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



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.

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.

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

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).

 
I apologise for the late report on the initial impressions of the Fostex TH-600. I spent early part of last week burning the headphone in. But when that was complete I was hit with the flu and high fever. The above photo was actually my bedroom rig during recovery. Post recovery, I actually managed to make some time to have a listen to the TH-600 a bit, and compare it to the Signature Pros and the TH-900. Over the weekend my friend & I attempted to find a pair of Denon AH-D7000 but there was none! Tokyo may be great with the latest and the greatest but they're also quick to stash away succeeded models. So sadly, no comparisons to the D7000 - not even 2nd hands.
 
Please note that these are very preliminary listening over the past 3 days and I've got another 1.5 days with it before I should probably return them back to Fostex.
 

Introductory Highlights

 
The way I'd quickly summarise the TH-600 is that it introduces the Fostex TH-signature to those who are curious about how Fostex TH house sound sounds like. It shares many qualities physical and sonic to the TH-900, but at the end of the day, this is still the little baby brother of the TH-900. The price of the TH-600 will retail for approx Y84,000 in Tokyo whilst the bigger older brother retails for approx Y130,000 street price.
 
 

 

Construction and Design

 
The TH-600 shares the same design, headband, earcup size, and ear pads as the TH-900. The fundamental differences between the two are the drivers are now 1.0 Tesla whilst the bigger brother is 1.5 Tesla. The cables are also 6N OFC whilst the other is 7N OFC. Visually the biggest difference is the magnesium textured black ear cups. The 1/4" plug is also sliver textured and is heavier than the TH-900's fingerprint prone chrome.
 
Overall the TH-600 is more stealth and understated but yet very classy. The textured magnesium cup is actually very feels rather industrial to touch.
 

Sound Signature

 
 

 
 
I'll start off by saying that aside from a few snippet comments here and there, I won't be doing a thorough sound comparison between the TH-600 and the TH-900 as I've previously mentioned in this thread that I feel it won't do the TH-600 justice. However I will say it's SQ matches my expectation for its given price. I was lucky enough to have Bootsy1 loan me his Ultrasone Signature Pro which to me is more similarly priced. Thank you Bootsy1.
 
The TH-600 shares similar tonal signatures to the TH-900 that it's a somewhat mild U-shape. I won't really say that one has more bass or treble quantity than the other, nor ones mid more recessed, laid/pulled back from the other. By comparison the Signature Pro has a more prominent mids, slightly less sub bass, and slightly more forward treble.
 
Overall the TH-600 has a more laid-back sound especially compared to the Signature Pros. I find it excels in slower vocal jazz (take your pick out of the Best Audiophile Voices series), whereas in more modern vocals Jazz or strong vocals where there's potential for some speed (such as Michael Buble, Adele, etc.) I prefer the Signature Pros. With slower paced genre, the TH-600 feels it has room to move and ease into music. Instruments and vocals are well separated and have room to breath. Whereas strong vocals like Adele where there's a varying pace, the TH-600 doesn't have the intimacy of the Signature Pros. As such the Signature Pros feel more engaged.
 
The soundstage and imaging of the TH-600 is by far larger and deeper than the Signature Pro, which shouldn't be a surprise. However, and this was something I didn't notice before with the Signature Pro, is the S-Logic's 3D feels more simulated whereas the TH-600 feels much more natural. Along with that, the resolution of the TH-600 is also greater giving a smoother presentation whereas the Signature Pro can occasionally feel somewhat grainy.
 
However, the tables are turned when the TH-600 is compared to the TH-900. The older bigger brother gives a bigger sound. Despite having the basic similar tonal signature, the TH-900 is more expansive, even greater soundstage, imaging, and more immersive. That's where the almost-double price show it's true value (instead of the Urushi cups as most may think).
 
These are my raw notes I made during listening :-
 
 
 
 

Conclusion For Now

I think for those who are curious about the Fostex TH-series house sound, the TH-600 will please. It actually performs well for a headphone of it's price range. I actually can't think of another closed back (I personally do not believe in comparing open to closed) of that price that would sound nice and articulate.
 
Having said that at least for my ears I do have preferences of certain genre where the TH-600 will shine more than others. Ideally one would own different types of headphones for different types of genre (the TH-600 for laid back tracks, the SigPros for strong vocals, the SigDJ for pop/hiphop/electronic). However if I had to choose only 1x closed-back headphone for home use of around this price range, the TH-600 would make me very happy.
 
 

 
Big Thanks To Bootsy1 For Loaning Me His Signature Pros!

Introduction

 
Before getting into the AK240, I'll need to thank Amos/Currawong for bringing this back from the SoCal 2014 show, and also a very big thanks to iRiver USA for being so generous on letting Team Tokyo have a loaner of this product. Where we can test in the comfort of our environment rather than standing in a shop with limited time for testing.
 
Is one needed for this DAP really? It's gained more attention before it was released than when it's available!! This is iRiver/A&K's latest addition to their line but it's also their flagship. The AK240 specs can be found below so there's no necessity to regurgitate in this review :-

http://www.astellnkern.com/eng/htm/ak240/ak240_spec.asp
 

 

Design

Below was the AK240 launch in Japan. It shows how the design of the AK240 was conceived. Sadly I don't understand enough Japanese to understand what was said in the presentation, nor do I understand enough about design concepts.
 

 
When the AK240 was first released I thought the design looked awkward and many others thought so too. However having one in my hands right now, with it sitting side-by-side with some of the other competitor DAPs, there's something attractive and appealing about it's very space-age design looks. Even walking around in the streets and having a cup of coffee, passer bys do take a glance at it wondering what this James Bond-looking gadget is. It's not that I'm ashamed of looking geeky with my multi-stack DAC/Amp hanging off my iPad but it's also nice to have something that's modern looking that actually looks trendy to the non-audiophiles but yet produce audiophile level sound quality.
 
