a cable is detracting from a model we will certainly not use it for release.

During R&D, an IEM will undergo a number of iterations as its tuning is honed and build process is refined. Once the tuning itself is finalized, we will then begin the process of pairing a cable with it, though we usually have a general idea of what kind of conductors will pair well with it. At what stage in development the cable becomes clear varies a lot depending on the R&D process.

We feel that our IEMs should perform great out of the box as equipped. Anyone could purchase our earphones, take them out of the box, and enjoy them for years without every changing the cable.

We also understand that there are some amazing cable producers out there making excellent aftermarket cables. Some of the fun in owning these high-end earphones is trying them out with different cables if that's what you're into. But if you're not or that isn't your thing, no worries, you're still going to have the full experience from your Campfire Audio earphones.

 

[Jaxz416]

Sure thing! While I can't speak to how other companies handle their cable pairing, but I'll try to provide some info here on our approach.

Our goal is to pair high-quality cables with our earphones that highlight and synergize well with their sound signature. However, having a unique cable custom-made for every earphone is not feasible for a team of our size and from an economic perspective. So this creates a necessity to have a well-balanced cable that can work for a range of models. Currently, this is our TimeStream cable. Sometimes, we find that we want to do a special or alternate cable with a given model, much like users themselves might do, we want to use the cable to accent the tuning in a certain way, or if we find that a cable is detracting from a model we will certainly not use it for release.

During R&D, an IEM will undergo a number of iterations as its tuning is honed and build process is refined. Once the tuning itself is finalized, we will then begin the process of pairing a cable with it, though we usually have a general idea of what kind of conductors will pair well with it. At what stage in development the cable becomes clear varies a lot depending on the R&D process.

We feel that our IEMs should perform great out of the box as equipped. Anyone could purchase our earphones, take them out of the box, and enjoy them for years without every changing the cable.

We also understand that there are some amazing cable producers out there making excellent aftermarket cables. Some of the fun in owning these high-end earphones is trying them out with different cables if that's what you're into. But if you're not or that isn't your thing, no worries, you're still going to have the full experience from your Campfire Audio earphones.

Really appreciate the transparency you have shown on here - from one rose city native to another

p.s. I like the new website!

 

[CFA Chris]

I have posted about my recent journey with my new Campfire Solaris Mercury (2020) and how I have sorted out some issues and ultimately come around to liking them a lot.

However, that experimentation with sources got me to thinking about why Campfire IEM are typically so sensitive ?

Less sensitive IEM are much easier to manage in that regard at least in my experience and it seems to me to be to their detriment since they are so susceptible to picking up hiss from even reasonably decent pretty typical modern gear on which I have never picked up any hiss with more typically sensitive IEM. A FiiO M11 Plus for example, they pick up faint hiss out of the 4.4mm so I use the 3.5mm which is silent. It is very faint from the 4.4mm but it is there. That isn't a high end DAP of course but it is pretty respectable gear nonetheless. Chord Mojo, very obvious, iFi Go Bar, extremely obvious.

Is that a design decision based on something that isn't apparent to me ?

Is that a holdover from earlier design decisions based around earlier sources and has continued on ?

Is it a byproduct of some other design decision in respect of the driver set up, crossovers etc ?

Sensitivity is a fairly complicated subject, and I certainly can't claim to be an expert on it, but from conversations with our team, I can maybe share some insight here.

Basically, I would say that the sensitivity of our earphones is mostly a byproduct of other design choices rather than stemming from a desire for high sensitivity. Our design process prioritizes certain things that lend themselves to higher sensitivity.

It starts with pairing drivers that play well together in terms of impedance and phase; we want drivers that sort of play on the same footing from the get-go rather than using passive components to rein in one driver or the other and constrain it to the terms of the accompanying drivers.

We tend to try our best to minimize passive components as we want to set drivers loose to do what they do best. We find that this allows for better technicalities, like dynamic range, clarity, soundstage, etc. Many things that people associate with the performance of Campfire IEMs stem from this approach. Loading our designs up with resistors would help bring down the sensitivity but also create a new set of compromises and changes to performance.

Ken used an analogy that I quite like, that drivers are like racehorses; of course, you have to shape and guide their behavior, but you also don't want to shackle them to the point that they can't let their nature shine.

 

[BS5711]

Sensitivity is a fairly complicated subject, and I certainly can't claim to be an expert on it, but from conversations with our team, I can maybe share some insight here.

Basically, I would say that the sensitivity of our earphones is mostly a byproduct of other design choices rather than stemming from a desire for high sensitivity. Our design process prioritizes certain things that lend themselves to higher sensitivity.

It starts with pairing drivers that play well together in terms of impedance and phase; we want drivers that sort of play on the same footing from the get-go rather than using passive components to rein in one driver or the other and constrain it to the terms of the accompanying drivers.

We tend to try our best to minimize passive components as we want to set drivers loose to do what they do best. We find that this allows for better technicalities, like dynamic range, clarity, soundstage, etc. Many things that people associate with the performance of Campfire IEMs stem from this approach. Loading our designs up with resistors would help bring down the sensitivity but also create a new set of compromises and changes to performance.

Ken used an analogy that I quite like, that drivers are like racehorses; of course, you have to shape and guide their behavior, but you also don't want to shackle them to the point that they can't let their nature shine.

Great thank you very much for the reply, much appreciated and makes perfect sense.

 

[SpaceInvader77]

Is anyone going to Axpona this weekend?

I’m thinking of going Sunday, it would be nice to get ear time with Fathom!

@CFA Chris - Do you know if the full current lineup will be available to audition here?