A few weeks ago, I met a very nice gentleman who was a distributor of this product. I had never heard of PSB let alone the M4U 2 and I was given the opportunity to demo this product. A very big thanks to John of Lenbrook Asia for this opportunity.
 


 
On The Head
 
Isolation - average. Maybe similar to the LP2  for my sized head. The Ed8s & Signature Pros isolate more. Whilst the clamping force though somewhat akin to the Ed8s & Signature Pros. It's weight on the head though is heavier than the aforementioned headphones.
 
The size of the earcups are just a tad small for my ears despite being circumaural. As such overall comfort-wise I'd probably feel its comfort to be less suitable for my head-size. But it may be more suitable for others with (smaller?) heads & ears.
 
Here's a picture showing the depth of the earpads.
 

 
Accessories
 
Absolute top knotch! Comes with 1/8"->1/4" plugs, airline converter jacks (very useful!), hard case, different cables (with phone capability), extra earpads, cleaning cloth, etc.
 
Features
 
Aside from the noise cancellation, it has an active & passive mode too (where passive mode can be used when the 2xAA battery drains). It also has dual jacks, one on each side of the earcup giving you flexibility which side you prefer your cable to fall on. I continually switched sockets on the earcups on the planes depending on which arm rest had the socket.
 


 
The cables don't tangle which is great, but they do have somewhat of a memory effect on how they were coil-stored. They're not microphonic though which is great.
 
The hinge also appears to be quite strong.
 


 
So how does it sound?
 
In Passive Mode

1. personally, these didn't sparkle for me - but then again I've been coming from Fostex TH900's, FitEar To Go!334, Unique Melody Merlin's, etc. Having said that, passive mode appears to be a bonus feature anyway, not its main selling factor - its ability for continued use even after the batteries are drained. My understanding is other NC/Active headphones stop dead when the batteries are dead - not good for a long overhaul flight.
2. although the SQ didn't sparkle for me, I still found acceptable detail in this mode.  Bass extension is decent but not deep. By comparison. The TH900 & V-Moda range extends deeper. They're not warm (nor bright for that matter) by any means.

 
In Active Mode

1. this is where the M4U 2 shines. I have to admit, I've always had a prejudice against double-amping but in this design, it seems to work quite well.
2. just switching on active mode, the detail jumps up, bass extensions increase, & overall sounds quite dynamic.
3. the trebles on the other hand didn't seem to extend further however, feels more brought forward.
4. the soundstage perceives to be larger in active mode initially but flicking back & forth, at least to my ears, they're really the same. Its more the improvements in the aforementioned aspects seem to make one think the soundstage increases too.
5. I seem to detect a hiss though (noise floor) when in active mode is enabled.

 
Noise Cancellation Activated

1. This is another selling feature of these headphones. Especially with the amount of accessories that come with these headphones, (at least to me) it tends to target more for the traveller.
2. the NC does (as with other NC headphones) cut out a certain range of frequencies so SQ is affected. Having said that, when I'm on a plane though, I don't mind so much...better than the low hum reverberating throughout the cabin.
3. again as with most other NC headphones, it does create a "suction" feeling the ears, but by no means uncomfortable.
4. on the plane, I actually used the NC feature quite a bit for watching in-flight movies more than for listening to music. So actually it's quite well suited for travel if it's the intent of the manufacturer to target travellers.

 

 

 
The Hd-Q7 are Ortofon's desktop amp powered by a 16V power pack. It takes in a switchable single ended 3.5mm or L/R RCA unbalanced input at the back and provides 6.3mm or 3.5mm unbalanced output. The volume knob is probably the most prominent feature at the top. Dialling the volume knob is extremely smooth yet firm. There's no chance of accidentally turning the volume up or down. Since it's large, it's easy to be precise.
 

 
 
The overall construction is very solid and presentation is simple and with very clean lines. Definitely an elegant classy looking amp, especially next to a MacBook Pro or MacBook Air.
 