The positive side-effect of this is that then the general audio listeners will also start to take an interest in good SQ as the products not only appeal their sonic palates but to match their image lifestyles too. If there's any opportunity to raise awareness to the general public of how good music could sound to their ears, I'd be happy to support such an opportunity - even if it means designing something visually striking and easy to use around a audio component that delivers great sound quality.
 

 
Ergonomically though how well does it fit in one's hands? At least in mine, averaged size palm, it actually fits in quite well. When I first saw the AK240 on the forums, I wondered why have the smaller screen with the bigger base? One may as well make it a rectangular box design and put in a larger LCD. However when I have this in the palm of my hand (and I'm left handed), I can actually wrap my fingers and rest on the slanted bevel below the volume knob which provides me a more secure yet comfortable grip, which is a nice feeling to have when holding a $2500 item.
 
The AK240 also feels solidly built and robust - I feel that it's something classy in my hands. The volume dials are light with distinctive clicks signifying a 0.5 jump increments (of 0 -> 75). The power, back, pause/play, forward buttons are also distinctive and don't feel loose. The 3.5mm jack holds in quite firmly but not excessively. 
 
Aside from the external design and ergonomics, I thought I'd put in another picture from the Japanese slide presentation I attended. This has is a little more about the internal architecture of the DAP and how it uses the 2xCS4398 DACs for each channel :-


 

Features

The AK240 is loaded with features which has made it a rather versatile DAP. It supports optical out, balanced out, functions as a DAC/Amp from a PC (not from Android), has WiFi for wireless upgrades, and online streaming, Bluetooth 4.0 support, and if 256GB internal storage is not enough, a microSD card slot with up to (the current) 128GB microSD can be further added.
 
I won't dwell too much on the WiFi MQS Streaming (hires) nor native DSD support as that's been discussed in the forums (although I will comment on it's SQ later) but I'd like to drop in a word or two about another service which hasn't been talked about much, mainly because the service is currently quite limited. The AK240 also supports online purchasing and downloading of hires quality music via the same MQS Streaming but through the Internet with some online music stores iRiver/A&K have partnerships with. Currently this service is available in Korea and (as I've been told) Germany. It's my understanding iRiver Japan is trying to provide this service in Japan too and since they had eOnkyo talk in their AK240 press release, I can only hope that iRiver Japan has a successful negotiation with them to provide hires and DSD downloading to the AK240 too.
 
Another feature which seems to be in the works is using the AK240 as a DSD DAC from the PC. Currently on firmware 1.09, it hasn't been very stable for me (the Audirvana Plus on the Mac side resets if I change volume on the software player, but it seems to work if I just let it play through without trying to change anything) but hopefully future firmwares will fix this and all the format supported on the DAP will also be supported as a DAC/Amp.
 

 

Sound Quality

When iRiver/A&K released the AK100, AK120, and AK100Mk2, they were (to me at least) revolutionary that they could make an audiophile level sound in a neat package that's aesthetically trendy and easy to use. But the SQ was still a little hit 'n miss that made me feel the makers were still experimenting a little (admittedly less so with the AK120 which was quite a solid product on its own). But the fact that they could be modified and improved internally meant to me that that the makers still hadn't nailed it. As such with the AK240, I think the makers has finally come up with something where (if we forget about the price), is something that sonically is it.
 
Personally I was skeptical myself of how "good" could a self-contained unit that fits in the palm of my hand could be, and my experiences with competing DAPs in the past had been minor incremental sonic improvements over each other that the reign of a DAP usually isn't very long lasting. The AK240, however was a jaw dropping easily noticeable marked improvement over it's predecessors. Not only that, but also given stiff competition to its peers.
 
The main primary sonic features I've noticed with the AK240 is how smooth and fluid it's musical presentation is. As I listen to quite a bit of older 50's & 60's west coast jazz, some vocal jazz with mainly few supporting acoustic instruments, the AK240 renders each instrument with precision, clarity and detail. Vocals are also very clear, involving, and smooth. However despite the precise distinction of each of these components, the AK240 pulls them all together that they all work in harmony together that it feels like I am listening to one single musical piece. Should I choose to focus on a particular instrument, I can hear it with ease with copious amount of detail but should I sit down and relax I can take it all in without any odd component standing out over the others.
 
I think this is helped by the large spacious setting the AK240 is able to create. The soundstage is wide as the imaging is deep. Placement of instruments and vocals on the stage are easily identified. But again, each component uses that space well. There are no pockets of 'vacuum' where the presentation sounds odd.
 
I find the AK240 to really start trickling into the multi stack portable DAC/Amp component space. Except for maybe the HM-901, I find comparing the AK240 to other DAPs to be an easy challenge and it has been more intriguing to compare it with the separate portable DAC/Amp products instead. Although there are some high end portable DAC/Amps that still have an edge over the AK240, the AK240 still puts up a good fight.
 
[Added: 7th Apr '14] The AK240 is not forgiving to poor recordings. In some older recordings and mastering, I can hear more background noise and imperfections during the recordings. Any skepticism I had with the CS4398 as a DAC from my older Marantz DV9500 SACD player are changing and I understand more that it's the implementation around the DAC that is just as relevant as the components used.
 

AK240 & NW-ZX1

Sadly my favourite NW-ZX1 was easily toppled by the AK240. Again we should, for the moment, forget about the price of the products. The AK240 to my ears sound smoother, greater depth, and that fluid presentation makes my NW-ZX1 sound somewhat less refined by comparison. That's not to say the NW-ZX1 is a terrible product, as I opted it over the AK120 which I subsequently sold. However the AK240 is a noticeable step up over both the NW-ZX1 & AK120.
 
Why would I choose the AK240: Greater storage, better SQ, greater flexibility with balanced output
Why would I choose the NW-ZX1: Great value for money, UI more dummy proof, open Android platform. Won't cry so much if I lose this since it's cheaper than the AK240.
 

