Introduction

Audiophiles would probably be familiar with the name “Dali” as they have been making speakers for the past 36 years. During that time they offer a range of entry to premium level speakers. However, recently they have taken a stab in making headphones which has resulted in the Dali iO-4 and iO-6, and Dali were courteous enough to offer me a pair of iO-6 for review a few weeks’ back.



Specifications and Design

Whilst both headphones are wireless, the iO-6 offers noise cancellation with a 30-hour battery life, whilst the iO-4 forgoes the noise cancellation but with a 60 hour battery life. Both headphones offer support to Bluetooth 5.0, AptX, AptX HD and AAC protocols, however Sony’s proprietary LDAC is not in the list. Both headphones can also be used wired should the battery resources run depleted. The iO-4 and iO-6 use 50mm paper cone drivers in almost identical enclosure cups aside from the odd noise cancellation button in the iO-6. The rest of the design is identical.

Dali offers each model in 2 colours, Caramel White (which is the one I have for review), or in more stealthy iron black. The materials utilised are primarily polycarbonate and synthetic leather however are incorporated together in such an aesthetically pleasing way that exudes sophistication and finesse. Even the assembly and construction demonstrate precision and class; the buttons are firm and definitive, the ear cups swivels smoothly, the headband adjustment is firm, and even the switching of the ear pads are symmetrical.

Dali has also opted to use the more current USB-C standard for charging which (at least in the iO-6, and presumably with the iO-4), comes with cables inside in a rather trendy looking carry pouch.



Comfort and Ergonomics

Whilst initially the iO-6 clamping felt firm and uncomfortable for extended use, after about 10 hours of break-in, I found I could, and did, wear them for a few hours at a time. They are proper circumaural headphones and my ears sit comfortably in the earpads. Whilst I’ve read other reviewers may have felt the ear pads were shallow for them, this is not the case with me. I don’t feel my ears touching the inner dust mesh.

The memory foam in the synthetic leather earpads do a good job in moulding providing a good seal even without my glasses. The cups swivel sufficiently across both axes to provide the right angles to provide the good seal.

The top of the headband is also padded and rests comfortably on my head. The overall headphone feels light and effortless without feeling flimsy.



Operation and Use

Electronically, I feel Dali has gone with simplicity with their wireless headphones. Whilst both models support the latest AptX, AptX HD, and AAC protocols (aside from LDAC), connectivity-wise Dali has adopted the traditional single point connectivity, and it does this well with Bluetooth 5.0. I live in a double story home and in one occasion I was upstairs in my bedroom when I switched on my iO-6 and it connected to something. Being a typical technologist, I have many Bluetooth devices - may it be my iPhone X, iPad Pro, iBasso DX200, Sony NW-WM1Z, etc. It took a while to realise it managed to pair to my iMac Pro downstairs in the TV room - separated by bricked walls. The connectivity was strong enough that I was streaming music through walls without any dropouts.

However, for those who do wish to pair their Dali headphones with multiple devices, one would need to disconnect from the current paired device before the new device can take over.

Dali has continued with the trend of traditional physical buttons instead of touch controls. Personally, for me, I’m very comfortable with physical buttons as I have had rather unnatural experiences with my former Sony MDR-1000X touch controls. It’s still not second nature to me and I prefer an actual physical click to provide me with assurance that I have performed an action. Dali’s implementation of the physical buttons is what one would and should expect out of a premium-designed product - buttons that don’t wobble, and have firm definitive clicks.



I found that I have experienced some 0.5 sec delays in response to the controls however.

Edit [8th July 2020]: Long term use :-
The power switch seems to have developed an issue where it doesn’t power on. It requires the button to be toggled a few times before it powers on, combined with it being a soft power, one can’t toggle too quickly. This issue isn’t specific to my unit but to other iO-6 owners too.

The battery of the iO-6 lasts for 30 hours, whilst I’ve not timed it but for the times I have drained and charged it, the duration sounds about right. Whenever one switches on the headphone, a report on how much battery life (in percentage) is provided.



The Dali iO-6 headphones come with 2 cables and an adapter. One cable is for analogue use, whilst the other is for USB-C charging. An airplane adapter is also provided. Here, is one area where I feel there’s room for improvement for Dali. The analogue audio cable does not feel as robust as what I am used to seeing in other headphones. I do feel that was provided more as a contingency when the headphones run out of battery and the owner still wants to continue listening to them, rather than for the owner who wants to have a wired experience as the primary form of listening.

The USB-C cable feels a little more robust, however both cables are wrapped in a rubber material that I suspect may melt and stick together in extreme heat, and now that I am in the middle of an Australian summer where we have had a string of 36-40C days, I’d be cautious not to leave the cables by the window sill or my car parked in the open. Mind you this is speculation as it has not happened yet however I have seen other cables with the same material react that way.

Thankfully though there is nothing unique about the analogue and USB-C cable. 3rd party cables work fine with the Dali iO-6. This opportunity opens options to those who like to “fine tune” their Dali headphones with premium cables.

Isolation

As the iO-6 is more circumaural it isolates decently even without ANC. Comparing to the V-Moda Crossfade series, the iO-6 isolates more passively than the V-Moda’s.



Naturally some ambient sound still leaks in, especially of the lower frequencies, however this is where the ANC comes in. When ANC is enabled, it’s that lower range that the ANC isolates. Some of the higher frequencies still do leak in but to a lower volume and is not cancelled by the ANC. Thereafter any music played through the headphones drowns out any remaining ambient noise. As such I feel the ANC works well enough. Without ANC, the ambient sound in a busy area can still be distracting even with music playing.

There’s also a transparency mode which reamplifies what the external mic pics up to the headphones. This is presumably to be able to listen to external conversations without removing headphones. With iOS devices at least, transparency mode pauses music. Presumably it does the same with Android devices.

Volume

In Bluetooth mode, I’ve found the iO-6 is able to drive with sufficient volume for most songs. There are some odd songs where I could do with more volume but for the most part I’m satisfied. In wired mode, naturally it’s up to the external amp and the headphones can go louder if needed.

Bluetooth Use for Conversations

These headphones are designed primarily for audio and whilst it can be used for SIP calls, the microphone does pick up ambient noise in conversations. This is typical of other Bluetooth headphones too.

Sonics

Bluetooth AAC

Overall, the iO-6 has taken a more evenly balanced frequency response. As a comparison, the V-Moda house sound tends toward a bossier signature. Whilst initially out of the box, I felt the iO-6 had a light bass response, over time I found that it was tight and had a satisfying impact. Dali, having made quality speakers for such over 3 decades, have recreated a sound quality of sophistication and finesse into their headphones. Once the iO-6 drivers are well exercised after couple of hours of use, it settles to a sound reproduction that is exudes refined quality.

Whilst on the topic of frequency response, as mentioned the bass is tight and decently impactful, but it tapers off in the sub-bass region. Texturing is ever so light and this kind of bass characteristic lends well to songs where there is a fast transition from beat to the next.

As for the midrange, the iO-6 is second to none in the current wireless headphone range. Vocals are simply crystal clear and very refined in reproduction. Especially in vocal jazz, the texture reverberation of vocals can be discerned clearly.

Similarly, with the treble region, the iO-6 is precise, airy, and crystal. However, for listeners who are treble sensitive, may find them a little uncomfortable. For my ears though I do like them.

Across the frequency response however, there is no bleed nor smearing as one (bass, midrange, treble) range crosses from one to the other. I feel Dali has taken care to ensure they do their best for each range however, ensuring the different frequency ranges remain coherent.

In terms of soundstage, the iO-6 sets a wide and tall virtual stage space. In fact, when I first unboxed and listened to the iO-6, it reminded me of the HD800 (but naturally not as wide as the HD800). For a pair of closed back headphones, it is impressive. Over time when the mid-bass and midrange presence have blossomed, it fills in the empty virtual space it has created.

Overall, to my opinion and preferences I feel the iO-6 excels well in the genre of Classical, 50/60’s jazz, 70-80’s pop, vocal jazz. However, if it’s more current EDM and R&B, I feel a pair of headphones with more expressive sub-bass to be more suitable.

ANC

As touched upon earlier, the ANC works sufficiently well although it may not necessarily cancel out some of the higher frequencies that my leak in. it seems to cancel out as well as majority of the noise cancellations headphones - with the exception being the Sony series which seem to create total isolation (which to me, at the cost of sounding somewhat “digital”).

It has also been commented on the forums, there have been quite a few comments that bass is more impact with ANC on. For as far as I’ve been able to discern, I don’t think this means there’s more bass quantity, however with the ANC on, clarity of the bass is more clearly heard and therefore sounds more impactful.

Wired

Rather interestingly there seems to be a slight tonal shift whilst listening wired with the iO-6 on, and off. With it off, the iO-6 the upper mids seem to have a little bit more bloom. This isn’t something I expect as I would have thought all internal DSP would be bypassed.

Having said that, with it wired and volume adjusted accordingly, there is an added smoothness and a tad more “rawness” (less perceived processed?) to the signature, especially when paired with a decent external DAC/amp or DAP. Although I’ve not tried different cables extensively, I did try with an Ortofon 6N POCC cable and one can definitely fine tune the iO-6 signature with a cable of their preference. The iO-6 clearly demonstrates its potential in scalability.

Conclusion



As a first take on headphones by Dali, the iO-6 clearly has made an impact to the wireless headphone market. In wired mode, it’s making its first steps to the audiophile category. It is definitely one of the most finest sounding wireless headphones I have heard. There is room for Dali to improve on a few aspects of the headphones such as supporting multipoint, improve on the delayed response times of the music controls, better quality cables to match the sophisticated design and feel of the headphones itself, and if possible, add LDAC support to the list of protocols. Whilst other users may demand a more aggressive noise cancellation, personally for me this isn’t necessary - especially if there is potential for unexpected side effects such as making the signature sounding overly digital.

The Dali iO-6 demonstrates that one can get refined quality with wireless headphones.

Introduction

Before I start, I’d like to thank Fostex for providing these review pair of TM2 along with the FitEar adapters.



Bluetooth earphones are nothing new however they’ve historically been tethered between the left and right channels, and in general have targeted to the standard mass consumer markets. Manufacturers have tuned them to be average warm bass to U-shaped Hifi-ish frequency response which was enough to capture the average listener who wouldn’t want to spend as much as audiophiles/audio enthusiast however is willing to spend a little more for the convenience of wireless.

It seemed to have taken 2 main noticeable events - bluetooth codec standards such as Kleer, AptX, LDAC, AAC (all proprietary!) start to mature despite being in existence for many years, and for Bluetooth earphones to be untethered...i.e. “true wireless” - did we start to see a subset of audio enthusiasts break away from the norm to give wireless a shot.

We’ve seen the number of true wireless offerings blossomed dramatically in the past 24 months, where only a mere 36 months prior, there were only a handful of brands. The offerings have also gotten bolder providing more and more options to the audio enthusiasts whilst continue to provide for the mass consumer market.



Here is where the Fostex TM2 comes in. To make it stand out from the rest of the True Wireless offerings, TM2 not only supports the latest Bluetooth v5.0 standards, IPX5 class water resistance, and AAC, AptX codecs, but with its Qualcomm QCC3026 SoC, it supports independent left and right channel connection with True Wireless Stereo Plus with a compatible transmitter. Most other true wireless take on a master slave approach where the transmitter pairs and connects to one master channel (left or right), and in turn the slave (right or left) connects to the master channel. Another prominent unique feature of the TM2 is the support user-preferred earphones via optional two pin, MMCX, or FitEar-styled connectors. As such, one can use their favourite CIEM with the TM2.

If those features aren’t enough to entice an audio enthusiast, then maybe the long 10 hour battery life may. I was able to enjoy TM2 for a long overhaul flight from Tokyo to Sydney with my favourite FitEar Titans.



Ergonomics, Comfort, and Usability/Portability

It’s true that when one first sees the TM2, they would wonder “Why is it so big with earhooks when other competitors are offering smaller in-ear True Wireless?”. I also have a Jabra Elite Active 65t and it’s tiny - even with its charging case. I won’t go into which is better than the other as each have their own use. Whilst the 65t just “sits in the ear”, it has popped out quite a few times especially during workouts where I’m lying other bench. Whilst the 65t has a 5 hr rated battery life per charge, I tend to get more like 3-3.5 hrs - which isn’t long if I were to use it for commute and gym for the day. The size of the TM2 allows the 10 hour battery life and the ear hooks keep TM2 in place around my ears.



Although I wear glasses, the memory wire don’t seem to interfere much with the arms of my glasses. Using the default TM2 driver however, I do find that due to the MMCX swivel, the earphone can pop out of my ear canal however the TM2 stays in place. Naturally when using my FitEar Titans CIEM, the earpiece is rock solid and stays in place. Back to to the TM2 driver however, with the right tips, they seal (and therefore isolate) very well.



The TM2 controls come in two forms, a button at the base of the unit which is used for pairing, music control, etc and the touch-sensitive ear hooks which one slides their finger up and/or down for volume control and for fast forward frame advance.

The button and touch controls of left and right channel units operate independently.

My glasses have more traditional arms that hook around the ear and that arm hook does block with the TM2 touch sensor however. This naturally wouldn’t be an issue for straight armed glasses.



As for the TM2 case, it’s primarily a cradle holder for the channel units and is unusually large. It does not hold any batteries and therefore does not charge the channel units. However the cradle unit does have a microUSB input and is required to charge the channel units. You cannot plug microUSB cables into the channel units directly. The cradle hosts a large cavity to cater for 3rd party earphones such as CIEMs.