 
The Hd-Q7's SQ signature seems to be reminiscent of a higher ended amp with very smooth basses neutral basses, transparent mids and clear/detailed highs without sounding harsh. It's very suited for Jazz, classical, and strong vocals, and probably less so for electronic music or hip-hop. But if you like music with a lot of acoustic instruments, and vocals, the Hd-Q7 delivers very nicely.
 

 
My setup is my iMac, Audirvana+, Benchmark DAC1 Pre, unbalanced fed to the Hd-Q7, and the Fostex TH900 as the headphones.
 
In this configuration, contrary to other reviews here in Head-Fi, I found the soundstage to be quite decent. It's ability and accuracy in separating instruments are amazing. Very well executed timbre. 
 
The amp's delivers quite a bit of detail that it's not forgiving to bad recordings. In that way it's actually quite an analytical amp. However having said that, it's not cold nor uninvolving. The highs, despite being crisp and transparent still sound very smooth, and in some tracks I find that there's almost an added dimension to the trebles.
 
I've further read in other reviews of the Hd-Q7 to be U-shaped. I personally find it's mids to be quite neutral so at least for me, it's not very U-shaped. Vocals are very smoothly textured along with a very natural bass. In some vocal tracks, the vocalist sounds he/she is singing more from deep within his/her lungs rather than just simply "singing". As a listener I find there's more emotion due to the way the amp delivers it's mids and basses more naturally.
 
The Hd-Q7 actually sounds much cleaner and clearer than the headphone out of my Benchmark DAC1 Pre, which was rather unexpected. Ortofon definitely managed to deliver an unassumingly high performance amp in a compact package that's decently priced.

 
This review will have a lot of references to the e-Q5 which will be explained later.
 
As with the e-Q5, the e-Q7 is also an easy-to-drive low impedance single balanced armature designed by Ortofon. In fact it's the same balanced armature as the e-Q5. The main difference between the e-Q5 and the e-Q7 is the pure silver plated cables as opposed to e-Q5's OFC cables.
 
The e-Q5 review can be found here :-
 
http://www.head-fi.org/products/ortofon-e-q5/reviews/6953
 
Again, like the e-Q5, the presentation and the packaging of the e-Q7 is impressive. It comes in a box, and a carry case in addition to the extra flanges, filters and tip cleaner.


 
A close up of the case :-
 

 
The big difference in the cables aren't only with it's construction but also the way it's cloth-material wrapped. The cables are as such somewhat less tangle-free but somewhat introduce microphonic vibrations.
 
The cables also come down perpendicular making it easy to wrap around the ear if desired with less stress on the joints. Strangely though, the isolation on the e-Q7 seems to be tad less than the e-Q5 and possibly the extended length appears to be add weight to the ends pulling the earphone down a tad. I've not tried different flanges to see if it improves isolation.
 

 
Since the balanced armature is the same as the e-Q5, a lot of my impressions are in comparison to the e-Q5 - to see the difference in SQ between the OFC cables vs pure silver plated cables.
 
Acoustic instruments sound more refined, controlled, & clearer than the e-Q5. Somewhat with more finesse, detailed & less mid-forward. There is still the mid hump, but its a tad pulled back in comparison to the e-Q5. The mids also sound a little more detailed, and overall, I'd say the eQ-7 is a tad more balanced & a little more neutral than the e-Q5. 
 
The trebles seem a little bit more airy, detailed & can be somewhat revealing to tiny details in recording, more so than the e-Q5.
 
The soundstage is also slightly larger than the e-Q5 but depth-wise is the same. It maintains the airy tube-like presentation of the e-Q5. The e-Q7 also adds a little more depth to the dimension. I'd also rate the a better timbre than the e-Q5.
 
As with the e-Q5, these earphones deliver a lot for it's online street price of Y21,400 (USD$270). Whether the e-Q7 is worth the extra USD$95 over the e-Q5, that's a more difficult question. Purely in terms of SQ, it's harder to justify. However the e-Q7 does provide a nice box for storage and carrying case for transporting around; in addition to the SQ improvement over the e-Q5.
 