AK240 & HM-901

This is one where it does get a little more interesting. The AK240 sounds more coherent than the HM-901 where I find the HM-901's separation to be a little too distinctively separate left & right (especially vocals). The HM-901 does have a deeper and greater sub-bass impact, with a mid-bass bloom. As such the HM-901 does sound somewhat more warm and mature, whilst the AK240 seems to focus more on the upper mids to treble space. I do find the trebles in the AK240 a little more compressed compared to the HM-901, but not offensively so. Overall FR though, the AK240 comes back though by having a greater sense of space in width and depth whilst the HM-901 sounds more intimate by comparison. When I have these two DAPs side-by-side, the HM-901 feels like the more older mature CEO of a large business, whilst the AK240 more the slick & smooth yet precise banker.
 
Why would I choose the AK240: Faster and more logical UI, more standard charging interfaces with its microUSB, longer battery life (just), good for HipHop, R&B
Why would I choose the HM-901: Cheaper than the AK240, more mature sound for the slow easy going, Jazz, vocals, golden oldies, 80's pop 'n rock. Can drive those harder-to-drive cans, modular amp options. A more standard(??) 3.5mm TRRS socket for balanced headphones.
 

AK240 & the CLAS -dB/Duet

The AK240 comes close to the Cypherlabs component stack and puts up a good fight against it. The -dB/Duet is able to match the staging width and imaging depth but also has the bass depth similar to the HM-901 in comparison to the AK240. The Duet is also has a more powerful amp section than the AK240.
 
Why would I choose the AK240: Compact, greater storage than any iOS or Android device with the -dB/Duet stack
Why would I choose the -dB/Duet: I'll sitting in some cafe for an extended period of time with my obnoxious large cans. It'll charge my iPhone whilst I'm listening to it. A more common socket with the Kobiconn for balanced headphones.
 

AK240 & the VentureCraft DD OPA627SM 12V LE/Apex Glacier

The AK240 still provides easier instrument separation and a mid-row from stage presentation, whilst the VentureCraft DD/Apex Glacier has a more front row stage presentation. (Typical of OPA627's??) There's more bass warmth to the VentureCraft DD/Apex Glacier but this stack also seems to have smeared details when compared side-by-side to the AK240.
 
Why would I choose the AK240: Compact, greater storage than any iOS device with the DD/Apex Glacier stack (note the DD is an iOS-only device), sonically more detailed and precise. I have a balanced headphone option if I want.
Why would I choose the DD/Apex Glacier: cheaper than the AK240, more configurable that I could switch amps.
 

Summary

 
As I mentioned earlier, before this product was in my hands and all I saw were pictures, I was a skeptic. Whilst I thought that it'll be a good product, I didn't think it'll be a great product. The price will deter most from even trying the AK240, and maybe the design may too. However if one were to put those pre-conceptions aside, and just get to touch, feel and hear the AK240, hopefully they'll see its inner beauty. Whether that is worth the asking price, that is up to each individual.
 
For me at least. I believe in bridging the gap between the image of geeky audiophiles with their geeky looking products with the more mainstream audio enthusiasts and where in the past these audio enthusiasts get turned off by audio products that may sound good but look horribly designed, products like the AK-series show that one could get good sound yet still not look awkward. Whilst it's true that the price of the AK240 may still make it prohibitive to the general consumer, it's closer within the reach of some of the audio enthusiasts and enlighten them a little more on what audiophiles are raving about - without looking too awkward.
 
Where the AK240 excels, I feel, is that as a complete self-contained package - sonics, capacity, usage, functionality, visual and feel aesthetics - the AK240 is a winner. It sits in one's pocket unobtrusively, it's basic functions are easily accessible with external buttons, it can function as a DAC/Amp with a notebook, it supports balanced headphones out, it supports line out, it has copious amount of storage, it can stream high quality music wirelessly, it even supports online download in countries where the service is available, and it doesn't sacrifice quality in doing all these things.

Introduction

Tralucent Audio is a name that's appeared on Head-Fi only since August 2012 but has quickly made a name for themselves with their ability to challenge other IEM makers when it released it's 1Plus2. I reviewed that IEM last year as a love/hate relationship as I felt it excelled every aspect of audio technicalities an enthusiast or an audiophile seeks sonically but overall, didn't sound musical to my ears. My expectations of the 1Plus2 was eventually managed when I bought the earphone again but with the Tralucent Uber cable on the 2nd round. In short it took a little while for the 1Plus2 to get a little loving from me.
 
Now onto 2014, Tralucent Audio has done it again with a new model, the Ref 1 and this has taken a much shorter period of time for me to fall in love with - and with its stock cable, even more so with the Uber coupled with it, and in my impressions I'll tell you why.
 
The Ref 1 (I believe is the first to Edit: As per @shotgunshane, it seems Audio Technica has done isobaric before the Ref 1) employ an interesting isobaric design for it's pair of 9.2mm dynamic drivers, coupled with a pair of balanced armatures - so this is a 3-way, 4 driver, hybrid & isobaric IEM. But it seems Tralucent Audio didn't just want to go for unique in design, it further challenged it's own older brother, the 1Plus2, in technical excellence and improved on it's musicality.
 

 

Design

The Ref 1 in many ways are very much alike the (latter version of the) 1Plus2 but just smaller. The socket design, the stem design, faceplate, position of the port, etc. are so similar it's the two models are easily mistaken for each other. As such comfort for me on both the 1Plus2 and the Ref 1 are very similar maybe leaning towards the Ref 1 for a slightly more comfortable due to it's size.
 
When popped into my ears, they do angle outwards at the bottom whilst the top inwards towards my skull, and this is due to the angle & length of the stems & tips into my canal, whilst the cable at the top of the IEM pulls the upper part of the IEM closer to my ears. As such the seal it creates is a light seal, of which if I move a lot, the earphone can pop out easily. However if I'm sitting, everything sits in place naturally. I can create a better fit by tightening the neck sleeve on the cord.
 
Whilst on the topic of seals, the isolation is similar to the 1Plus2. Due to the light seal and the vented port, isolation is average for my fit.
 