Sonics

The standard drivers is a simple yet full sounding single 6mm dynamic driver. My main comparison would be with my other True Wireless Jabra Elite Active 65t which uses a 6x5.1mm driver. To my ears, the Fostex TM2 have a a more full neutral sound with a tight bass, meaty midrange and extended trebles that are smooth. Compared to the Jabra, the 65t sound somewhat warmer and darker with a milder midrange and lower trebles. The upper trebles are also somewhat mustier, “tinny” and not as airy as the TM2 standard drivers. Due to the tonal signature difference, I find the TM2 to be more detailed and more expressive in texture across the the frequency spectrum.

The warmer signature of the 65t provides it a greater sense of depth in soundstage however the TM2 expresses a more organic and holographic soundstage especially when synthesizer instruments transition between the left and right channels during the mixing and mastering of the musical piece in the studios. Overall the TM2 has a wider soundstage compared to the 65t.

As another comparison, I put the TM2 drivers (MMCX compatible) onto my Sony MUC-M2BT1. The Sony MUC-M2BT1 is a Bluetooth 4.1 compatible receiver and supports AAC, AptX, and LDAC codecs. Where the TM2 delivers a fresh crisp tonal signature, the MUC-M2BT1 pulls back the trebles a tad which may suit those who are treble sensitive ; however there is still plentiful of trebles in the MUC-M2BT1. The MUC-M2BT1 does express a little more mid bass presence and adds a little more holographic characteristics over the TM2.

There has been some folks who hear hiss with the TM2 with their custom IEMs however not with the default TM2 drivers. I’ve not heard hiss with the TM2 default drivers nor with my hybrid balanced armature/dynamic driver FitEar Titans but I’m not so sensitive to hiss. My wife who has much more sensitive hearing does not hear any hiss with the default TM2 drivers too, but she can’t use my CIEM Titans.



For my personal use of the different true wireless I have at my disposal (which is only two - the 65t and the TM2), I think each have their own place. e.g. when I’m in the gym, I would use the 65t’s as I don’t really care about sound quality too much. However if I’m out of the home and at a cafe for an extended period of time, the TM2 would undoubtedly take the spot - especially using it with favourite CIEM, the FitEar Titans.

This is one of the major advantages of the TM2 over most other True Wireless - with the optional adapters available one can pair their favourite IEMs with it. One isn’t locked into the default drivers that come with product. Foster have adapters for MMCX, Westone 2-pin, and the FitEar styled 2-pins. This places the TM2 in another tier up above the other True Wireless.

Microphone for Phone Use

The TM2 performs as well as most other True Wireless. In a quiet environment the microphone naturally picks up voices well however also picks up ambient sounds. Unlike dedicated headsets for phone use, there is no dedicated microphone for picking up and isolating ambient noise. The TM2 microphone works fine for home and suburban environment however may not be as functional for downtown city use.

Accompanying Software

As at the time of writing this review, Fostex does not have any application for the TM2 yet however it has been mentioned that they are preparing one which will allow blending for environmental Landscape Mode sound, EQ functionality, and Voice Assistant function.

[Edit 17th October 2019]: Fostex has just released the IOS app for the TM2 which can be found here :-
https://apps.apple.com/us/app/fostex-tm-sound-support/id1480797748

No word if there'll be an Android app for it or not.

Conclusion



From a sonic and flexibility perspective, I would personally place the Fostex TM2 above most of the other True Wireless offerings mostly due to the ability to use any IEM of my preference. The optional adapters for supporting Westone 2-pin, Fostex 2-pin, and MMCX covers most of the IEMs out there. Even the default TM2 drivers are sonically satisfying sound reproduction. The long 10 hr battery life per charge is also another advantage over most (all?) other True Wireless alternatives.

These features alone demonstrate the TM2 are good value for money and with the flexibility of interchangeable of user-preferred earphones, the TM2 demonstrates long term use too allowing the user to swap earphones whenever his or her tastes change.

Introduction



Personal audio enthusiasts of the past 12 years would be all too familiar with the iBasso brand. They started making amps, then to DAPs in the better part of the past 7 years, most notably the DX100. Whilst iBasso made some more mid-tier DAPs such as the DX50, DX80, & DX90, it wasn’t only until 2017 that iBasso finally had a new flagship, the DX200.

Paul from iBasso sent me a review DX200 in Feb 2017 however until now I’ve not written up a review for it; instead I’ve contributed where I can in tiny little snippets and little posts here and there in the iDX200 and other threads.

Roll forward over 2 years later, I’m finally writing a review. Why now? What has given me confidence in this DAP is that it has stood through the test of time, especially in this current dynamic climate where audio enthusiasts are changing their players faster than their warranties expiring.

How has the DX200 been able to maintain the fuelling the steam train? At least to my opinion, it is due superb design - and I don’t mean aesthetics nor user functionality on the surface. By this I mean it was a properly thought out product from conceptual design to production and support. Not only are the modular amps usable across their suite of DAPs (DX150, and upcoming DX220) but the DX200 design caters its lifecycle to remain current and adaptable - such as supporting DSD512 which is becoming more prevalent now than when the DAP was first released 2 years back. Furthermore the design is open enough to cater for the DIYers to tweak not only just the firmware but the hardware components too.

Contributive members such as @Lurker0 and @Whitgir keep the product alive with the support of iBasso. Even the member base has kept the DX200 alive and current for over 2 years.

The DX200, however, didn’t come up as an immediate winner though when it was released back in 2017. It’s firmware instability in the early days definitely did not help its reputation much especially when its larger commercial competitors had DAPs with smooth interfaces, and did not suffer from ghost touches. However true iBasso fans stuck to their guns and provided their continual support over the years that the other competitor models came and left whilst the DX200 stood strong. iBasso Support greatly deserves the recognition to have open interaction with their fan base and often bending their backs to help their customers - all this for a $1000 product, that was competing in a market where competitors were easily charging $3000 - $4000.

I believe this is where iBasso has shone as a company as who cares about their customers.

Specs



The DX200 uses a dual ES9028PRO DAC and boasts a 8 core 64 bit processor with 2GB LPDDR3 RAM. Whilst when it was originally released it was based off Android 6.x, the current supported firmware is Android 8.1.

The base amp module is the general purpose AMP1, however over the past few years iBasso has also released the AMP2, AMP3, AMP4, AMP4S, AMP6, and more recently the AMP7 and AMP8. Each with their own speciality in various single ended 3.5mm outputs, up to the recently adopted 4.4mm balanced. Also more recently, a prototype AMP9 with Korg’s NuTube was exhibited in the e-earphone PortaFes Winter Dec ’18 Show.

The DX200 also supports 5G WiFi & Bluetooth 4.0. With Android 8.1, the DX200 supports SBC, AptX, and LDAC.

The DX200 battery lasts for a respectable 7-8 hrs depending on the amp module used and usage.

Ergonomics



The DX200 holds nicely in the hand and does not have an obnoxious heft as some of the other TotL DAPs are these days. Granted the DX200 gold is pretty heavy but that’s a limited edition, rather than mainstream model. The volume dial has a bumper which prevents accidental volume change and the buttons are mostly recessed protruding only ever so slightly. I’ve not had any accidental button presses on them either.

Inputs and Outputs



The DX200 has Coax out at the top, and supports USB-C for charging and transport. I don’t recall any other mainstream DAPs that used USB-C when the DX200 was released in 2017.

The headphone/line out depends on the amp module of user’s choice. Some have headphone out only, whilst others have both headphone and variable line out.

Firmware, User Interface & Operation



As mentioned above, originally when the DX200 was released, there was much room for the firmware to improve, and improve it did. iBasso quickly fixed the ghost touches a few years back, and the current Oreo firmware has been very stable. Whilst the UI is still a little laggy compared to the likes of AK or Sony, however is a lot smoother than it used to be from its original firmware when it was released. @Lurker0 further helped to improve the operability and extend functionality which is own patching.

The DX200 firmware allows a dual mode of listening either in Android mode with the Mango player, or in an Android cut-down “Mango native” mode.

I tend to use the physical buttons for track control more than the touch screen as I find that to be a little more responsive.

The battery life of the DX200 depends on which Amp module use but on average for a healthy battery, it should last ~7 hrs.

Sonics



Over the years, the DX200 has had different firmwares, each seem to have tweaked the sound a little bit in one way or another. Further the device has had a wide range of amps, each having their own tuning. However as an overall (and after 2 years of listening to it), I feel the DX200 has a very neutral presentation. The player has proven its ability for detail retrieval comparable to the likes of the Sony NW-WM1Z and AK players. Naturally each of those players would vary in how it decides to present the details it has retrieved. The little nuances and subtleties picked up in track recordings are presented ever so smoothly even compared to its expensive competitors. Sonically, there is nothing that even hints mediocrity in its music presentation.

Customers who decide to pick other alternative DAPs would do so more for other reasons such as personal sonic preference, or for a smoother user experience, but it would not be for DX200’s sonic inferiority.

AMP1
This amp seems to be the base standard of the DX200. In terms of functionality it supports a 3.5mm single ended headphones, and 3.5mm single ended line out, and a 2.5mm TRRS balanced headphone. The amp to my ears have a somewhat flat signature but also a little rounded on both low and high ends. Sonically it wouldn’t be my personal preference as other iBasso amps seem to have a fuller signature, however I do keep the AMP1 handy for its line out functionally for testing external 3rd party amps.

AMP2
This amp is now discontinued and a more dedicated SE-only with 1x 3.5mm TRS for headphone and 1x 3.5mm TRS for line out. The AMP2 uses a 4 channel architecture with current feedback buffer based. Sonically the AMP2 seems to extend the either ends of the FR that the AMP1 rolls off. The AMP2 seems more give a somewhat fuller signature to single ended headphones.

AMP3
I spent a lot of time with this amp as it was a dedicated balanced amp for both headphone and line out in the 2.5mm TRRS size. For me this married the AMP2’s fuller signature with the AMP1’s balanced headphone out. Due to it being balanced, not only does one get the fuller signature of AMP2, but also a wider soundstage experience. The AMP3’s design is high voltage swing based.

AMP4
I only recently managed to get hold of this as it was available in limited quantities. The AMP4 took on the Pentaconn 4.4mm socket which has been gaining popularity in recent years being a more robust design than the 2.5mm size. Whilst this is also a high voltage swing design like the AMP3, to me sonically the AMP4 is my personal favourite as it seems to have an even fuller signature than the AMP3. The bass seems fuller and more impactful and the highs are refined and extended. To my ears, I feel the mids have an ever so slightly U-shape to give it a nice wide soundstage however not recessed by any means. IMHO it is a pity that iBasso didn’t further invest in the AMP4 (but as you’ll read next, they have the AMP8).

AMP4S - AMP5 - AMP6 - AMP7
Unfortunately I do not have these amps and therefore cannot comment on them. Whilst info about the AMP4S, AMP5, and new AMP7 are available on the internet. What’s intriguing to me is the elusive AMP6 which does not even appear in iBasso’s discontinued section, yet small quantities of AMP6 exists.

AMP8
Along with the release of the single-ended AMP7, the AMP8 is the latest production-ready balanced-only headphone out amp in the Pentaconn 4.4mm format. I feel this is the replacement of the AMP4. Prior to me receiving the AMP4, I shifted from the AMP3 to the AMP8 as most of my headphones were 4.4mm terminated. There were differences between the AMP8 and the AMP3 however where the AMP8 has a completely new discrete design that features both voltage and current feedback. I preferred it sonically over the AMP3 where I felt it made the soundstage even fuller and wider than the AMP3. However to my ears the AMP4 had the perks of the AMP8 but with a wider soundstage. As the AMP4 is no longer available (except in the used market), the AMP8 would be the go-to amp for 4.4mm based plugs.

AMP9 (prototype)



In the e-earphone December PortaFes Winter 2018 show, iBasso demoed the AMP9 which is Korg Nutube based. The Korg Nutube is vacuum tube in a dual in-line package (DIP). As it is a proper vacuum tube, the Nutube is also sensitive to vibrations. As the AMP9 is just a prototype, when one taps on the DX200/AMP9 you’ll hear the microphonic tube “ping”. As I heard the AMP9 at the show, it was hard to comment on how it sounded like. I do hope that if the AMP9 makes it to production, iBasso would (have room to) implement some kind of vibration dampening around the Nutube.

How does the DX200 compare to other DAPs?
The only other DAPs I have in my disposal are the Sony NW-WM1Z and loaner Cayin N8. Both of these DAPs are 3x the cost of the DX200 and therefore not entirely apples to apples comparisons.

To my ears, irrespective of amp modules chosen, the DX200 has more of a reference-like sound which I attribute to the DAC of choice & implementation within the DX200.

As previously mentioned, to my ears I feel the DX200 is able to retrieve as much detail as its higher ended competitors however the presentation may vary. I find that whilst the DX200 tended more towards a reference sound, the NW-WM1Z and N8 were more organic in presentation. There was greater depth imaging with the NW-WM1Z and N8 whilst the DX200 focused on soundstage breadth. In fact in NW-WM1Z’s firmwares, the DX200 had a wider soundstage than the Sony. Over the years as firmwares of both DAPs improved, the NW-WM1Z’s soundstage caught up, whilst the DX200 improved in UI response.

Conclusion



The iBasso DX200 has definitely stood the test of time. Despite a DX220 coming up, I feel the DX200 base will remain strong especially in the DIYer community. Although I’ve not seen nor touched the DX220, I feel it’s taken some strong directions from where the DX200 itself had evolved in the past 2 years with thanks to the DIY community.