 
The Ortofon e-Q5 is an easy-to-drive low impedance single balanced armature driver designed by Ortofon themselves. It uses OFC cables and the shells are aluminium CNC-ed.
 
As with most Japanese products, presentation is important and the e-Q5 doesn't disappoint. It comes in a nice cylindrical can with a multitude of accessories - tip cleaner, flanges/tips of various sizes, and filter replacements too.
 

 
The e-Q5s retail approx Y13,800 (USD$175) online, and probably a tad more in a bricks 'n mortar shop. For that price though, its provides a very nice, tube-like signature. The earphones tend to lean more towards a mid/treble forward and the trebles are nicely extended with detail but doesn't sound harsh or sibilant. Despite being somewhat tad mid/treble forward, they aren't as forward as the Shures SE535 for example.
 
The bass on the other hand seem to have slightly less dimension and less detail but more musical. However Ortofon has managed to keep the bass tight and neutral. These are not bass heavy earphones.
 
As for the other aspects of its signature, it's timbre and instrument separation are also very impressive particularly for acoustic instruments - a very airy presentation. The soundstage is also quite decent.
 
 

 
 
Talking to the makers, the target genre is more jazz/classical and it's met that goal. Listening to West Coast Jazz like Gerry Mulligan, & Paul Desmond, their (alto) sax sound very smooth and involving.
 
For some early 80's music with electronic (e.g. keyboard)  instruments, that are naturally treble focused, the earphones could sound a little more fatiguing but genres such as acoustic of vocal jazz, & classical, they reveal the strengths of these earphones.
 
As for the fit of the e-Q5, they do fit in snugly into ears and the cable can be looped around the ear if desired - however I don't know what kind of stress that will put on the cable since it'll be bent perpendicular to the aluminium housing. It's isolation is also decent (but I've not tried all their flanges).
 
Overall, for the price, one is definitely great workmanship with good quality sound. I'd definitely wouldn't hesitate recommending these earphones or it's bigger brother, the e-Q7 especially to a jazz enthusiast.
 

 

 
Go-DAP 4.0 OpAmp Comparison Review
 
Brief History
For the past few weeks I've had a couple of Go-DAP 4.0s on loan for a review. Some of you may know that in the past 6-7 months I've had bought a couple of Go-DAPs, upgraded them, then got rid of one. I started off with the Muses 8820E first back in early October and very soon after the BurrBrown OPA2134. Then VentureCraft announced they were providing upgrades to the OpAmps offering 3 versions, OP-275, AD8397, and OPA-2604. I upgraded one Go-DAP to the OP-275, and another to the AD8397.
 
Since then, VentureCraft has offered another OpAmp, not as an upgrade but as it's own Unit 4.0 - the OPA1612.
 
I kept my AD8397, sold the OP-275 to a friend and for the past few months the Go-DAP 4.0 AD8397 has been my favourite portable DAP.
 
Current Go-DAP Comparisons
 
I've talked about my AD8397 in the past in some Go-DAP threads so I won't be talking about this OpAmp. However I have managed to secure the original Muses 8820 & the OPA1612 on loan from VentureCraft and this review is specifically about these two models.
 
Aside from the aforementioned Go-DAPs, my tests involve using the Ultrasone Edition 8's , Unique Melody Merlin's, and V-Moda M-80's. My audio files are a mixture of 256k AAC, 320k AAC, ALAC, and FLAC (via FLACPlayer). My tracks used are Phantom of the Opera, Gerry Mulligan's Night Lights, Paul Desmond's Bossa Antigua, Black Eyed Peas' E.N.D., & Michael Buble's Call Me Irresponsible.
 
 
Note that all the Unit 4.0 Go-DAPs use the AKM AK4353 DAC so the comparison is primarily on the OpAmp.
 
 
In general, if one is looking for a completely integrated DAC/Amp to the iPhone 4S, in my humble opinion, nothing beats the Go-DAP. I know many Head-fiers have concerns that the integrated iPhone 4(S) jacket is limiting especially Apple comes up with new iPhone models annually. However if most people buy the iPhones on contract, usually the contract is 2 years so one could get a 2 yrs life out of the Go-DAP. In addition, one could always buy a iPod extended cable and hook up any iDevice to the Go-DAP.
 