Thanks to @burtomr, he did remind me that with the demo Ref 1 unit I had, there was a driver flex on the right IEM only. This sounds like a crackling sound when putting on IEM and if I were to push it. It didn't bother me much as once I had it on I was listening to it for it's SQ, however I can see how others could find it annoying for an expensive IEM to have such an issue.
 

Sound

 
Tralucent has basically done it again by making an earphone that’s technical perfection but tailored for a different taste. This earphone is all the detail demon that the 1Plus2 was yet further incorporates musicality into it - which was what I was seeking in the 1Plus2. It has more “body” than the sound of the 1Plus2 but still remains technical.
 
One of the first things I noticed about the Ref 1 is how fast it was. Music just sounded more positive, lively, and slick overall. Articulate sounds transition so quickly yet naturally - slick and speedy. This provided an overall very refreshing sound across the board for all genre I was listening to. I'd very much like to see the waterfall plot of this IEM but I suspect it to have rather short decays across its frequency response.
 
Tonally to my ears the Ref 1 further carries on from the 1Plus2s but with slight differences. As with the 1Plus2, the Ref 1's bass extends deep with a nicely controlled rumble, into a tight mid-bass region which to me contributes to the speedy response mentioned previously. The way the bass is rendered, is one of the most addictive - it sounds realistic, clear, & taut.
 
As for the midrange, this is where to me the Ref 1 differs a little from  the 1Plus2. Overall, it has a fuller midrange which renders vocals in full bloom. However slicing into a little more detail, my ears seem to notice little dip in the lower region of the midrange which I think gives the overall vast soundstage for the whole signature. It's therefore able to achieve 2 goals simultaneously - provide a huge soundstage presentation yet with the rest of the midrange having a full sound give vocals a rich and blossoming body.
 
The trebles are personally to me the most welcoming especially when I found the 1Plus2 to sound sibilant with certain recordings on the stock cable. The Ref 1 manages the sibilance without sacrificing the treble extension. Trebles maintain it's airiness, crispness, detail, and smoothness.
 
 
As mentioned before, the slight dip in the lower portion of the midrange seems to contribute to the Ref 1's overall soundstage. The soundstage can't be emphasised further - it'a huge and vast, just like it's older brother. It's even more so with the Uber cable plugged into the Ref 1. I'd dare say that the soundstage would sit between my (former) Signature DJ's and TH-900's and that's where I feel the Ref 1 starts to challenge some closed back headphones.
 

Ref 1 with different DAPs

These days there's quite a bit of questions on synergy of the earphone with various amps, DACs, and DAPs. I've tried the Ref 1 with the Cypherlabs Algorhythm Solo -dB/Duet combo, AK240, HM-901 and NW-ZX1 and I feel that it works well with most of those combos with maybe the only exception being the NW-ZX1 where it starts to be more track and genre fussy. The NW-ZX1 tends to have a somewhat more treble-focused sound and combined with the Ref 1, on certain tracks can start to sound sibilant for my tastes. On the other hand tracks that aren't treble focused, on the NW-ZX1 the trebles can sound crisp and airy.
 
However for multi-genre and multi-purpose, I personally prefer the Ref 1 out of the AK240 or CLAS -dB/Duet in my collection.
 

Closing Notes

 

 
Personally for me, I feel Tralucent Audio has excelled in this new IEM. It's not only got a very innovative design by incorporating drivers in an isobaric configuration coupled with BAs for an overall hybrid design but more importantly producing a sound that has maintained Tralucent's house signature - technical excellence. It gives a fast and slick signature with a highly addictive bass and yet maintains the technical excellence of its older brother, the 1Plus2. It's provided a sound that I've not heard in other makers which make the overall experience very refreshing.

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.

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.
 

The Signature DJ is the new addition to Ultrasone's Signature series. It's basic exterior design is based on the  Signature Pro design sharing many components together (except colour) however the driver is a new 50mm mylar driver.
 
A very big thank you to TimeLord Japan for loaning me a pair of Signature DJs and Signature Pros to do this impression and review.
 

 
 
 

What's Included?

 
The Signature DJ comes in a hard case just like the Signature Pro. It also comes with 2 cables (3.5mm and coiled 1/4" jacks), both with locking mechanisms into the left cup. The jack that goes into the left headphone cup is a 2.5mm mini-jack. 
 

Fitting and Comfort

 
Like the Signature Pros, the Signature DJ are true circumaurals. Since there's so many similarities to the Signature Pros, I found the isolation to be extremely comparable (that is - good isolation). Similarly the clamping pressure seems to be the same (which is strong clamping pressure). I feel I can't really wear these headphones for more than 2-3 hrs at a time.
 
 

 

 
The headband and earpads seem to be the same thickness too.
 

The weight of both the headphones are the same. I guess the weight of the larger driver is negligible.
 

Differences To The Signature Pro

Here's where the Signature DJ's start to differ from the Signature Pro. Ultrasone has managed to fit in a 50mm driver into a cup housing the same size as the Signature Pro (which is a 40mm driver). For that the S-Logic has shape and size has to change.
 

 
Below is a comparison of the S-Logic between the two. The left being the Signature Pro, whilst the right is the Signature DJ.
 

 

How Does It Sound?

Having enjoyed the Ultrasone Edition 8 Limited Edition for 9 months, I sold it to buy the Signature Pros which I felt were sonically more to my liking. However I never did get around to buying them. As such when the Signature DJ's came out, I was very keen on giving it a listen, and to my ears, they don't disappoint.
 
Sadly the Signature Pros loaned to me seemed to sound different from some of the other Signature Pros, as such I wasn't able to do a direct comparison between the two. But from memory at a very very high level, the Signature Pros seem to have a more forward mids than the Signature DJ's.
 
I was on the other hand able to compare the Signature DJs to the V-Moda M-100 which I recently gained possession of and with the Fostex TH-900 which I bought a few months back. And yes I am fully aware that the Signature DJs are 3.38x the cost of the M-100s, and the TH-900s are almost 2x of the Signature DJ's.
 