Introduction

V-Moda is one of the prominent brands on Head-Fi that got into Bluetooth early when audiophiles were still very insistent on on wired. Despite AptX and Kleer proprietary wireless protocols were available, not many brands adopted and stuck to SBC for their consumer-grade models.

V-Moda released the Crossfade Wireless (CFW1) back in 2015 focused primarily on getting the wired and wireless to sound as close as possible to each other. They did a highly commendable job however the CFW1 were not without some criticism such has no CliqFold (especially when the M100 had had it for a few years effort then), and intermittent disconnect issues from the source phone/device.

The Crossfade 2 Wireless (CF2W) came in 2017 with AptX support (only with the Rose Gold!) and with the CliqFold. This made quite a few fans happier however iPhone/iPad (iOS) users remained isolated with the lack of AAC support.

In 2018, V-Moda released the Crossfade 2 Wireless Codex Edition (Codex). This filled in the gap allowing iOS users to enjoy the superiority of AAC protocol over SBC.



Construction and Comfort


The Codex edition is no different from the CF2W Std from its looks and construction. In fact I needed a way to mark and distinguish between the two (yes I got the same colours, and no, I don't have any customised shields).

It is beautifully constructed and durable especially the yoke and CliqFold. However there are some weak points in the cups such as the volume and control buttons do feel a little flimsy.


Both the Codex and the CF2W differ from the original CFW1 that both newer models have the XL pads by default & CliqFold, whilst the original CFW1 had the standard pads and regular pre-M100 non-CliqFold headband.

Therefore in terms of how the Codex feels over the head, it's about the same as the CF2W Std. The clamping force is tight with little chance of the headphone falling off from my head. Further with the XL pads, they are a little more comfortable than the CFW1 standard pads.

This is a full sized superaural headphones however for my ears, they are more supraaural with the earpads sitting on my ears. As such isolation is average. I can definitely hear external ambient noise leaking in however I assume not as much leaks out. I can hear wind noise when I'm walking in the street. It doesn't bother me as much when I'm no the move as I do like to be aware of my surroundings.

Whist in summer the headphone can feel warm, they make great musical earmuffs during winter.

Bluetooth Connectivity


I've not been able to to find the Bluetooth version yet however I've not had any disconnect issues even with my iPhone X in my back pocket whereas previously with the CFW1 I could get disconnected occasionally depending on how far I place my iPhone from the headphone.

Codec Comparison with the other V-Moda Wireless


Note, the codec connection on iOS can be checked and confirmed via the XCode device logs.

1) iPhone X - CFW1 SBC vs Codex AAC on FLAC Onkyo Hi-Res Player

The CFW1 sounded to have a somewhat more mids recessed compared to the Codex. The CFW also has a somewhat more boomy bass. The Codex did sound more airy however. The difference in resolution from the codec differences is quite noticeable. However I feel the tonal difference is primarily due to the difference in earpads between the CFW1 and Codex. A reminder that the CFW1 has the standard pads from M-100 days whilst the Codex has the XL styled pads, and pads do make a difference to frequency response.

2) iPhone X - CF2W SBC vs Codex AAC on FLAC Onkyo Hi-Res Player

This is where I think we have a closer comparison since both should essentially be the same except for the difference in codec connection to the iOS device.

• The Codex had a bigger thump in the bass region.
• The Codex still seems to sound a little more mid-rich compared to the CF2W, which is a little surprising to me. I did not think a codec difference would have such an effect on tonal response.
  
• Percussions are a little more distinctive on the Std (SBC) version, but overall music sounds less smooth (most noticeable in vocals) and more brittle in the treble/percussions, presumably due to the codec differences.
• The Codex did have an added clarity over the CF2W which is where also where I believe is the difference in codecs.

3) iPhone X - CF2W SBC vs Codex AAC on 256k AAC lossy Music Player

Maybe it's me, but with lossy source, it's a little bit more difficult to distinguish between codecs. The difference in codec is still there however not as big compared to lossless.

4) iMac Pro - CF2W AptX vs Codex AptX on ALAC iTunes

Remember the Codex still keeps the AptX support therefore in theory there should be no difference between the CF2W AptX vs the Codex AptX however :-

• There's some kind of channel imbalance on the CF2W with AptX vs the Codex edition with same AptX. Hard to do a comparison with the Std having a slightly lower volume on the left channel vs the right.

5) Sony NW-WM1Z CF2W AptX vs Codex AptX

So I was able to use another AptX supported device to compare the CF2 W AptX vs the Codex AptX. I whipped out my Sony NW-WM1Z and paired with both headphones. To my ears, they sound identical.

6) Codex Wireless vs Wired

I hear tonal shift where the Codex FR leans more towards a neutral (but not completely neutral) stance compared to wireless AAC. There is a little more upper mids/lower treble presence, and a little added clarity in presentation. Overall though I -think- I hear a slightly more open sounDstage in wired mode.

Compared to other Bluetooth Headphones


Sony WH-1000XM3

The headphones here are cupped differently. For my ears, the WH-1000XM3 is circumaural whilst the Codex (and other V-Moda full-sized cans) are supraaural.

The WH-1000XM3 are lighter, have swivel cups, and lighter clamping force. Overall the 1000XM3 feels more comfortable on my head for long term use.

The WH-1000XM3 has a few other features over the Codex such as LDAC (in addition to AptX and AAC), and noise cancellation (3 mode settings: ambient sound control on, ambient sound control off, noise cancellation).

Totally they are different. Where the Codex maintain the V-Moda house signature sound, the WH-1000XM3 has a more typical HiFi-ish balanced sound. To me the WH-1000XM3 is a little U-shaped with mellow mids, whilst the Codex has as stronger & clearer mids and neutral treble.

The WH-1000XM3 midbass seems similar to the Codex, however the Codex has more sub-bass impact.

The WH-1000XM3 feels more spacious whilst Codex is more holographic headroom wise.

Master & Dynamic MW50

Like the Sony the MW50 is circumaural. The sliding cups were really stiff to adjust (maybe it was just with the demo unit I tried). Going back 'n forth between the MW50 and Codex, my first thought was "Where's the bass!?". The MW50 did have nice percussions however.

Beyerdynamic Aventho

In Japan the Aventho is like 50% more expensive than the Codex. It's supraaural like the Codex. Tonally, the Aventho sounded a little weird, like the lower mids a little suppressed. Vocals sounded a little nasally.

B&W PX

I don’t even want to talk about it...

Conclusion


The Crossfade 2 Wireless Codex Edition is the headphone V-Moda should have released last year as the (almost) all encompassing headphone. It still lacks LDAC however that protocol is not as widely used as AAC and AptX. Regardless, it is finally here and V-Moda has a pair of wireless headphones for both iOS and Android users to enjoy listening at enhanced protocols. It's definitely a welcoming model and for those who don't have a V-Moda wireless but want to enjoy the V-Moda house sound, the Codex is the way to go.

However if one already has the V-Moda Crossfade 2 Wireless of 2017 with their Android phone, IMHO there is little reason to upgrade unless one intends to support iOS devices too.

As with all other V-Moda Crossfade headphones, wired or not, the Codex is as sturdy and durable and beautifully finished. Whilst I've not taken advantage of the customised shields, it is comforting to know that aesthetically it can be personalised.

The Codex is an obvious choice for those who like the V-Moda signature sound.

Introduction

Campfire Audio introduced their new dynamic driver flagship , Atlas, in April '18 and was immensely popular at the Tokyo Fujiya Spring Headphone Festival. Ken was kind enough to leave a review pair for @currawong which has now made it to my hands for a quick review.

The Atlas pushes the former dynamic driver flagship Vega down a spot, and as with the Vega, the Atlas does not fail to impress. Where the Vega was a the first 8.5mm on-crystalline Diamond dynamic driver, the Atlas is a 10mm diamond dome (ADLC) dynamic driver. The full metal jacket design has also changed that each unit are synonymous from a channel perspective and is up to the cable wiring (and markings) that decide the left and right channel drivers. One does not need to 'match' the cable channel to each earpiece.



Construction

Without a doubt there is some heft to the Atlas. Each piece is solidly constructed and feels so. Holding in my hand feels like a holding a jewel. In terms of comfort, if I'm sitting whilst listening, the Atlas holds well in my ear. However due to the weight, any jaw or body movement, the earpiece could fall off easily.

There is an option to wear it upside down and have the cables hook around the ear, however at least for me, it still could fall out my ear canal (but at least the cable will keep it around my ear still).

The chrome surface is prone to fingerprints. As I've been careful with these demo units, I've not seen nor put any scratches onto the casings (and am not about to test/try!).



Sonics

This is where the I love and also hate the Atlas. I can't find anything wrong with its sonics. (The Love bit) I'm extremely impressed with the sound it produces that (the hate bit) it rivals my $3000+ IEMs!! It's mind boggling to me how "a simple single dynamic driver" can bring such joy to ones ears with no discernible weaknesses.

There is a nice deep impactful bass that holds tight especially in a balanced configuration. Shifting from the bass to the midrange, the midrange is more neutral but still with a clear solid presence. There’s no noticeable bleed of the mid bass to the trebles and is a smooth transition. Similarly moving from the midrange to the trebles, there’s plenty of sparkle and air. Percussions are distinct, impactful and articulate without sounding offensive or brittle.

This is by no means a neutral tuning. It definitely has a strong bass tendency however does not sound rolled off.

The amount of detail the single tiny dynamic driver can produce is mind-blowing. Little nuances are presented boldly without sounding exaggerated.

The most immediately noticeable feature of Atlas signature to my ears is how big of a sound it makes. The soundstage is spacious yet the music it produces fills the virtual room so fully. Some of my other high end IEMs don't even produce such a big staging with big sound.



Conclusion

Sonically I can't find any faults with the Campfire Atlas. It's signature is to my tastes. Maybe I could with with just a tad more midrange for some tracks but in others, I don't miss it it. These sound it produces is definitely satisfying to my ear palate.

Any practical criticisms I have of the Atlas is more the ergonomics and how easily it pops out of ones ear. However Campfire Audio could easily produce an ear-hook to address that issue.

Campfire Audio not only has a winner in its hands but also demonstrated of how much quality sound a single dynamic driver can produce without the need for fancy multi driver designs.

Introduction

Hifiman is no stranger to personal audio. It has been around for 12 years and doesn't require any introduction. In recent years Hifiman has been producing some high quality sounding headphones such as the HE1000 v1 & v2, HE-X v1 & 2, their top end Shangri-La electrostatics, and earphones such as the RE2000. They also make DAPs and amps.

Hifiman has also won quite a few awards as detailed in their Wikipedia page.

The Susvara Planar Magnetic Headphone



The Susvara was introduced earlier 14th May this year. It was originally named Edition 6 and shown as a prototype in Jan 2017. It is a planar magnetic leveraging on a proprietary "Stealth Magnet" technology with a very thin diaphragm a nanometer in thickness.



The headphone rather inefficient of 60 ohm at 83dB requiring a rather hefty amp to drive it properly. I've tried it with the Eddie Current Zana Deux and even though I had sufficient volume, sonically it was still flat sounding. Only after I hooked it up toy my McIntosh MC275 via the Hifiman HE-adapter did it breath life into the Susvara. The other desktop amp I tried that could drive the Susvara adequately was the Oji Special BDI-DC24B -G Limited.



Most desktop amps with sufficient to drive the Susvara tend to be rather expensive - leveraging on speaker amps via the HE-adapter seems to be a somewhat more cost-effective way to drive these headphones.

Aesthetics Design and Comfort

The Susvara is a comfortably light headphone at 450g. The weight on the head feels similar to the Stax SR-009 whist the Focal Utopia feels noticeably heavier. The earpads are somewhat shallower approx 20mm at the back and 15mm in the front. With my ear shape, my helix touches the driver protective cover.



The material of the earpads is both a fabric and leatherette. Although comfortable around the ears, for extended use, I do find them getting warm.

The housing is CNC metal with Ebony wood trimming. The grill metal protecting the exterior of the driver is malleable therefore one should be careful to store the Susvara in a hard case.

Overall the aesthetics of the Susvara is more pleasing looking than the HE1000 and HE-X series and even the Shangri-La however the headphone does not scream its USD$6000 asking price. The headband is somewhat thick and the stitching does not exuberate finesse. However once it's on my head, I don't really look at the headphones anyway. But I would expect one would desire more for such an asking price.

The Susvara comes in a large case inlined silk with a soft carrying case. It also comes with 2x 3m cables - one XLR balanced, whilst the other 6.3mm single ended terminated. The cables too are rather basic looking that doesn't scream finesse however they are functional without memory effect and do not tangle.

The one inclusion I do like with the packaging is the coffee book hard cover manual which at least to me is a nice touch.

Sonics

At least for me, this is why we're here. We may debate on price, return on value for the Susvara as a complete package, however how it sounds holds a top (though not sole) priority of the evaluation of a headphone.

For my setup, it's the Susvara driven by the Oppo BDP105 into my McIntosh MC275 to the Susvara via the HE-Adapter. I even bought an Orb Multichanger that'll let me switch the outputs from my MC275 to either my speakers or the HE-Adapter.

After a few weeks of dabbling with the Susvara being driven from the WA8, Zana Deux, and other transportable and desktop amps, I was somewhat underwhelmed. I did try to demo the Susvara at the Hifiman Japan office however I couldn't feed my iPhone into their DAC/Amp there was unfamiliar with their music tracks. I requested if I could borrow their Susvara and they sent me a loaner for me to review.

I've had the Susvara for approx 2 months burning in whenever I have the time, listening and comparing to my other headphones (namely the SR-009 and Utopia).