 
Here are the notes I've written up when comparingthe OPA1612 with the Muses 8820E

1. Probably the most prominent difference between the two is the 1612 seem to have more depth and more full bodied (apologies if I'm using wine jargon in my comparisons here)
2. The 1612 also lean towards a more 3-dimensional soundstage over the 8820E. That's not to say that the 8820E doesn't have much soundstage as it's reasonably wide however the 1612 seems to add depth to the width. The 8820E seems more "flat".
3. Across the frequency range, the 1612 seems to have more impact. It's not necessarily "in your face" but whether it's primary vocals, or instruments seem to have more distinction.
4. Along with the impact (and probably the cause of the impact) is the 1612 is somewhat more detailed and clear
5. Both the 1612 and the 8820E have a wide soundstage however the 1612 has a slight edge over the 8820E.
6. The 1612 also has (ever so slightly) an edge over the 8820 in terms of treble extension. At times the 1612 could sound more "bright" and for headphones like the Ultrasone Edition 8's, one may find it fatiguing. The 8820 may be better for such headphones for extended play.
7. The 1612's mid bass seems seems more forward too than the 8820. In terms of bass extension though, I think both are the same. At least to me they are full enough with the Merlins and with the M-80's.

 
Overall, I feel that the 8820E is fine for extended listening to music and seems suited across all genre. Whereas the 1612, I find myself immersed into the music.
 
Other Aspects of the Go-DAP
 

1. I found the gain settings on the Muses 8820E to have a bigger difference (between low and high) than the OPA1612.
2. The 1580mAh battery charges a dead iPhone 4(s) up to about 54% before it kaputs. But very strangely the 2000mAh (the one that comes with the OPA1612) doesn't charge the iPhone 4(s) fully either. I got as high as 68% before the 2000mAh battery went flat. The charging is probably a little too quick...both cases of the 1580mAh and the 2000mAh, it drains in less than 1 hr. This is without using the Go-DAP for music.
3. The Go-DAP is reasonably pocketable...it is large however, it is integrated. Carrying something like the HP-P1, or CLAS+Amp is definitely less pocketable.
4. The brushed aluminium back scratches very easily. So one has to be very careful with it.
5. The Go-DAP can be used as a transport too with an optical out. I've chained up the Go-DAP to my Benchmark DAC1 Pre but to me it sounds flat in comparison to optical out from my iMac or iBasso DX100. Talking to the makers, the Go-DAP apparently up-samples from 44.1kHz to 48kHz and this is a side-effect of the up-sampling. I have not yet tried loading up a 48kHz ALAC/AAC to see if this flatness disappears since no up-sampling is required then. I'll try that later.

 
Go-DAP vs other iDevice DAC/Amps
 
I have actually owned the Fostex HP-P1, CLAS, Pico Slim, and RSA SR-71B. In my honest opinion, the Go-DAP is up there with the rest of them and in my personal opinion I'd lean towards the Go-DAP even for SQ alone. I feel it has a slight edge over both the HP-P1 and the CLAS in terms of detail and whichever OpAmp is chosen they seem to provide a decent amount of bass and treble extension.
 
NB: Based on memory from last year, the OP-275 on the other hand doesn't seem to have the same treble extension as the AD8397, or OPA1612.
 
As a complete integrated DAC/Amp package for the iPhone 4(s), the Go-DAP 4.0 is the only product I know. All others are either separate component attachments, or Amp-only integrated package (iFuzen for example).
 

 
Venturecraft does ship the basic Go-DAP 4.0 model overseas from their online site :-
 
http://venturecraft.jp/gadget_en/index.php
 
However if you're looking at the customised versions like the ones mentioned above, the  details are at the bottom of the home page and you'll need to mail VentureCraft on the customisations you require. They will have to give you a mail quote.