Signature Summary

 
To my ears, the Signature DJ has the U-shaped signature reminiscent to quite a few of the headphones released in the 3rd quarter of 2012 - but each to varying degrees. The first and foremost impression I get of the Signature DJ is its ability to deliver a crystal clear and clean presentation. As with other Ultrasones, with the S-Logic plays its part well in these headphones too.
 
As the name implies being a DJ headphone, bass is one of the primary features of this headphone. It reaches deeper than the Signature Pro but manages to control it tightly. There is no boominess, not bleeding into the mids. In addition, like the Signature Pro, there's a nice reverberating texture to the rendering of the bass. Interestingly though, despite the bass reaching in deep, it's not as deep as the M-100. It almost seems like a conservative deep bass.
 
I'd describe the mids to be recessed, however the clean and clarity of the overall signature, I personally don't find the recessed mids to be an issue for my tastes. Only some songs I find the Signature DJs mids don't work well with (e.g. Kenny Loggins' Top Gun - but I'm very sure Ultrasone didn't have that soundtrack in mind when they developed the Signature DJ ). On the other hand, the M-100s which I personally felt also had its mids pulled back somewhat (but not recessed like the Signature DJs) weren't as clear. Vocals on that headphone sound like the vocalist has his/her mouth right over the microphone. Whereas the Signature DJ's mids just deliver the voice more cleanly. The TH-900 on the other hand does have more forward mids than either of those but deliver cleanly.
 
The trebles on the Signature DJ are forward, and again, crystal clear. But there's no sibilant (however I may add possibly borderline...anymore and it would be sibilant). The trebles are smooth too unlike the Edition 8s which had a reputation of being harsh. There's also a sense of airiness to the treble that, to my ears, is well received.
 

S-Logic, Soundstage, and Imaging

 
To me there's something special about S-Logic. At least for my ears they work and they work well with the Ultrasone headphones. The Signature DJs are no exception. When I listen to jazz on this (yes I know, they're DJ headphones), I feel like I'm in the band with the music and instruments around me. Along with the soundstage and imaging, I feel how wide and deep the stage is. This is naturally more apparent for certain genre that employs acoustic instruments, rather than modern music with electronically produced sounds (I'm not limiting this to electronica). As such the reference of listening to jazz earlier. With modern music, I don't feel there's any congestion in the presentation too.
 
At least for my music preferences and these pair of headphones, this is another big feature of the Ultrasone Signature series. In all honesty though, I haven't really worked out in my mind how this feature plays a part in a DJ scene - where these headphones are intended to be used.
 
The M-100s on the other hand, despite having a wide soundstage and decent imaging, isn't as wide, and presents the music in front of you. With the TH-900s too, I feel the music is presented in front of me, however has a vast soundstage and great depth image.
 
 

[Added: 19th Nov '12] In Comparison To Its Signature Pro Older Brother

 
Earlier I mentioned of the 1st demo Signature Pro didn't sound correct especially compared to the Signature Pros in the shops. I went back to the distributor and told them of my findings and they pulled out 2 other Signature Pros for me. One with an older serial number (in the early 100's, and another in the high 400's - whereas the first demo I had was in the low 500's. All 3 sounded different and they didn't appear to be batch ro serial grouping related. The 500's sounded closer to the low 100s whilst the best of the 3 was the high 400's. As such I swapped the initial 500's demo for the low 400's.
 
Doing a comparison between the two Signature DJ and Signature Pro, as DigitalFreak replied in the Signature DJ thread that the the DJs hit the bass with a bigger slam than the Signature Pro. That is to be expected as these days, the trend of DJ headphones seem to be hard hitting bass.
 
I feel the mids to be somewhat more recessed than the(se) Signature Pros - more specifically the lower end of of the mids. Whilst the higher end of the mids seem to be somewhat comparable.
 
As for the trebles I feel they both are about on par on how forward they are. Now on initial listening the Signature DJs seem to have more forward mids however I feel that this is more merely relative to the recessed low mids and in other soundstage and instrument separation factors.
 
During my A/B-ing (and I'm still doing it now) with the two Pros and DJ, it wasn't the bass difference that I noticed first but I feel soundstage. Again, I don't know if it's my particular unit of Signature Pro or if it's consistent across all Signature Pros, but they feel congested in comparison to the Signature DJ. On the DJ, the instruments and vocals feel they have more room to breath and as such instrument separation also is better to my ears. Furthermore, since they are clearer separated, I feel that I can hear more details. As such back to the treble difference, I think that initial impressions that the DJ's feel more forward is actually isn't the case. I feel the congestion tends to "hide" the trebles of the Pro.
 
Having my wife as a 2nd pair of ears, for the kinds of music we listen to we prefer the Signature DJ over these pair of Signature Pros. So far the only exception to this is with classical. The Signature Pro does sound more natural and airy whereas the DJ has a more "Hi-Fi" kind of sound.
              

Conclusion

As a pair of headphones for the audiophile consumer, along with it's Signature Pro brother, I feel both of these are a great introduction to high end quality sound. It's not just a matter of its frequency response signature but the little details such as texture rendering, good quality imaging, airiness, etc. that start to show - of which the other higher ended headphones carry on and emphasise.
 
To me the Signature DJs present such a classy sound that I actually wonder where it plays in the DJ scene. It's almost too classy for the average nightclub scene and am more inclined to think thats sound would suit more in a high end classy nightclub or lounge rather than just standard one down the street. For consumers seeking quality sound, on the other hand, these should impress.

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).

Ortofon Japan and MHd-Q7 Introduction

 
Aside from importing and distributing Ortofon's global products such as turntable needles, their Japan office also makes some local Japan-only products such as earphones and amplifiers. Ortofon Japan produced their Hd-Q7 a few years ago and was already reviewed here.
 