This is where the Susvara distinguishes itself from its other competitors - it produces a much more expansive yet wholesome sound compared to any other headphones I've had in my possession. Compared to the HD800S which is also expansive, feels somewhat "hollow" whilst the Susvara sounds wholesome. As some others have termed it, the HD800S sounded diffuse whilst the Susvara maintains the focus.

The Susvara sets the listener a few rows from the front stage but yet provide pin point accuracy on positioning and separation of the artists and instruments on the stage. Despite being precise and distinct, all the moving parts of the musical piece is meshed together maintaining coherency and musicality. The Susvara recreates "realism" as if one were actually there listening to a live presentation. The 3D imaging is one of the finest qualities of the Susvara that excels over many other headphones.

As a comparison, the Stax SR-009 whilst still sounding precise and articulate still sounds like a headphone with a much more up 'n close personal presentation. If the Susvara sounded like a live presentation, the SR-009 is like listening to a clean master recording. The Utopia is similar to the SR-009 in that respect but just somewhat more surgically clean and much more closed soundstage.

Both the Susvara and SR-009 have that ethereal qualities except the SR-009 sounds a little bit more crisp whist the Susvara has taken the musical path.

In terms of frequency response, the Susvara has a heavier weight to it (more akin to the SR-007Mk1 than to the SR-009), whereas the SR-009 sounds lighter on the feet. The sub and mid bass of the Susvara has a visceral layered quality to it - nicely rendered reverberation to the presentation.

The midrange is a little mellowed (but not recessed) which works with the 80 pop music I listen to and make the Susvara a more generic headphone across all genres. The SR-009 on the other hand seems to have a little more fullness to its midrange which helps the Stax excel in vocal jazz. Both are clear but the close distance from the stage helps the SR-009 sound a little more accurate whilst the Susvara with its few rows back from the stage leads to the vocals blend in more with the music.

In terms of treble extension, the Susvara has a decent extension as with the SR-009 however not as pronounced. There is a refined shimmer to percussions without sounding bright nor harsh. It's sufficiently airy but not to the point that the whole signature sounds light. It still retains an overall wholesome signature.

Conclusion

The Susvara has a uniquely special sound signature that is very inviting to ones ears. When I listen to the Susvara, I don't want to put the headphones down and I can listen to it for hours. The only time I do take a break from the Susvara is due to the warmth of the cups, running out of material to listen to on my BDP-105, or for unrelated external reasons.

If the Susvara sounds underwhelming in any demo, show, or audio festival, I'm inclined to think the headphone isn't driven properly by the amp. My recommendation to anyone demo-ing the Susvara to ensure that it's driven by a decent powerful and clean amp, and in a properly quiet environment. These headphones are very open headphones.

It is very hard for me to fault this headphone sonically. All the faults I can find about the Susvara are non-sonic - such as the aesthetics, warm cups, rather cheaply looking materials used for their cables. However once I have the headphones on, I actually don't pay much attention to those factors as I'm more focused on the sound the Susvara produces.

Thank you

A big thank you to Brise Audio for loaning me this hot-off-the-press cable for 2 weeks for this review. Brise Audio didn't even have the opportunity to perform any product shoots of the cable before loaning it to me.
 

Introduction

 
Brise Audio is a relatively new company from Japan but with over 20 years worth of cable experience. They focus on primarily home audio cabling although their roots originated from internal PC cabling in the 90's to internal crossover speaker wiring, speaker cabling, interconnects, and most recently personal audio headphone and earphone cables, analogue and digital interconnects. Their cable products range from approx USD$300 portable audio cables to high end ~ USD$15,000 speaker cables.
 
Brise Audio are based in Gunma, Japan and their products are hand made locally. They're not a high volume maker and often they cater for customised requests which take a few weeks for delivery. As they have been busy touring around Japan at miscellaneous audio shows, they have quickly gained recognition and won some local awards. Their recognition internationally have primarily been through the internet forums and they sell directly to most other countries except China, and Hong Kong where they have distributors.
 
More can be read about Brise Audio in my separate report here.
 

Brise Audio's Philosophy

Rather than jumping into the construction of this cable, it may be worthy to explore a little more into their beliefs. Despite Brise Audio offering a range of products that is convoluted and at times confusing to understand, their concept is rather simple. They use silver-based cores for digital cables such as AES, coax, etc.and high grade copper for their analogue cables such  as earphone and headphone cables, and interconnects. I suspect due to their background in internal PC and internal speaker crossover cabling their products have a strong emphasis on shielding. The platter of offerings are primarily due to the different levels of shielding provided.
 
The shielding levels are Murakumo with 13 layers of different materials, Masamune with 11 layers, Shinkai with 8 layers, and Osafune with 6 layers. The shielding sheets are hand wound around the entire length of the cables around a 37 strand 4 core high grade copper core in a spiral twist.
 
Brise Audio also offers the UPG001 and STD001 range and for this particular cable review, it is a newer version of the UPG001HP Headphone cable. The UPG001HP is an 8 core spiral twist configuration but of a different AWG than the Murakumo/Masamune/Shinkai/Osafune range. The shielding is also in specific sections of the cable such as the termination points and headphone jack and I believe near the Y-split to left and right channels but not along the entire length of the cable offered aforementioned range.
 
Brise Audio has been a little tight lipped about the "N" rating however have just left it as a high grade quality copper cable. Judging by how much attention and meticulous their focus on the materials and construction of their products, I  do suspect that the grade of copper used is very high indeed. Even the electromagnetic shielding that's used is proprietary only to them and not available to other makers.
 
With their shielding though I speculate Brise Audio has chosen a simple twist configuration of the different cables instead of any kind of fancy braiding.
 

 

Quality and Ergonomics

Overall the quality of products and materials used were high quality. I informed them before my visit I was keen on a Lemo connector-terminated for my Utopia and a 4.4mm 5-pole based plug for my NW-WM1Z player. I don't know if they made this cable specifically for my specification or if the had one readily/freshly made but they accommodated my request without any fuss. The Pentaconn 4.4mm plug used was the USD$90 OFC Pentaconn as opposed to the USD$45 standard Pentaconn (not to mention the availability of even cheaper options). Similarly the Lemo connectors were original ones that's labelled rather than China copies. I was very happy with the presentation of the cable as a whole that appears sophisticated yet understated.
 
Ergonomics-wise the cable is a little more stiff but still comfortable. As I had the cable for only 2 weeks, I didn't really get to see how the cable is like longer term. Their UPG001 cables for earphones on the other hand could get tangly but with this UPG001HP, I didn't feel it would get to that state. Possibly their silver sleeving may help the cable ergonomics too.
 

Sonic Qualities

 
My setup was listening to the cables with my Focal Utopia headphones balanced off my Sony NW-WM1Z DAP. Depending on the album, the DAP has just enough oomph to drive the Utopias with my volume hovering just over 100 mark out of the NW-WM1Z's max of 120. As a comparison I had my newly self-customed Oyaide Augline that comprises of 4x Augline +pt (silver/gold/platinum alloy based wire) and 4x Augline +α (silver/gold based wire) using the same Pentaconn OFC 4.4mm plug and Lemo connectors.
 
As I had only 2 weeks with the Brise Audio UPG001HP cable, I spent most of the time burning that in (which came up to about 333 hrs worth of burn in) whereas my new Augline had about 24-36 hrs worth of burn-in. Although personally I do believe burn in may some part into the settling of the sound signature, I don't think it's a big drastic difference therefore 24-36 hrs vs 333 hrs to me shouldn't be such a big difference comparison. And for the non-believers of burn-in, well it's just having this review 2 weeks later rather than 2 weeks earlier.
 
Comparatively to the Oyaide, I've found the Brise Audio UPG001HP has a very balanced and even tonal response. My Oyaide Augline felt somewhat more midrange centric. On the high end, the UPG001HP was fluid and smooth with a nice airy extension. The detail and transparency of the Augline extends to the layering of the lower bass end too. Whilst listening to "Looking For A Home" by Keith Greeninger & Danyan Kai, the subtleties of the lower bass tones kept making me turn my head around as I was wondering if my kids were banging on some thing a room a few doors away from me.
 
The Augline, possibly with it's shorter burn in, sounded a little gritty and grainy whilst the UPG001HP was like smooth silk exemplifying the analogue characteristics of the NW-WM1Z player.
 
Whilst the UPG001HP had a larger soundstage presentation (I believe thanks to it's even/neutral tonal signature) than the Augline, the Augline had a slight edge in the holographic depth imaging. The UPG001HP wasn't flat and wide, however the depth layering on the Augline was a little more apparent and obvious.
 

Final Thoughts

There's little to fault in the UPG001HP cable. To my ears it's an obvious improvement over the stock Focal Utopia cable, and discernible difference from the Oyaide Augline (which mind you despite being a DIY-ish self custom still cost a pretty ~USD$550). The final price has not been decided however I'm told to expect it to be less than ¥100,000 (approx  < USD$910). However if price is of no concern, I feel it compliments well with the Utopia and with the NW-WM1Z combination.
 
Aside from the cable itself, the Brise Audio folks have been a pleasure to talk to and to deal with. I feel the company itself has potential to grow in the future. I look forward to whatever newer products they may be coming up with.
 

Thank Yous

A big thanks to Pete Millett for lugging this amp all the way from US for us here in Japan and a further added thanks to Amos/Currawong for shipping it to me from his hometown down south, to me in Tokyo to have an opportunity to listen and review this amp.
 

Introduction

 
Apex Hifi and Pete Millett are names that is well known to the veterans of personal audio. Pete doesn't churn out new amps the way Toyota would revise their Prius, however what he does produce are solid proven products such as the Pinnacle and Teton, and most recently he's leveraged some new technologies in his latest Sangaku amp.
 
The Sangaku uses the Nutube tube package which employs vacuum fluorescent display technology from Noritake Itron Corp. The package which looks similar to an IC chip with pin outs and glows blue/green fluorescent light when powered on. It's even microphonic like regular tubes. However it seems it doesn't require a long warm up time like regular vacuum tubes.

Design

 
The amp is a very compact 22.3cm x 23 cm x 5.5 cm designed to be laid flat. Due to the front panel, can't be laid on the side (for those seeking to save space). Pete went for a basic amp only design leaving the user to have the flexibility to use the DAC of his/her preference. The amp is versatile in accepting 1x XLR pair for balanced, and 2x RCA pairs for unbalanced. It has also a pre-amp out at the back, and unbalanced 6.3mm and XLR 4 pin balanced out socket in the front. The input and output selector switches are push buttons that just rotate around the various options. For the 6.3mm single ended and XLR 4 pin balanced out the output selector further provides a low and high gain option.
 

 
The volume knob is also smooth with no perceivable channel imbalance.
 
As earlier indicated in the introduction, the Nutube is sensitive to vibrations like normal tubes. The way the Nutubes are mounted on the PCB and in turn mounted within the chassis, any vibrations on the Sangaku amp would cause the Nutubes to ping. This include whilst plugging in the headphone into the socket, pressing the input/output selector buttons, and in general tapping on the chassis. The good news is that the microphonic ping from the Nature doesn’t ring for long - light taps would settle in about 3-4 sec but a bigger tap would take longer for the ringing to settle. Some sort of dampener on the soles of the amp would help.
 
Unlike other tube amps, the Sangaku and Nature produces little heat. I can’t count the number of times I’ve burnt my forearms accidentally touching my Zana Deux tubes whilst reaching to the side/back to power it off on or to fiddle with the cords behind. The Sangaku is vented however little heat is produced from within.
 

Sonics

My setup is Audirvana Plus 2.6.4 on my iMac to the iFI Micro iUSB 3.0, Invicta 1.0 to the Eddie Current Zana Deux pre-amp out into the Apex Hifi Sangaku (Single Ended connections all the way through). The headphone used is the Focal Utopia cabled with Moon Audio’s Silver Dragon.
 
The Sangaku is mostly a transparent amp. It doesn’t add colour to the overall signature so having a good source helps. The amp has has a more distinctive left/right separation than my Zana Deux (ZD), but the overall tonal signature doesn’t seem to be as full bodied as the Zana Deux. That’s not to say my ZD is bassy but the the ZD seems to have a bit more “weight” to the signature making the ZD a little more holographic and with a little more 3D imaging than the Sangaku.
 
However the Sangaku having the distinctive separation gives a (soundstage) wider presentation than the ZD.
 
The overall signature difference between the Sangaku and Woo Audio WA8 is greater than with the ZD. The WA8 has a noticeably warmer signature than the Sangaku, making the Sangaku sound “light on the feet” by comparison.
 

Conclusion

 
Tonal signature and sonic presentation-wise, there is little to fault with the Sangaku. Compared with the Zana Deux and WA8, it’s merely preference of tonal signature and synergy in pairing. For example, with my personal preference, I’m happy with the Utopia with stock pads and the WA8 as the Sangaku is a little too “light” tonally for my preference. However, I believe my opinion would change if I had the Elear pads on my Utopia with the Sangaku- of which I could perceive that to be a decent match. Unfortunately I’ve sold my other dynamic driver headphones.
 
My minor issues with the Sangaku is more related to the microphonic nature of the amp. I’m more conscious of how I plug in my headphone into the socket, vibrations from its surrounding on the table, etc. 
 
However I appreciate its size - a seriously compact tube amp that packs a punch in sound.

Thank you's

This pair of Campfire Audio Vega is courtesy of @KB for review and to be passed around to others for their review. I blame @Currawong for putting me onto this 'cos I initially had no plans to review the Vega's at all this until Amos asked me for help to pick them up from Ken Ball at the e-earphone Winter 2016 Porta Fes show and to ship to him as he couldn't make it himself. I used the Vega's as the main earphone to demo the other DAP/Amp products and comparisons to other earphones at the e-earphone Winter 2016 Porta Fes show.
 