Around early 2012, I was privy to the development of a portable amp Ortofon Japan. But for about 6 months I hadn't heard of any further progress form it until the e-earphone event in mid October where I met my Ortofon contact who then told me that he will ship me the MHd-Q7 for a review.
 
 

 

Physical Design and Signature the MHd-Q7

 
In a current portable amp market these days, there seems to be a trend to make more powerful amps that can drive high impedance headphones. Raw power seems to be requirement to get some attention and to "fit into the club".
 
Although Ortofon is a new participant to the portable audio bandwagon with this new portable amp, they have opted to stick to their philosophy of an analogue sounding signature that focuses on subtleties rather than just raw grunt power. As such this amp has a somewhat hint of a tube-ish taste.
 
As with it's older bigger desktop amp brother, the Hd-Q7, this small portable amp was designed with very stylish and clean-cut lines. It's very simple yet very classy. Although not a very practical shape, it's definitely attractive.
 

Functionality

 
This amp weighs at 150g, measuring 82mm (from the knob to the back), 67mm wide, & 27mm thick. It charges via a miniUSB at the back and a full charge leaves the MHd-Q7 running for approx 22 hours. The input and output 3.5mm jacks are in the front next to two leds (green for power on/off, and red for battery level low). The volume knob acts as a power on/off too.
 
There was a little weirdness to the circuitry of the amp that when it charges, it will automatically stop charging when it's fully charged. It doesn't trickle charge. So during simultaneous charging and operation, you may find that even though the miniUSB is plugged in, the amp may run out of charge after 22 hrs. You'll need to swtich off/on disconnect/reconnect the miniUSB to charge it again. I've mentioned this to the maker and although they can't make anymore circuitry changes, they've updated their manual to reflect this.
 
The MHd-Q7 & JDS Labs ODAC combo :-
 

 

 
As with the Hd-Q7, the volume knob is firm yet smooth. No channel imbalance was noticed at -any- setting. There's no sense of scratchiness nor static or noise during the volume knob operation. I wonder why other makers can't do this.
 
The MHd-Q7 is not a powerful amp. It will drive IEMs and low impedance headphones really well but not designed for high impedance headphones like Sennheiser HD800's, Hifiman HE-series, nor Audeze LCD-series. However headphones like the Fostex TH-900s, and naturally its own IEMs eQ-5 & eQ-7 are fine.
 
Update [30th April 2013]: The output impedance of this headphone amp is 0.38ohm. This further makes it suitable for the low impedance ear/headphones.
 

How Does It Sound?

 
If Ortofon Japan has aimed for a really clean sound that suited for classical and jazz, I'd say that they've done it and very well at it if I may add. The MHd-Q7 maintains very analogue almost tube-ish sound. It's extremely transparent, clear, and has a very airy presentation. It's bass has a nice warm touch to it. The midrange and vocals are also extremely warm and intimate.
 
Most of all it does a brilliant job of creating a deep 3D imaging and wide soundstage presentation. I must say that in single ended mode, for most of the genre I listen to, I actually lean more towards the MHd-Q7 over the ALO Rx Mk3.
 
 

 

Buena Vista Social Club

 
Listening to the Chan Chan track the MHd-Q7 sounds richer than the ALO Rx Mk3. It edges out in clarity, transparency and staging. The Rx Mk3 actually sounds flat-ish and un-engaging by comparison. Meanwhile the RSA SR-71b has never really been my favourite amp and remains the same in single ended mode. The SR-71b sounds murky by comparison.
 
The MHd-Q7 has a nice warm midbass and highly involving vocals whilst the Rx Mk3 has a deeper sub bass but sounds thin in the midbass and mids by comparison. The highs on the MHd-Q7 also sound more airy with clarity and detail by comparison. But probably the combination of the 3D imaging depth, and wide soundstage that grabs my attention. It has a more immersive impression than the Rx Mk3.
 
Similarly with the El Cuarto de Tula track, the MHd-Q7 sounds more immersive and engaging. Due to the wide soundstage, the instrument separation sounds more distintive yet coherent.
 

Lana Del Rey's Born to Die

 
On listening to strong vocals like Lana Del Rey's Video Games, the 3D depth difference is somewhat less but still edges out to the MHd-Q7 than the Rx Mk3. Again, Lana Del Rey's voice is filled with bloom and extremely immersive.
 

Cher Lloyd's Stick + Stones

 
For a change, I tried something modern like Cher Lloyd's Want U Back. For fast songs such as this (and the rest of Cher Lloyd's album), the MHd-Q7's tube-ish signature starts to show its weaknesses. The Rx Mk3 responds faster whilst the MHd-Q7 seems to feel laggy.
 

Summary

 
As such the MHd-Q7, as the makers intended, is not a general purpose amp but catered really for those who like classical, jazz, and slow deep vocals. I do enjoy my Vivaldi collection, 50's/60's West Coast Jazz, Bossnova, and some country vocals such as Anne Murray with this amp.
 
On the other hand, as previously mentioned, more modern genre like hip hop, electronic, and dance the MHd-Q7 isn't suitable for such genre.
 
Although the MHd-Q7 has a rather awkward shape for most of the DAC/Amps out, it does work out with some combinations. The JDS Lab's ODAC was already shown above to work quite well and even the new iRiver AK100 seems to match pretty well with the MHd-Q7; resulting in a more cube stack.
 
 

 
Alternatively just using it with an iDevice has also been quite rewarding :-
 
 

 

 
This amp is quickly becoming my default amp to throw into my satchel. It works well with most of my DACs and earphones I have and most importantly for the easy going genre that I listen to most of the time.

 
Analog Squared Paper is small business run by Kageyuki Shikada. He makes each one of these amps by hand and they're effectively made to order. I won't belabour the specs and details of this amp as ianmedium has done a wonderful job at covering all of that in the Analog Squared Paper thread and in his review of this product. But I'll get into what this amp has done for me.
 
Shikada-san was extremely generous to loan me the TU-05b and TUR-06 for reviewing and I'm very thankful to him for such an opportunity.

Getting Straight Into The Sound

 
I'll admit from the start that I'm a noob when it comes to tube amps at the time of writing this review. I've only purchase my first headphone tube amp (Zana Deux) beginning of May 2013, and I've borrowed my friend's Shindo Labs Corton Charlemagne for my home speakers during the same duration. Prior to that, I've dabbled a little with the Woo Audio WA7 and an occasional demo of the portable ALO Audio Continental series, as well as Fostex HP-V1.
 
Although those portable tube amps were nice, the TU-05b really is in a league of its own and borders on being a desktop tube amp instead. It delivers a full sound that gives a large sense of space in terms of soundstage and imaging. The amp was pre-tuned to low/mid gain and I didn't need to turn up the volume to get that fullness and richness of the sound. Another immediately notable quality is the smoothness in rendering that's typical of a high end quality tube amp that's often read about. This tube amp reinforced what I've always read about the infamous "tube signature".
 
In terms of its frequency response, my particular TU-05b capped at around 30Hz however the maker assures me that with some modification the sub bass can extend lower. However, even for what it can deliver at 30Hz is extremely pleasing with the fullness and richness of it's bass presentation. There's this purr to the bass which almost gives it a life of its own. The quality continues to extend to the midrange and vocals especially are, again, rendered smoothly with an analogue-like texture. I've read a lot about how some amps can sound "digital", by listening to the TU-05b, I can understand the contrast much better. The treble continues with it's smoothness and airy highs without any sibilance. It's probably one of the clearest trebles I've heard in a portable/transportable (irrespective of OpAmp or tubes).
 

 

Practicality and Use

 
This amp though is by no means a practical amp. It's about 1kg, and at least for me, probably not so easy to walk around with. However if I'm going specifically to sit down at a coffee shop for an hour or two, that could be a case scenario of practical use. In Tokyo where "anything goes" no one would probably care if one had something like this on the table but in other countries, it may catch a stare or two. It's definitely quite a funky looking amp which probably screams out a certain level of geekiness but also style (to my mind anyway ).
 
I did have a problem with the TU-05b and I need to deeply apologise Shikada-san for my clumsiness. In taking pictures, I removed the PostIt labels from the ports. I accidentally attempted to plug the headphone cable into the charging socket as I wasn't paying attention and inadvertently short circuited the TU-05b. Of course I'd offer to pay for the damage I've done to it but it also got me thinking of how the charging port could be improved to prevent idiots like me doing such a thing again. I must say that I've never done such a thing before to other devices (well most other devices are USB charging) but looking at something like the CLAS -dB, Rx Mk3, or DX100's round charging socket, it's not so easy to short circuit the batteries for those as at least one of the two connection points are more recessed. I think this is one area that could be room for improvement. Again, most people probably aren't as clumsy as me but further prevention couldn't hurt.
 

Conclusion

 
To my mind and my ears, this amp will not fail to impress and for the kind of sound it's able to deliver, and will continue to satisfy for a long time. As such, I personally see this amp to be a worthy investment. In addition, if one wants to play with the sound for a little variety, this amp is very open to tube rolling. ianmedium has done quite a lot that which he's shared in the thread. This amp will not bore.
 
TUR-06b on the left (to be reviewed later), TU-05b on the right

 
The TUR-06 is the smaller brother of the TU-05b reviewed here. This hybrid tube amp was added to the offerings of Analog Squared Paper earlier this year around late January 2013. The differences between the TUR-06 and the TU-05b are :-
 

1. Hybrid Tube/Transistor Amp
2. 482g (vs 1kg for the TU-05b)
3. 2x1U4 (1T4)
4. estimated price to be USD$600 vs $1070 for the TU-05b

 
The TUR-06 is actually more practical due to its size by comparison to it's larger brother.
 

 

Sound Signature

 
As mentioned in my TU-05b review, I have had little experience with tube amps (portable, desktop, or speaker) until this month. My thoughts about the sound signature of the TUR-06 is compared pretty much directly with it's bigger brother. As I've not owned any portable tube amps before, I can't comment on how it sounds in comparison to, say, the likes of the ALO Continental series.
 
As with the TU-05b, I found the TUR-06 to really deliver a very full sound that's almost comparable to a desktop level amp. Although it's a hybrid amp, it still has a distinct tube-like signature to its presentation. The trebles extend very nicely and are smooth and airy with exquisite detail but no hint of sibilance whatsoever. Whilst the midrange, like the TU-05b, presents robust fullness especially in vocals. Listening to Jazz vocals from the "Best Audiophile Voices" series of CDs, I feel the artists are singing from the bottom of their lungs rather than just from their throat.
 
It's the sub-bass level of where the TUR-06 is different from the TU-05b. The TUR-06 reaches much deeper with a nice classy rumble that's very nicely textured in its rendition. Upon hearing it, the Vorzuge AmpDuo with it's Bass Boost lever flicked on came to mind as a comparison. The difference is that the TUR-06 still maintains the tube-like signature in its presentation of the bass with that analogue purr.
 
Although the soundstage and imaging of the TUR-06 is still wide (probably wider than some of the other solid state portable amps I've heard and owned), it's a wee-bit smaller than it's bigger brother. However all is easily forgotten just with the rest of the quality presentation the TUR-06 is able to deliver.
 

Conclusion

 
Again, I have to highly praise this amp. Although it's less than 1/2 the weight of it's bigger brother and it's hybrid tube amp as opposed to a Class A it's able to deliver most of what the TU-05b can and areas such as the bass, could deliver more. If one isn't concerned about it's size, SQ-wise I personally feel it'll be one of the most satisfying amps amongst it's peers (price-wise). Of the other amps I've in my possession, and for my preferences in SQ, I feel this delivers more than what my current portables can and is just midway between what my desktop tube amp (Zana Deux) can deliver. I wouldn't have any hesitation in recommending someone who wants an introduction to (trans)portable tube amps to at least give this product a listen.
 