And how I'm hooked on the the Vega's, it'll be sad to see them go to Amos but will be excited to see his thoughts and review of it.
 

 

Introduction

The Campfire Audio Vega is the world’s first 8.5mm non-crystalline Diamond Dynamic Driver in a liquid alloy metal housing. In this current day and age where different makers are putting in more drivers, mixing balanced armature and hybrids, or putting in different configurations of dynamic driver pairs, the Vega has gone for a very simplistic single driver approach.
 
However the quality of sound it produces simply has to be heard to be believed. It challenges a lot of other makers (and in my opinion, even other Campfire Audio offerings) that more isn’t always better. It shows that with the right design and construction what a single dynamic driver can do.
 

Design

Unlike the Andromeda model which has more F117-like angular lines, the Vega has gone for what I feel to be a more eclectic design. It’s beautifully finished with with a simpler semi circular curve mixed with an odd angular bend and bevelled design to remind one it has a very modern touch to it.  It’s small and fits in the ear easily, with very little fiddling. Despite having a port at the top it has decent isolation.
 

 
 
Once in my ears,  it just disappears and I forget it’s there. In short it's s simple classy design and very practical to use.
 

Sonics

The first thing that hit me when I popped the Vegas into my ears is “Wow the impact of that sub bass!!”. It definitely grabs one’s attention, yet it’s a classy presentation. There’s sufficient decay to enjoy the sub-bass but not excessively so. The mid bass is also quite tight and doesn’t bleed into the mids which to my ears is just a hair touch laid back and comes back in the trebles which is sparkly and airy. Overall compared to the other IEMs i have, the Vega is a shallow U-shaped signature with a strong bass impact and an overall thicker presentation without wooly bass. I wouldn’t call it a warm signature but just a heavier signature.
 
Compared to the MH335DW-SR, I would categorise the FitEar MH335DW-SR to be warmer with a woolier bass, and on the opposite end of the line would be the Tralucent 1Plus2.2 where feels more neutral than the Vega’s from a tonal response perspective.
 
The Vega seems to have a more closer to the front row stage presentation with a decently sized theatre. The Tralucent 1Plus2.2 would still have the edge in terms of size of presentation (which to me is more like a few rows back of a large concert hall) but the Vega’s aren’t far behind.
 
Despite having a musical toe tapping signature, the Vega’s are quite detail especially with the shimmer of percussions in the treble region, and with the  textured layering of the bass. It’s also quite a speedy and fast IEM. To me, it’s a dynamic driver at it’s finest.
 
The overall signature to my mind is reminiscent to the Fostex TH-900 but in an isolated earphone form.
 

Conclusion

To me, it’s surprising that the Vega is able to present such classy and fun signature with just a single 8.5mm dynamic driver. It is somewhat a little on the pricey side however for the quality of sound it produces it's very rewarding. For the past 2+ weeks of having them, they're easily my daily earphones community to/fro to work and listening at cafes and at home. They'll be sorely missed for sure after I pass them on to the next reviewer.
 

Introduction

 
As with the Focal Utopia, the Elear requires pretty much no introduction. Again with great thanks to Focal and to Rocky International, Focal's local Japan distributor, for giving me the opportunity to review the Elear for a few days.
 
The Elear was released as an alternate offering from Focal with a somewhat slightly different signature from the flagship. One of the most exciting advantages of the Elear is the RRP of USD$1000. For the quality of sound the Elear produces compared to some other brands of the same asking price makes the Elear sound like a real steal. Although it's somewhat difficult to measure, to me, the Elear offers one of the highest return on value (or more accurately, "satisfaction") compared to other new/current model headphones in the market at the moment.
 

Design and Construction

 
Although the Elear uses the same driver design the construction as the Utopia, it is different in materials used and magnet design/strength. Other differences include the earpads where Focal has opted to use a microfibre fabric for the Elear as opposed to the lambskin in the flagship Utopia. The microfibre is warmer on my ears than the Utopia's lambskin but yet are supple on the head. The Elear's earpad also contributes to defining the overall tonal signature of the headphone, but more about that later.
 
The Elear is surprisingly lighter than the Utopia despite the use of aluminium yokes vs the flagship's carbon fibre. As with the Utopia, the cable that comes with the Elear is also long and heavy. The connectors are more regular 3.5mm 2 pole - therefore the cables are not interchangeable with the Utopia. Since the headphone design is similar to the Utopia, aside from the warmer earcups, the Elear sits comfortably on my head too.
 
Aesthetically, the Elear has a lightly more understated compared to the flagship. It retains the sophisticated but more slightly stealthy look compared to the Utopias.
 

Sonics

 
Despite having a basic conceptual design with the Utopia, due to the different construction material of the driver diaphragm, the magnet design/strength, earpad materials, etc. the tonal signature to my ears is vastly different from the Utopia. I have the impression that instead of Focal creating a more affordable version of the Utopia, the Elear was created to provide an alternate sound signature to cater for customers with varying tastes. This approach is very encompassing and welcoming to catering to customers' preferences.

The tonal signature of the Elear is a warm analogue-like fluid signature with a stronger woolier bass to midbass region. The midrange to me sounds somewhat similar to the Utopia but in the treble region feels a little more mellowed (but not recessed). As such with a mellower signature, the Elear is more laid back and a contrast to the Utopia's engagingly aggressive approach. When swapping the Utopia pads with the Elear, the default Elear microfibre earpads contribute considerably to the Elear's overall warm based smooth analogue tonal signature. With the Utopia lambskin earpads on the Elear, the bass is toned down a little however something, which I can't put my finger on, doesn't sound as right.
 
As I don't own any headphones in this tonal signature family, I wasn't able to compare the Elear to other headphones of similar sound signature family. However from my past experience on listening to a variety of headphones, I gather audiophiles and audio enthusiasts who like the earlier Audeze LCD-2/3's, and MDR-Z1R sound signatures may want to consider giving the Focal Elear a listen.
 
In terms of the detail retrieval and resolution, the Elear comes close to the Utopia however is somewhat more less obvious by comparison. One has to "search" for it during listening sessions as opposed to the Utopia where it's more easily apparent. The Elear is still miles ahead of some of the other current model headphones of similar price though and to re-iterate again, this is where the return on investment of the Elear is to its owner.
 
The Elear's soundstage shares a similar characteristic to the Utopia whereby at least to what I'm used to, sounds a little closed in, however excels with a great 3D-like depth imaging. Do bear in mind though that most of the headphones I'm accustomed to such as the HD800S do have a wide soundstage - wereby some would even claim to be unusually wide.
 

Final Thoughts

 
So why would I give the Elear 4 stars if I think it's that great value for money? If there was greater granularity to the Head-Fi ranking system it'll get a more than 4 stars but fall a little short of the Utopia I reviewed earlier. The reason is simply due to my sonic preferences, whereby I like a little more trebles and slightly tighter bass. It's simply not my 1st choice of tonal sound signature despite its technicalities meet and even exceed my expectation for its asking price. As such I don't own any other headphone of that familyof sound signature. Had it been my taste though, the Elear would have full stars as it does it executes the technical deliverability so well at such an extremely charming price. If one likes this signature and has a budget of $1000, the Elear is really a no brainer. In my personal opinion it puts to shame the other headphones of similar price.

[size=24.57px]Introduction[/size]
 

 
The Focal Utopia doesn't need an introduction as it's already very well known and probably one of the most popular headphones amongst the audiophiles and audio enthusiasts. I have to thank Focal and Rocky International, Focal's Japan distributor, for lending me the Utopia and the Elear for a few days. They are as popular on the internet as they are in shows, exhibits, and audio events. Rocky International were kind enough lend them to me for a week despite their busy schedule for upcoming shows, and magazine reviewers.
 
Despite the retail price of the Focal Utopia, the model remains highly sought after with only a few initial production runs trickling into consumer hands. Most recently Focal has been expanding their operations in the headphone dept which is improving the production output of the Utopias and the Elear to meet customer demands.
 

Design and Construction

 
I won't get into the details much as there's been many other reviews already about how and what materials were used to construct the headphones. However I would like to write about how it feels on my head at least. The headphones are the heaviest of what I own (HD800S, TH-900, SR-007Mk1, and SR-009). Granted the length/weight of the cable probably makes the headphone feel heavier than it really is.  The weight is definitely noticeable especially if one is used to lighter aforementioned headphone, but for LCD-x owners, the Focal Utopia would probably be light by comparison.
 
At least for me, despite its weight,  it does sit comfortably on my head thanks to its padded lambskin leather headband. Clamping force of the phones are also easy going on the head due to the supple earpads. They so far haven't felt warm although I am testing these in approaching winter weather.
 

Sonics

 
The Focal Utopia sound as appetizing as its reputation on the internet. At least to my standards, it's lived up to its hype and I can understand what the fuss is all about. To my ears and my limited experience of headphones, these are probably the most resolving dynamic driver headphones I've heard to date, further more the sound signature is very balanced. There are details I hear I didn't take notice of on my HD800S and TH-900. It comes close to the level of finesse of the Stax SR-007Mk1 and SR-009 I own.
 
Instead of writing about how the Utopia sound as other reviews have already well covered, I'd probably like to share a comparison to other headphones I've owned. In the cases below, the dynamic drivers are driven by the Eddie Current Zana Deux (Mullard ECC35 input tube) with a self-customed low/high gain switch with specs provided by Craig Uthus. The Stax are driven by the Eddie Current Eelctra (Mullard ECC32, STC CV1988/6SN7, EL34 XF2) - with both Eddie Current amps connected to the Resonessence Labs Invicta v1.0.
 

Utopia & Fostex TH-900

In terms of tonal neutrality, clarity and accuracy, the Utopia produces the more sophisticated and detailed sound of the two. To me the TH-900 didn't have the resolution the Utopia was capable of. However, not all is lost for the TH-900 as if one had a tonal preference for a more fun sounding bass thumping signature, the TH-900 would probably be more engaging in that perspective especially when listening to dance or EDM. The Utopia focuses more on being sophisticated and accurate.
 

Utopia & Sennheiser HD800S

Now at least to me, here's a little bit more of a challenge for the Utopia. Whilst to my ears the Utopia still has the edge on resolution over the HD800S, the soundstage of the HD800S make the Utopia sound somewhat more closed. To be fair though, I think the HD800S would make any other headphones sound somewhat closed. The HD800S feels the music has room to breath outward breadth-wise whilst the Utopia seems to have the depth. The difference in the presentation does make the Utopia sound more aggressive than the HD800S.
 
One other observation is at least with the Utopia unit on loan to me, comparatively to the HD800S, seems to have some kind of peculiarity with the midrange region most noticeable with vocals that sounds like some kind of internal reflection or a little "echo" effect. Being more accustomed to the HD800S' presentation, I was a little taken back by what I heard. I did not notice this before with the earlier Utopia demos I had at shows, however I didn't have my HD800S to compare side by side. Over extended periods of listening time with the Utopias, that peculiarity didn't bother me as much as I got used to it.
 

Utopia & Stax SR-009

This is where I feel the Utopia has met its match at least to my expectations. The Stax SR range are known for their ethereal qualities and at least in my opinion, the Utopia comes really close to the Stax level but there's something about the SR-009 that just has that little added shimmer/and glimmer around the edges of the notes giving it a nice finish. The SR-009 does seem somewhat lighter on the bass compared to the Utopia. The SR-009 seems to sound a little more clinical by comparison. As such from a tonal balance perspective, the Utopia sound more like the all rounder. The Utopia still sound more energetic and more aggressive than the SR-009.
 
In terms of staging though, like the HD800S, the Utopia sound more closed compared to the SR-009. Like the HD800S (although not as spacious), the SR-009 seems to allow the music to breath more outward.
 

Utopia & Stax SR-007Mk1

This is where I feel the Utopia is bested by the SR-007Mk1. Like the SR-009, the SR-007Mk1 retains the Stax ethereal qualities however also has the fuller signature of the lower end. Arguably the Utopia may still pack a bigger punch in the bass region than the SR-007Mk1 but the SR-007Mk1 is no slouch. The mids of the SR-007Mk1 seems to have the edge in overall tonal balance in the midrange seems is a little mellower (note I don't mean recessed). Where the Utopia sounds aggressive, the SR-007Mk1 sound more neutral yet engaging.
 
As with the SR-009, the SR-007Mk1 seems to give the music the room to breath outward compared to the Utopia.
 

Final Thoughts

Is there room for the Utopia in my personal headphone collection? Despite my preferences for the Staxes, I feel the Utopia is a strong candidate to replace, budget willing, my TH-900 at least and possibly my HD800S too, to provide a little compare/contrast between my dynamic driver and electrostats collection. Although not ready to replace my electrostat collection, to me at least the Utopia is the pinnacle of the dynamic driver headphones I've heard to date. The Utopia come as close as possible to electrostats without being electrostats.
 
Furthermore, although, I haven't mentioned above, I've been listening to the Utopia with my Woo Audio WA8 and the paring is excellent making it a potential transportable setup - something I would never be able to do with my Stax setup. In some ways the pairing with the WA8 may be better than the Zana Deux in treble space where the Zana Deux could be a little "hot" at times.
 

 
Focal has done a wonderful job with the Utopia and the headphones deserve the reputation and attention it's been receiving.

Introduction

Does Tralucent Audio really need any introduction? It's been around and well known since 2012 and Gavin (@spkrs01) has been active with the Head-Fi community even before the business started. In fact he's more a consumer than a maker! Tralucent Audio did not start of by making low end products then working their way up. The business wasn't shy in coming up with high end sound from day one with Gavin himself listening and instructing how the sound should be tuned.
 
In the past few years, Gavin has come up with the 1Plus2 back in late 2012, then Ref1 in 2014 still a hybrid but employing a isobaric design for the dual dynamic drivers, the Ref1 Too, and most recently offering an all BA earphone with the Plus5. However in 2016 he also revised the 1Plus2 into a the 1Plus2.2.
 

 

Design

As far as I know, I believe the design is still pretty much the same - a single dynamic driver with twin BA's. Whether it's the same drivers as the original 1Plus2, I'm uncertain. I've long since sold my 1Plus2 however shape-wise it does seem to look the same. I'm not certain but I think the filter grills may be different but I can't seem to find pix of the old 1Plus2 grills. It uses a Westone-styled connector however I'm not certain if the diameter of the pins are the same as they used to be.
 
The cable to me is a little tangly and cumbersome and somewhat microphonics. However in terms of sonics, it seems to couple with the 1Plus2.2 rather well.
 

Sonics

We'll get to the meat of it all but before doing so, my primary set up is as pictured - the AK380Cu with matching amp on firmware 1.25 listening to mostly DSD files. Why the AK380Cu? 'cos Gavin convinced me that the setup was to die for - and who am I to argue with a man who knows what he's talking about?
 
First and foremost, the 1Plus2.2 is ridiculously transparent and clear. Whatever you have in your DAP, it feels like the 1Plus2.2 just presents it exactly for what it is - if you have a bad recording, well you'll definitely hear it; if you have a live recording; well you're gonna feel like you're there hearing every chatter, clapping, toe tapping, champagne corks popping, etc. in the background of the track. Want to know what I mean? Have a listen to Bill Evans Trio's My Foolish Heart from the Waltz for Debbie album. The 1Plus2.2 makes you feel like  you were there back in 1961. In fact with so much transparency, with the wealth of information that the 1Plus2.2 can present, it can almost be overwhelming.
 
Which leads to the next point of instrument separation - the 1Plus2.2 is distinctively clear. The various instruments don't muddy up each other. This works well for "simple" presentations but if it's a musical track of multitude of instruments, vocals, etc. it can be a little overwhelming. However listening to Jazz triplets and quartets or simple vocal jazz the 1Plus2.2 absolutely excels.
 
Soundstage plays a part in the above too - one of the reason why the 1Plus2.2 works is that the soundstage it presents is wide and deep (for an earphone at least), and at least in my opinion, gives the instruments room to "breath" so to speak. I don't hear any excessive decay and overlap in this earphone. The 1Plus2.2 also seems to create one of the largest soundstage presentations within the category of IEMs.
 
As for it's tonal signature, if memory serves me correctly, to me it's the same as the original 1Plus2 but smoothed out somewhat less "harsh crisp". The bass is deep, punchy and tight. To my ears, it's an addictive part of the signature that I really like. The mids are a little toned back like the originally 1Plus2 but not offensively recessed - I may call this a slight shallow U but not V shaped signature. The trebles in the 1Plus2.2 is where I feel it has improved the most over the 1Plus2. The 1Plus2.2 trebles remain a extended however are much smoother and silkier than the original 1Plus2. There's more air and a "classy" presentation to it than it's predecessor.

As the 1Plus2.2 has an overall very tight presentation that it makes it a speedy IEM that works well with  fast tracks.
 

 

Conclusion

If one were to seek a very open and transparently clear earphone, the 1Plus2.2 would probably one of the top in this category. It's the kind that would keep one excited in hearing every detail and it keeps one on the edge of the seat throughout the whole listening time. To me, it's not a laid back, relaxing kind of presentation - in a movie analogy, it's like watching an action movie in 4K or even 8K with the full 4DX works. At least in my experience, there are few IEMs in this category and personally in my IEM list, the 1Plus2.2 reigns in the top 2 list (where the other is the Shure KSE1500).

The Thank You's 

Before I start, I have to give a big thanks to Jack Wu for providing this loaner. In Japan, Woo Audio products aren't easy to come by (in fact almost impossible) to demo.

[size=24.57px]Introduction[/size]
 
Woo Audio is a business that's been the audio scene for a very long time with its roots very established in the desktop amp space. In fact with its WA234 Monoblock product, it's venturing to the floor amp space too. They're also known for their elegantly designed headphone stands.
 
Woo Audio has come up with the first transportable Class A tube DAC Amp with the WA8 Eclipse. Other makers have made all-tube amp transportables whilst others have made tube DAC/Amp portables, however the all tube amp transportables are only amps only, and and the tube DAC/tube are hybrid tube/transistors. The WA8 Eclipse has made a tube DAC/Amp where the amp portion is all tube.
 
The specs of the WA8 Eclipse can be found here: http://www.wooaudio.com/products/wa8eclipse.html


 

Design

The WA8 is one very solidly built device that has a hefty 1.1kg weight to it. When you hold it in your hand, it exhibits quality workmanship all around. The volume knob rotates smoothly yet firmly. There's little chance of one accidentally bumping up the volume during listening. The three (2x 6S31B & 1x 6021) are safely caged safe from grubby hands yet visible through the open window. There's 5x LEDs to show the battery strength which lasts for approx 4 hours. This has been a controversial topic as many feel 4 hours isn't long enough however the WA8 can be used whilst charging with thanks to a dedicated separate charger port. Personally for me, I don't have 4 hours to dedicate to listening so the battery run time has not bothered me. Having an external charger is a little cumbersome however with a large battery of 3400mAh capacity, it's understandable why an external 12.6V 3.0A charger is required.
 
The power on/off switch and 2/3 tube settings are also set in and therefore no chance of accidental bump and break. The WA8 also provides the versatility of 3.5mm and 6.3mm headphone jacks and a 3.5mm single ended line in, or USB-B port digital input. Unfortunately there is no balanced in/out support. The USB-B port does seem somewhat old school especially these days when microUSB as been more popular.
 

 

Whilst Listening

I listened to the WA8 Eclipse off my iPhone/iPad mostly with the Onkyo HD playing mostly DSD tracks. A times I did drive it off the iMac too with Audirvana Plus 2.5.3, again listening to mostly DSD but occasionally 16/44.1 PCMs. My headphone of choice was the Fostex TH-900 as pictured since I had loaned my Sennheiser HD800S to @Currawong.  During the listening sessions, I didn't hear any tube vibrations nor pings, however whenever I stopped a DSD track, I get an unexpected pop which gets me by surprise almost all the time. (Edit: Thx to Jack Wu for helping to debug, this so far seems to be with DSD. I didn't hear any pops/clicks with PCM or DXD files).
 
I have also listened to IEMs off the WA8 Eclipse but haven't heard of any hiss nor noise.
 
Sonically the WA8 Eclipse oozes tube sound and typifies what one would expect from a tube amp. It does not cease to impress in that respect. I compared the WA8 to my Aurender Flow, Cypherlabs CLAS -dB/Duet stack, and against my AK380/Analog Squared Paper TUR-06b. The WA8 just screamed "tube" by comparison, even against the TUR-06b which is a hybrid design. The overall signature is smooth and fluid across the spectrum. Bass was deep and impactful with a beautiful layered reverberation. The midrange was full extending to the trebles which continued the trend in its silky smooth textured presentation. My other transistor amp setups were more "crisp" rather than smooth in their respective presentations. I wouldn't describe the WA8 as technical demon however the signature is smooth and articulate with a relaxing musical signature setting the mood for listening.
 
Soundstage wise, I do feel the WA8 is somewhat smaller and a little flatter than the likes of the Aurender Flow and AK380/A2P TUR-06b stack. In that respect, the WA8 was closer to the CLAS -dB/Duet stack.
 
As for the DAC portion, the ESS9018K2M used in the WA8 is the same as the Aurender Flow. It's a fast and detailed DAC. If the ESS DAC is known for it's lack of warmth, that's definitely not exhibited on the WA8. To my ears, the WA8 feels full sounding and in fact leaning more towards the warmer end.
 

 

Conclusion

If one is looking for an integrated DAC/Amp pure tube transportable, the Woo Audio WA8 Eclipse is it. It exhibits premium sound as what one would expect from a brand of this calibre. The tube signature does not fail to disappoint. Personally for me, to use it on IEMs would be a waste and to make full use of it, large cans are the way to go with this DAC/Amp. Sonically, what it lacks in soundstage, it makes up in the silky smooth fluid presentation and it's bass textured layering is addictive. It gets close and almost rivals my Invicta/Zana Deux setup.

Firstly thank you to Fostex for this opportunity borrow the HP-V8 for a week
 

Introduction

Fostex has made desktop integrated DAC/Amps before with their HP-A8, HP-A4BL and compact HP-A3. The HP-V8 is a different beast altogether. It's a tube amp using 300B, KT88 and E88CC tubes and is as large as some speaker based amplifiers. It's almost like an announcement that Fostex is stepping into the high end desktop amp market and is making a clear statement "We're in the game too".
 
The HP-V8 comes in very well packed and huge box that weighs 31kg shipped. Its inputs at the back are simple - just a 3 prong power, and L/R RCA unbalanced inputs. The power switch is also at the back. On the front however there is a standby button, and 2 headphone jacks (balanced XLR and unbalanced 1/4" with a toggle switch to go back 'n forth between the two). The selector switch supports Low/High Gain for Low Impedance, and Low/High Gain for High Impedance, and a large volume knob.
 
The touch and feel of the knobs and switches just oozes quality. In many ways it reminds me of the feel and knobs of the Accuphase integrated amp I used to own. During operation, the unit does get warm but the cage is well ventilated with the tubes set decently enough in the middle that if anyone touches the front perspex, they'll feel a slight warmth but not burn themselves. The top mesh on the other hand is much warmer naturally. On my table, my kids won't be able to reach the top panel anyway.
 

Sonics

I don't have a lot of experience with proper desktop amps as in the past I had owned the more integrated DAC/Amps like Benchmark DAC, HP-A8, and currently my setup is the Invicta v1.0 feeding into a very customised Eddie Current Zana Deux (ZD). It should be noted that the mods done to the Zana Deux brings it into something in between a Zana Deux Special Edition & the newer Zana Deux Super but tailored quite specifically to the TH-900 to my liking. The headphones I have at my disposal too iare my single ended TH-900, and a loaner balanced TH-900 from Fostex too. I'm using Audirvana Plus v2.4 USB into the Invicta, and SE out to the ZD which acts as a preamp into the HP-V8 too. My customised ZD is my baseline and I use almost exclusively in its 3 ohm ZOut mode on the TH-900.
 
Probably one of the most immediate noticeable difference I find in the HP-V8 against my customised ZD is the HP-V8 simply produces a huge sound so effortlessly. It lives up to the image that it is a big amp producing big sound so easily. In comparison, say the DAC/Amps I had before, I feel those have to "pushed" and almost sound "strained" to produce that big sound. My ZD being a dedicated amp with a dedicated separate PSU, doesn't feel strained in producing that big sound however it doesn't feel as effortlessly as the HP-V8.
 
The presentation is airy, articulate and very smooth, with a nice full low end in the bass range. The tube signature just renders the bass with a nice vibrato-like texture and layering. Music just breathes and fills that large virtual space the amp creates for the headphones. By comparison the ZD feels somewhat more intimate and (possibly due to the 3 ohm output impedance?) the bass doesn't fill in as much as the HP-V8. The amp also seems to smooth out some of the treble peaks I hear in my ZD.
 
Comparing the single ended and the balanced XLR output, the later provides just that additional larger soundstage and instrument separation. I heard some sounds I hadn't heard before in tracks I'm very familiar with and for the moment was wondering if I was picking up connection faults in the socket connector and later realised it was repeatable and not so obvious in single ended mode until I knew what to look for. The benefits in balanced mode is just that much more obvious.
 

Summary

Sonically speaking, I don't think there's anything I can fault in the new Fostex HP-V8. I wish I could keep this amp and I even wonder if the TH-900 headphone is a bottleneck to what the amp can do. Sadly I don't have any other high end headphones (like the HD800S which I'm so tempted to procure just to try it out on this amp!). At least to my ears, the flaws to the amp aren't sonic. The physical size/weight and cost aspect would probably the main deterrents for one to buy and own such an amp. In terms of return on value (RoV), I think it would be hard to justify. Whilst it's clearly a step up from my customised ZD, I don't know if I personally would feel if its RoV is 4x the cost of my ZD. But if money is no object and desk space is not a premium, the HP-V8 would be a very satisfying headphone amp.

Thank You's

With big thanks to @shigzeo who's patiently loaned this to me since early this year and I've still hung on to it till now.
 

 

Introduction

I've not heard of Master & Dynamic until @shigzeo asked if I was interested in giving it a listen. I have to say that I fell in love with its looks when I first googled it up. Aesthetically it's extremely fashionable and would really fit into the fancy shopping districts in Tokyo. But let's get into the product more. The MH40 uses 45mm Neodymium drivers, with lambskin earpads and cowhide-covered headband. Metal components are made from aluminium.

There are 2x 3.5mm ports leaving the listener to choose plugging into the left or right earcup, whichever he/she feels more comfortable with. It comes with a 2m long detachable cable or with a 1.25mm mic/remote. It comes with a portable durable clothed case.
 
The earcups are circum-aural  with an inner diameter of 65mm x  35mm and a depth of 25mm. The cups swivel out so that the headphone can be laid flat.
 