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 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.

[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

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

 

The Rhapsodio RDB+ 2v1 (formerly known as RDP+ v2) is the baby brother of the RDB+ v1. It's still a 2xBA & 1xDD but instead of a 10mm driver that the older brother has, it sports an 8mm driver instead. As such the overall shell of the RDB+ 2v1 is smaller. In addition, the sound of the RDB+ 2v1 isn't necessarily a successor of the RDB+ v1. Talking to the makers, the RDB+ 2v1 is meant to have a more accurate sound signature, a goal of which I feel they have achieved.
 

[size=1.5em] Design & Ergonomics[/size]

As can be seen, this isn't a very big IEM. Used with Ortofon tips, it fits snugly and comfortably in my ears and don't protrude out that much. Despite movement from walking or head motion, the IEM sits in place in the ear. Unlike the RDB+ v1, the bass port is placed next to the cable socket instead. At least for my ears, the port doesn't get blocked. However the IEM is prone to wind noise especially in a wind tunnel situation (subway exits, etc.). On normal days though, isolation is decent. I can hear external ambient noise however are easily ignored and not distracting when music starts playing.
 

The construction material is the same as other IEMs and seem durable although it seems more recently it's been revised with an even more robust shell. Note also the goove in the nozzle seems to hold the tips reasonably well. Having said that, My Ortofon tip has fallen off twice early on but haven't fallen out recently.

[size=1.5em]  [/size]

[size=1.5em] Sensitivity[/size]

The RDB+ 2v1 is an easy-to-drive IEM which is easily driven by an iPhone or other mobile device. It doesn't require an external amp, however one still can be used to suit the listener's signature preferences. Although not particularly sensitive to hiss, it is sensitive to poorly mastered recordings however not necessarily sensitive especially with live recordings. However, I've not encountered any issues with poorly ripped tracks.

[size=1.5em]  [/size]

[size=1.5em] Sound Signature[/size]

Tests were all done with the Ortofon tips. Overall, as mentioned in the introduction, I find these IEMs to fulfill it's designers' objectives. The signature is almost somewhat neutral. I'd venture to say that, as per the maker, mostly accurate too. The reason why I mentioned mostly is that occasionally, I find the upper bass/lower mids to be just a tad lacking but not by much. Usually the other positive features of the signature distracts from noticing that lacking point.

[size=1.17em]  [/size]

[size=1.17em] Treble[/size]

I never realised until recently that I'm particularly sensitive to bright trebles. This is coming from someone who used to enjoy the Edition 8's and owned one for 9 months! As such with the RDB+ 2v1, I find the trebles to be sitting on the fence really depending on how the wind blows. Given the right conditions (cable, amp, DAC), it has a very airy and smooth presentation - one of the highlights of the IEM in fact. However with a bright amp + pure silver cables + bright musical tracks, then the trebles could sound harsh. However I don't actually encounter that latter combination that much which means most of the time I'm actually enjoying the airy trebles quite a bit. I also suspect that the mids have a big part at play to the relative perception of the trebles (which is why I may not find the trebles sibilant most of the time).

[size=1.17em]  [/size]

[size=1.17em] Midrange[/size]

To my ears the mids are also quite flat except for the lower end where I personally feel it takes a little bit of a dip but not by much. In fact due to the rest of the frequency and the airy trebles, I actually don't notice it most of the time. Vocals sound detailed yet rich and musical. In fact vocal tracks seem to shine with this IEM's signature. Listening to the Norah Jones' Come Away With Me album, there's a lush richness in her voice with an intimate presentation. Listening to Taylor Swift's "Ours" and vocals are great whilst guitars to be quite crystal clear. Similarly with A1's When I'm Missing You, the vocals & guitar at the introduction is quite musical. With Adele's 21 album (possibly more particularly to the "Set Fire To The Rain" track, I personally could do with a little more upper bass/lower mids emphasis. However it's ever so slight that the other positive features of the signature seem to distract me from noticing this little dip.

[size=1.17em]  [/size]

[size=1.17em] Bass[/size]

The bass is an area where I think most listeners will perceive this IEM to be lacking. However what I find rather interesting about the bass is that most of the times when it's truly called for it's there, but's just not forwardly present all the time. Back to the Taylor Swift's track, the bass there fills nicely without being overpowering. However with the A1 track, although the bass is tight, the sub-bass does feel somewhat lacking, therefore lacking the fun-factor too.

[size=1.17em]  [/size]

[size=1.17em] Soundstage and Imaging[/size]

The soundstage is decent. These days with the likes of FitEar MH335DW or Tralucent 1Plus2 with their supermassive soundstage, the average IEM's pale by comparison. Having said that, it doesn't sound congested by my standards at least. But not exactly super vast either. I feel it performs well amongst its peers. The imaging on the other hand is another forte of the RDB+ 2v1. This is more prevalent with album's such as "This is Chris Botti" with the live recordings.

[size=1.17em]  [/size]

[size=1.17em] Airy Presentation, Timbre, & Speed Response[/size]

I'm probably repeating the airy presentation again however this is one of the great features in addition to timbre that stick to my mind. String instruments such as violins or acoustic guitars, and percussions just sound so natural with this IEM. I feel they are presented crystal clear and accurate. The response of the IEM also sounds quite fast. Listening to Cher Lloyd's Sticks + Stones album, the tracks don't sound slow at all and keep up pretty well.

[size=1.5em]  [/size]

[size=1.5em] Summary[/size]

Overall to my ears, these IEMs are as what the maker has told me - accurate. To me they also sound mostly neutral of which I'd love to compare them to the UERM one day. They don't have a warm signature, nor are these bassy or hi-fi fun sounding IEMs and if a prospective buyer is looking for those kinds of signature, I'd have to politely recommend looking elsewhere. However if one is looking for a mostly neutral IEM, to my ears they're closer towards being the "monitor" styled signatures - at least tonally. Finally but not least for the price I paid, they are extremely great value for money.