Comfort Wear & Aesthetics Design

These are probably the strongest traits of the headphone from my personal perspective. I find the headphones very comfortable to wear. Despite being circum-aural, they still do rest on my ears. The lambskin earpads are very supple and the depth from the drivers provide sufficient space that my ears don't feel too warm. Overall they're also decently light on my head at 360g.
 
I think it does a decent job in isolation however I think to the colleagues (or strangers surrounding), the headphone does leak.
 
The design though of the MH40 is probably the most attractive point in my eyes. There was a "alternate" design styling to it that make sit perfect for some of the fashionable districts in Tokyo. In fact whilst googling up the MH40's, I was rather bummed the limited edition Proenza Schouler MH40-PS white leather with black earpads ones were sold out - I found out about the Master & Dynamic too late!
 

 

Sound

I have to admit, when I saw it I was yearning for it to sound good too. Overall I feel the tonal balance of the MH40 to be mostly neutral but with a slight added bass boost. There is no doubt these headphones have a strong bass but all the way to the midrange and trebles it's pretty neutral to my ears. I'll start with the trebles, that they are pretty well extended with a decent sparkle. The midrange is also full extending down to the midbass which starts to bloom into the subbass level. Overall tonal signature is quite decent and palatable to the ears.
 
Unfortunately it didn't have the clarity across the frequency response I was hoping for. The sub & mid bass to me were a little too flabby for my tastes whist the midrange although full didn't have the detail I wished for. Similarly, whilst the trebles were extended and sparkly, it seemed to have lacked the air and finesse I had hoped for. The soundstage was somewhat small and has an overall congested presentation that if I listened to a reasonably fast track with lots of instruments and vocals, it all sounds rather "cramped in" that it starts to sound noisy.
 
I'm not a headphone designer but I can't help feel if cups are too small for the 45mm drivers it houses. I had high hopes for this aesthetically beautiful headphone to exhibit a premium sound too. Unfortunately,  there are other headphones which are a little cheaper that produce a somewhat (what I define to be at least) premium sound.
 

Summary

 
Overall these headphones are pretty decent. Although they may not provide the premium sound the audio enthusiast seeks, they are tonally palatable to the ears and for the average listener they suffice. Aesthetically they're visually stunning to my tastes - extremely fashionable and for those who have in mind a an overall artsy presentation, these headphones fit right in. If Master & Dynamic ever consider revamping these, personally I do hope they don't change the style so much but tweak and improve the sound instead.

Thank You's and Sorries

A big thank David Maudlin for sending me the Cypher Labs AlgoRhythm Trio to me back in late May and I apologise that it's taken me 3 months to put something up about it.

 

Introduction

Cypher Labs as a company needs no introduction. It's been in the portable audio business being one of the first few companies to release an iOS approved DAC back in 2011 which carries the AlgoRhythm name used in most of Cypher Labs portable devices till this day. This AlgoRhythm Trio however is (if I'm not mistaken), Cypher Labs first portable tube amp. All of Cypher Labs past amps had been fully solid state or discrete.
 
I'm not going into the specs of the Trio which you can read yourself here: http://www.cypherlabs.com/products/algorhythm-trio-portable-vacuum-tube-headphone-tube-amplifier/
 
 

Design

As with all other Cypher Labs portable components, the design of the Trio is simple yet elegant. The top and side plate has small ventilation for the tube amp and also allows the owner to take a peek at the glow (which is natural by the way, not cheating with LED lights). Some slight differences from Cypher Labs other portable devices/amps are that now the Trio has a glossy surface. It gives it the very shiny new look however it's also slippery in the hands and attracts fingerprints. If you're fussy like me, then you'd be continually wiping/cleaning but carefully otherwise over cleaning could result in wiping off the logo. Another difference is the volume knob is now in the middle with line in to the right and headphone out ot the left. Cypher Labs has also opted a separate power switch instead of built-in to the volume knob instead.
 
The charging is via a miniUSB although personally have a preference for a microUSB like what the Picollo & Duet uses.
 

 

Sonics

Overall, Cypher Labs has got it right with the tonal balance of the amp but the slight difference is that to my ears they do sound smoother and more analogue-ish compared to the Duet. The sound staging too is larger than the Trio but still falls slightly shy of the Duet. Like the Trio though, this is also a powerful amp. Unfortunately in the case of the Trio, that power comes with a rather noticeable noisefloor especially with sensitive earphones/headphones. I opted to use the Fostex T50RP Mk3 with this review.
 
Going back and forth between the Picollo and the Trio, the sound stage is the main difference I've noticed. The Trio is able to create a bigger spacious sound. Separation of instruments is also more noticeable to my ears. Imaging is also deeper. In many ways I feel the Trio is closer to the Duet in terms of sonic reproduction. The difference would be where the tube comes in and the Trio provides that smooth analogue texture especially when listening to easy listening vocal jazz with acoustic instruments.

In terms of it's frequency response, the Trio pretty much gives the full range just like the Trio and Duet. If there's any differences, I'd personally feel that the Trio has  treble forwardness closer to the Trio whilst the Duet is a hairline behind. Because of this, I think the Trio would work better with headphones that has a slightly toned down treble just to get that added balance.
 

Summary

The Trio to me is just another exquisite product from Cypher Labs. If used with the less sensitive slightly warmer or neutral treble headphones it'll pair beautifully. It doesn't do so well with IEMs as say the Picollo or the Duet but it does give the smooth tube touches the other Cypher Labs portable amps don't. it adds to suite of Cypher Labs current portable amps with that slight twist of tube goodness to it.
 

Thanks You's

A great thank you to Fostex Japan for graciously passing me this T50RP Mk3 and giving me the opportunity to write this review. Further a great big thanks to @Wallabee for loaning me his T50RP Mk2 for a comparison.
 

[size=24.5699996948242px]Introduction[/size]

Fostex T50RP models actually require no introduction as it's been a running model since 2002 (with a revision around 2007). And in 2015, Fostex has done a 3rd revision of the T50RP. The RRP in Japan is 20,000 yen (equiv to USD$161).
 

 
Unlike it's predecessor, the Mk3 is more easily identifiable with changes to the text & colour of the labels, a padded headband. Strangely just such tiny little changes does make the headphone look more fashionable. Internally however, the Fostex has made some changes that does make the headphone sound like a different model altogether. The diaphragm is still the same but the ventilation portion and the baffle has been re-designed.

There are a few traits that keep that "Fostex T50RP" house sound however the tonality of the T50RP has changed significantly. But more about that later.
 

Package and Ergonomics

As with the Mk2, the T50RP Mk3 includes a 3m long black cable terminated with a 1/4" plug. In addition, it comes with a shorter 1.2m orange cable terminated with 3.5mm locking plug. The shorter cable is actually more practical for portable use.  Ergonomically the Mk3 is just as comfortable as the former. Despite the headband being padded, personally for me it hasn't really made much of a difference from the former in terms of comfort. The Mk3 weighs at 316g and is about 10g lighter than the Mk2.
 
T50RP Mk3 Headband

 
 
The headband differences between the T50RP Mk2 and Mk3

 
T50RP Mk3 earpads


The firmness seems to be very similar but design-wise has changed. The Mk2 pads were made from regular urethane whilst the newer is made of low repulsion urethane. Design-wise, notice how the flange of the older (right) goes over the rim of the up of the cup, whilst the newer (left) is more like the TH-900/TH500RP style.

 

Sonics

As always, this is what we're here for. Firstly my setup is having Audirvana Plus 2.1.1 running off my iMac USB3 into my Aurender Flow. There I have a splitter to run both versions of the T50RP concurrently. Although there's been criticisms about the T50RPs needing amping, I've actually managed to drive the Mk3s (and Mk2's) reasonably off the iPhone 6 whilst the iPhone 4s may seem to struggle just a little bit more. Further with the tonal differences between the Mk2 and Mk3, the latter "feels relatively easier" to drive at least to my ears. However, I've been accustomed to using my Aurender Flow included as my base reference recently and continue to do so with the impressions of this Fostex model.
 

So tonally, to my ears, the T50RP Mk3 feels more natural than the Mk2. It's reminiscent of the Alpha Dogs although there's sufficient differences that gives the T50RP Mk3 its own identity. Comparing directly to the Mk2, the newer Mk3 seems to have a tighter bass, a veil lifted in the midrange to lower trebles range, and the transition from the upper midrange to the lower treble range feels more uniform whilst the older Mk2 seems to me to have a little treble rolloff. There is one common feature in the treble range of both the Mk2 and Mk3 that reminds me they're both from the same Fostex family, and that is a bit of a 10kHz hump/spike. This is more noticeable in the Mk2 as the treble is more rolled off, then an unexpected "spike" around the 10kHz range. The Mk3 also seems to have that but as the trebles aren't rolled off, the spike isn't as obvious.
 
The midrange of  the T50RP Mk3 also isn't as prominent as the Mk2. In fact comparatively the Mk3 feels there's a slight dip to the midrange. However this makes the Mk3 signature to be an overall easier signature to like.
 
The bass is part that I do like in the T50RP Mk3, where I feel Fostex has taken the effort to clean up the bloom that the T50RP Mk2 had. The midbass bloom seems be tighter and the speed of the T50RP drivers is more noticeable. The sub bass is lacking however I don't personally don't really miss it.
 
Aside from it's tonal signature, it provides a decent soundstage. It's not as wide as it's TH-900 cousin however does give the perception of a wider soundstage than it's predecessor Mk2s. Similarly for it's depth imaging. I can't help to think (and having experienced the Alpha Dogs) the cup size and dampening used of the T50RP plays a part in how it presents the stage. However again, the Alpha Dog is a complete rework and a further 3x the cost of the T50RP Mk3s.
 
Detail retrieval to me is one of the most I've personally heard in a $200 (or even $300) headphone. Of course there are other headphones with miro detail-level retrieval performance however those headphones are priced rather differently. This is where I feel the T50RP drivers do really reveal their capability.
 

Summary

 
I think Fostex has done a fantastic job in improving the long running T50RP name. This is a marked upgrade (and probably a long overdue) over the T50RP Mk2. I can't help to speculate that Fostex has been sitting on the sidelines a little too long watching what other makers could do with its T50RP drivers and selling their versions of the headphone at 2-4x the price.Now the T50RP Mk3 can get a piece of that action too without increasing its price line too differently. Whilst I'd dare say the Mk3 still isn't an Alpha Dog, they are tonally closer than the Mk3 is to the Mk2; yet price wise it's much closer to the Mk2 sibling than the no longer produced Alpha Dog.
 
For the price and the sound quality it produces, T50RP Mk3 stands on its own. Should any maker decide to continue using the T50RP drivers, they'd need to consider how to keep their mods more competitive.

Thank You: 

Firstly a big thank you to Stephen Guo for shipping these cables to me for review. I apologise that it's taken me so long to do it. 
 

Introduction

 
Beat Audio is a brand that has been in the cable business for quite a few years now and is not new to the portable audio industry. It's name is also well known to the mature members of Head-Fi who are focused on the portable audio. For a few years, Beat Audio's Oslo was their TotL and later revised to the Oslo II. However late in 2014 Beat Audio introduced their new TotL named Prima Donna. This is a 4 core of primarily silver alloy however I believe there may be a little mix of other materials of which I've not been privy to.
 
I normally don't get into the nitty gritty details/specs of the products therefore details of the Prima Donna can be found here :-
 
http://www.beataudiocables.com/cables/prima-donna.html
 

Ergonomics

 
With the few premium cables I've played or owned, they're usually thick and somewhat inflexible - solid cores require even more TLC. The Prima Donna's however are very supple. They could be rolled up and put in the pocket yet with little concern of damage. This is actually one the strong features of this cable as rarely would I do that to a cable over $500.
 
The cable can get a little tangly though but at least has little memory effect, nor suffer from mircophonics.
 

Sonics

 
The version I had was terminated for the FitEar and in this case my use was rather exclusively with the MH335DW-SR. As can be seen the connector used is a much smaller lower profile than the normal L-shaped 3rd party cables normally use.
 
When I first received it, I felt they were a little 2D and mailed Stephen Guo who then recommended running in for a few hundred hours - that was back in early Feb. Well, now a few months and hundreds of hours later, I must say that whatever sentiments I had back in late Jan/early Feb are gone. Coming from the Wagnus Proton and Tralucent Uber, the silver in the Prima Donna is more obvious in terms of treble extension and air. It has overall a nice headroom and a decently wide soundstage. Although imaging-wise, the other two cables may have an edge in terms of depth imaging, the Prima Donna isn't as 2D as initially pre-burn-in and provides a decent depth in imaging.
 
One obvious difference between the Prima Donna and the Proton/Uber is the treble extension and the air it presents. For a pair of bass-focused earphones like the MH335DW-SR, this provides a nice "finish" to end of notes and vocals. It's almost like a polish to the notes. This seems to give the impression a slightly cleaner finish the decay. The midrange is presented with clarity too whilst the bass remains as tight as the drivers of the earphones can present - in short, it feels like the Prima Donna doesn't add or subtract anything to the signature the earphone itself (ok and the DAC/Amp too).
 

Conclusion

Sonically, there is only praise for these cables and there is nothing to fault. Construction-wise, it's a blessing that it's such a supple cable that's easy to manage. I actually feel more comfortable having these cables as my "everyday" cable that doesn't sacrifice sonics whilst on the road. The cost on the other hand would be the price - at $800 it's not exactly cheap, but it's one of the few "over $500" cables I feel I don't have to baby over.

Introduction

China & Korea have been churning out DAPs that it's gotten to a point it's difficult to keep track of. A lot of these DAPs also have a rather idiosyncratic and non-intuitive user interface, and/or slow to react to user interaction, coupled with poor battery life. They may have good sound however their poor user interface and impractical battery longevity is almost a deterrent to take them out for use. Therefore when @audionewbi encouraged me to give the Lotoo Paw Gold a shot, I felt I was doing him more a favour than for the product as I had little interest a gaudy looking DAP from China.
 
I managed to borrow a Lotoo Paw Gold from the local Japan distributor, Top Wing Tokyo, for 3 weeks and as I'll divulge in greater detail later that I'm extremely thankful that @audionewbi had brought this product to my attention as it turns out to be quite a wonderful DAP. To me it's a demonstration that brands from China are capable of producing something that not only sounds good but also has a decent interface that rivals some of the premium and more popular DAPs. Finally some focus has been paid to the user interaction to the device with an acceptable speedy response, rather than just focused entirely one sound.
 
I won't get into the specs of the device as the information is easily found elsewhere, nor will I delve into Lotoo except to say that Lotoo OEMs for Nagra (which seems to be better known). 
 

 
 

Specifications Highlights & User Interaction

I know, I mentioned I won't get into the details of this DAP but feel compelled to write a few words. The DAP uses a Burr Brown/Texas Instruments PCM1792 DAC & LME49600 OpAmp. It also has a 6000mAh battery that charges via a 12V/1A DC charger - therefore not USB charging. The battery is claimed to last 11 hours however I've not tested it that far. It has lasted a whole day for me so it seems it does come close to the advertised duration. During burn-in, the DAP does run rather uncomfortably hot therefore it's not recommended to have it in the pocket for Aextended duration.
 
The DAP is 60x104x25.4mm in dimension and weighs 280g. It fits in quite nicely in my hand and feels very solid :-
 

 
What grabbed me the most about the DAP is the interface is fast especially when it comes to playing large files (DSD, 24/192 FLAC, etc.). This is unlike some (more like most) other DAPs where there's a delay in hitting "play" and the track actually starting. Scrolling is fast too and overall the interface is quite intuitive. The LCD screen is a little daunting with all the colourful feedback it provides (probably an overkill) however it's not unattractive. Overall user interaction to me though is a surprise blessing as I didn't expect it to operate so smoothly and quickly. This to me is probably one of the major features of this DAP.
 

Sonics

 
Before I started the review, I let the Paw Gold burn in for approx 100-150 hours listening to it every now and then. To me, the sonics did change during that time but very little. The treble smoothed out a little more but didn't change the overall signature of the DAP. During the time of listening, I compared it mostly against my Hifiman HM-901 with the yellow discrete Amp board, courtesy of @Mimouille who helped me buy one from China a few months back. Earlier this afternoon I also did compare it to my trusty Sony NW-ZX1. Unfortunately I didn't have my AK240 therefore was not able to provide a comparison against the iRIver DAP.
 
My primary earphone was the Noble Kaiser 10 (K10's) with a Dita Truth cable, FitEar MH335DW-SR with Tralucent Silver/Gold v2.0, and rather briefly Dita's Truth.
 
Most of the time I was listening to Alan Parson's Project Eye in the Sky, Earth Wind & Fire's Let's Groove, Shelby Lynne's You Don't Have To Say You Love Me & I Only Want To Be With You, Toto's I'll Be Over You, Sarah Morgann's Through The Eyes Of Love, & Alison Krauss' It Wouldn't Have Made A Difference - therefore mostly vocal jazz and some 80's pop/rock.
 
As an overall especially in comparison to the HM-901 & NW-ZX1, I found the Lotoo Paw Gold to sit right in between the two in terms of tonal signature. The Paw Gold felt neutral after going back 'n forth between the other DAPs. Compared to the HM-901, it feels somewhat more sterile but by no means no less musical. The HM-901 has a more warmer, mature and meatier sense of grasp of the music tracks but lacks the clarity and transparency in the trebles of the Paw Gold. As such the Paw Gold also feels somewhat fresh with a sense snap crispness giving it more air and spaciousness over the HM-901. The HM-901 felt more intimate with greater sense of depth due to it's warmer bass but the Paw Gold seems to have the edge of headroom. The combination that worked well for me was the Paw Gold with K10's and Dita Truth cables since the K10s are somewhat warm in the midbass to midrange and neutral trebles especially with vocals.
 
Switching to the FitEar MH335DW-SR however, which has copious amount of sub bass, the HM-901's warmer signature seems to take advantage of that by giving the overall signature a little more "thump" and authority. As such with the MH335DW-SR, I do have a tendency to pair it to the HM-901 instead however only marginally so. The Paw Gold still pairs well with the MH335DW-SR but just a tad dry compared to the HM-901.
 
With regards to the Dita Truth IEMs, I feel the Paw Gold emphasises a little too much on the trebles and on some tracks can sound somewhat brittle.
 

 
Meanwhile, I did get an opportunity to compare the Paw Gold to the NW-ZX1 too. This is where the Paw Gold demonstrates its neutrality. The NW-ZX1 has a more treble focus and across all the 3 IEMs could sound somewhat "rough" and a little harsh by comparison to the Paw Gold. Vocals are more emphasised on the NW-ZX1 too (but that doesn't mean the Paw Gold is mid recessed).
 
The Paw Gold performed rather well against these two other DAPs however when compared to dedicated components such as the Aurender Flow, the Flow does have the edge especially from the perspective of soundstage, depth and microdetail smoothness. However the Flow is a large component that requires an external player and is not so easily pouchable.
 

Conclusion

This DAP has actually great potential. Sonically it's up there with the rest of the premium DAPs and practically in terms of battery longevity and ease of use it's a blessing compared to some of the other DAPs around. I actually don't mind the aesthetics after a few days especially coupled with my flashy red with gold flakes Noble K10's (heck, this is Tokyo afterall...a land where walking out in your PJs is considered as fashion), and if one doesn't mind that, the only horrific pricing. In Japan the AK240 is ¥248,000 whilst the Lotoo Paw Gold is ¥285,000. It doesn't feature the balance headphone out the AK240 or the HM-901 has (with the balanced amp module), but at least with respect to the HM-901, I feel the Paw Gold doesn't really need to have balanced out.  It's also a pity it doesn't support ExFAT but that's possibly why there's a USB 3.0 interface instead of USB 2.0.
 

Introduction

 
Despite the existence of DAPs in the past decade, in the recent 2 years DAPs seemed to have skyrocketed with big thanks to makers such as iRiver/A&K having decent quality SQ but more importantly in a more intuitive interface and more practical pocketable sizes. The expansion of DAP options seemed to have overshadowed the portable component market. Early in 2014 Chord came up with the Hugo which breathed life into the portable component are but at a pretty hefty cost.
 
Along comes Aurender which has made many high end speaker level components in the past but now with their portable Flow. The name Aurender is still quite new to the portable market however with the introduction of the Flow, the makers didn't dip their toes in the shallow waters of the toddler's pool but went straight out to open sea. The Flow is a product that's targeted for the audio enthusiast who intends to extract the most out of their digital music and presenting them to their best headphones or earphones. It doesn't come at a cheap price but at the same time not (subjectively) unjustifiably or unreasonably priced.
 

Specifications & Operation

The Flow is a 455g device that measures 80x127x28mm. It's by no means small nor light (having said that, my CLAS/Duet weight 476g but measure 71x113x48 excl the balanced cable sticking out on the back & the Duet's volume knob). It has a 4450mAh battery that lasts for approximately 7 hrs. Although this seems normal for quite a few DAP these days (e.g. the HM-901 or AK240 around 9 hrs) but rather short for components, especially one of this size.
 
However size isn't so much for large battery but space for SSD storage of up to 1TB. Now with the music control buttons on the side, this device is easily mistaken to be a DAP but be assured it's a DAC/Amp. The storage is so that the Flow can be used as an external storage device to hold music for the software player running on your Mac or PC. The idea is that if one is travelling with a notebook with limited storage, one could put all their music on that SSD storage of the Flow, use only 1x USB port of the notebook for that storage and for external DAC/Amp capability. It should also be noted that the makers have opted USB 3.0 for the interface to transfer music to the SSD quickly.
 
 
As I had the chance to talk to the makers, I did ask if there were any concerns for bandwidth of the USB, that if one were to be reading music off the SSD to the Notebook/PC's music player, only to be fed back down the USB to the DAC of the Flow. It seems the transfer during play isn't intensive as such USB specs have more than sufficient bandwidth for bi-directional data transfer for music play.
 

 

The music control buttons on the side actually control the software player.- it controls the Audirvana+ 2.06 & iTunes on my iMac, and with Music and Onkyo players on my iDevices. So I can pause, rewind, fast forward, play, and control the volume from the Flow. Further as alluded earlier, the Flow functions with an iPad, iPhone, and with Android devices too. There's the option of controlling the charging too such as no charging during playing (recommended for iDevices), always charge even during use (* a little more about this later), or intelligent charging - where only charge when not in use or not playing any tracks but don't charge if playing. The reason for this option is because some listeners feel that audio quality is affected whilst the device is charging and playing simultaneously.By having intelligent charging, the user can leave the Flow hooked up to their notebook/PC the whole time and whenever it's not playing music it can charge but when music is being played, charging stops not compromising the sound quality.
 
For the past week I've been burning in my Flow and set for always charging and I have noticed that even in this mode, usage of battery is faster than it can charge itself. Something to take note of.
 
Other specs and operations of the Flow can be found here :-
http://www.aurender.com/manual_v1000.php
 

Sonics

 
And of course this is why we're here. As mentioned before the Hugo pretty much screamed, portable component aren't dead yet and tried to prove by producing one of the best quality sounds out of a portable component. The Flow wasn't going to be another component hiding in Hugo's shadows. Sadly I don't have the Hugo to be able to do a side-by-side comparison but I have heard the Hugo quite a few times and if one is awed by the Hugo's quality at sound presentation, the Flow doesn't disappoint either. The difference is that the Flow comes up cheaper by about $700 but has less inputs/outputs.
 
But firstly the Flow's SQ. To my ears the overall presentation of the Flow is very very smooth, delicate and tends to lean towards the clinical side of  the overall presentation. It's by no means dry nor cold but the added crispness to the treble gives it more of a fresh presentation rather than warm lush presentation. Notes and keys are presented with distinction and clarity. There's no blurring of notes as it flows from one to another. There's just that sense of precision giving the listener the impression that he or she is really listening to music in the studio then and there. Further, the treble extension is far and smooth (I have had about 144 hrs burn-in into the Flow).
 
The midrange is also clear and quite neutral. No particular attempt to emphasise on any part of the midrange frequencies. (Sdie-by-side) Comparing to my Cypherlabs stack (-dB/Duet), vocals don't have the "bite" that the Flow has in grabbing one's attention. The Flow's representation of vocals seem to just be somewhat cleaner/crispier with the nice finish/closer to each word (listening to jazz vocals). the Cypherlabs does seem to present more warmth to the vocals though which gives a sense of intimacy.
 
For the midbass/sub bass region, the Flow continues on with its tightness and precision. Decay of drums seem to be as the instrument should be - not so much of saying listening to drums in a small basement club (or a large hall) where there's reflections and echos, but more like drums in a recording studio room. Despite the Flow leaning somewhat on the clinical side to my ears, there is no shortage of bass either. The Flow will go deep when it's called for but just not long excessive decay.
 

 
Now for a good long while, my Cypherlabs stack has been my personal preferred portable whenever I have the occasion to use it (i.e. out of the home but in a location for an extended period of time - cafe, etc.). I liked it even when it was the -dB/Rx Mk3 days. I preferred my Cypherlabs stack over my AK240 even although the AK240 is used when I'm literally on the go (in public transport or when actually walking around). I liked the Cypherlabs stack 'cos in it's optimal configuration - with the balanced ICs, and with balanced headphone cables - it had a large presentation with a wide soundstage and deep imaging.
 
The Flow has just taken over my Cypherlabs stack in that respect of "presenting a big sound". The Flow has been able to just make the sound bigger, larger, wider, deeper. I'm actually comparing the Flow to my Invicta/Zana Deux desktop gear - although not up to that level it's mightily close at a fraction of the cost. So despite the somewhat clinical tonal presentation, it's width and depth presentation on the other hand makes the overall music sound so palatable to the ears. 
 

Synergy with Headphones/Earphones

The one factor I do appreciate in the Flow over the Hugo is that it has a black background for sensitive IEMs. Noise, to be honest, doesn't really bother me but I didn't buy the Hugo as I do have mostly sensitive earphones. So if I can have another device that's at the level of the Hugo's performance but with a black background (and cheaper!), the choice is easy.
 
I do like the Flow with my TH-900s, FitEar MH335DW-SR, TO GO!334, Noble Kaiser 10's. I actually thought that the Flow would be too clinical for the Tralucent Ref1 but was proven wrong and the Flow worked quite well with the Ref1 too. I've not tried the 1Plus2 as I no longer own one.
 
With the Dita Truth's I do feel that it does get a little too clinical for my tastes. To be fair though so would it be with the Cypherlabs stack (my choice for the Ditas would probably be with the HM-901 but that's a different topic altogether).
 

Summary of Thoughts

 
Overall, the Flow has highly impressed me. It's pushed the sonics of portable audio that borders some serious desktop level components in a portable form. It's not without it's flaws though. I do wish the battery life is a little longer. In addition, interoperability with iDevices can be a little finicky especially if A/Bing with other portable components. There are particular sequences to execution whenever switching back 'n forth between the Flow and other portable DAC/Amps on the iDevice. I also do wish there was a 3.5mm, and balanced output would have been nice too. However, it's output on the 1/4 jack has surpassed some of the other balanced portable components that one wonders if balanced is even needed (or how much better balanced on the Flow could be).