Reviews by jieranli
Disclaimer: This review is part of a North America review tour afforded to me by the manufacturer in exchange for my honest opinion, there's no incentive for me to write a good or bad review here.
Then again, nobody really gives horrible reviews unless the product is truly unredeemable. I think readers should take that into account weighing the scores.
A little about me
I'm not an engineer, let alone an acoustic engineer, so I can't formulate all my thoughts in an objectively scientific manner. I'm trained in social science, more precisely behavior economics. I tend to see a lot of human fallacies, so I realize my impressions, along with others', may also be under the influence of such fallacies.
My experience with audio gears started with headphones, and I was wowed by an entry-level Audezes coming from outside of the audiophile world in the early 2010s. Then my faith and expectations in the hobby got destroyed by the piercing sound of HD800 hooked to a Chord mojo. Then long story short, over the years I have eventually ventured into the far end of headphones and found my equilibrium at the Utopia with the legendary Cavalli LAu and the beautiful Italian Aqua La Scala 2. With that, I then went into the upgrade spree with speakers as well, with my most recent prized precession being Hegel H590 + Dynaudio Contour 60s. Fast forward to now, life is slowly creeping in, to interfere with my love for audio gears, I had to let the speaker systems go. I'm finally settled in IEMs because they are the most "life (wife) - friendly" options.
About my gears
That brings me to my testing gears. For source, I use either the MacBook Pro 2018, a desktop PC, or Innuous Zen mk3 music sever running a Roon Core. The benchmark dac/amp I have my trusty iBasso DX300 with amp module 12. As for the intermediary between an amp and my ears, I'm only using IEMs for this review. They are UM Mason Fusang, Final a8000, Leisurely Audio e16. To offer some perspectives for those who haven't heard these IEMs yet, I will try to rank them in a few areas of characteristics:
Overall cohesiveness and completeness: UM>Final>e16;
Details: e16>UM>Final;
Bass: e16>UM>Final;
Mid: UM>Final>e16;
Treble: UM>e16>Final;
I overall tend to reach for the UM buds more. Because they just sound correct and engaging in almost every song.
Build Quality
I think most will agree with me that the CMA15 is an extraordinarily well-made piece of gear. It feels smooth to touch, the weight is substantial for the size. The knobs and dial all scream quality. Some people knock the score down a bit because of the screws, but I feel they actually compliment the overall build with an authentic retro look. The size is perfect for a desktop system due to its shallow depth and thinness. The warm yellow indicator lights illuminate with the right amount of brightness. This is all I have to say about the build, it's awesome.
Sound Quality
I find everything to sound right with my small collection of IEMs. It sounds very similar to my iBasso in almost every way, and I'm not sure how I feel about this.
I had very high hope coming in, thinking a desktop solution will hand down have a leg up in every aspect, if not at least in a few areas. That didn't turn out. But on the other hand, I truly love my Ibasso dx300, it's a capable machine that never failed me, and probably considered one of the best DAPs out there. But with my prior desktop and speakers experience, I just have this belief (justified or not), that a similarly priced desktop Dac must be better than a DAP. I was a little baffled they were performing similarly sonic-wise. Most strangely, they even sound pretty much the same. I think I'd struggle to tell them apart in a blind test. You would think it's more strange when you realize they have very different DAC chip implementations - iBasso has 4 Cirrus Logic chips, and the CMA 15 has an ESS 9038 chip. iBasso is powered by a battery, and CMA15 is by a wall socket.
This all put me in a special reviewer limbo when I can barely tell my baseline and treatment apart. Especially that the audiophile terms are useless all by themselves. But, it's a responsible thing that I at least try to the best of my ability in describing how I experienced it. CMA 15 like the DX300, has an airy treble, albeit not what I'd describe as sweet nor seducing, it's just accurate. It has no obvious flaw, and doesn't bring any extra attention to peaky trebles. It feels as if the DAC/amp is taking a back seat to let the music and earphones express themselves fully without adding artifacts. Mid-range is quite nice with a full body to it that will bring any music to life. Again, no bloat, no additives, just neutral with a slight hint of warmness. Think of it as if the CMA is a neutral-sounding and neutral-looking orchestral hall with a warm AC turned on during a cool autumn evening, just letting the bands be the center of the performance. Bass is nice and without any noticeable flaw, but it's not the deepest I've heard. So, I guess that's something to improve on in the future. I hear no difference in soundstage between iBasso and CMA15. I have to note that headphones experience on these might be different from my IEM experience. I can't compare, because my Utopia had a broken driver recently.
Function
It's my conclusion that the defining hallmark of Chi-Fi is becoming the anti-fragility of functions. Try anything you can think of on it, and use it however you want. It will likely work because features they can add at a reasonable cost, the companies will do it for you without making a fuss about it. For example, my setup isn't a well-treaded pass making 100% emphasis on IEMs, but it worked as intended - no noise floor issue, drivers are not blown, and my eardrums still exist in their perfect state of happiness.
I also have to add the less talked about feature of low latency, latency is non-existent in my setup connecting any source I have. Gaming, movie, conferences on these are perfect. So once again, this is another life-friendly detail that shouldn't get overlooked even if Questyle doesn't advertise it. It probably owns this quality to the newest and the greatest XMOS X216 USB module they put in there. For comparison, my iBasso has a noticeable one-and-a-half-second gap.
Conclusion:
You should seriously consider this if you want to holistically improve life quality while maintaining Hi-Fi integrity.
If you're like me, want to upgrade from a DAP to a desktop solution, prepare to be shocked at how good the DAPS already are these days.
Then again, nobody really gives horrible reviews unless the product is truly unredeemable. I think readers should take that into account weighing the scores.
A little about me
I'm not an engineer, let alone an acoustic engineer, so I can't formulate all my thoughts in an objectively scientific manner. I'm trained in social science, more precisely behavior economics. I tend to see a lot of human fallacies, so I realize my impressions, along with others', may also be under the influence of such fallacies.
My experience with audio gears started with headphones, and I was wowed by an entry-level Audezes coming from outside of the audiophile world in the early 2010s. Then my faith and expectations in the hobby got destroyed by the piercing sound of HD800 hooked to a Chord mojo. Then long story short, over the years I have eventually ventured into the far end of headphones and found my equilibrium at the Utopia with the legendary Cavalli LAu and the beautiful Italian Aqua La Scala 2. With that, I then went into the upgrade spree with speakers as well, with my most recent prized precession being Hegel H590 + Dynaudio Contour 60s. Fast forward to now, life is slowly creeping in, to interfere with my love for audio gears, I had to let the speaker systems go. I'm finally settled in IEMs because they are the most "life (wife) - friendly" options.
About my gears
That brings me to my testing gears. For source, I use either the MacBook Pro 2018, a desktop PC, or Innuous Zen mk3 music sever running a Roon Core. The benchmark dac/amp I have my trusty iBasso DX300 with amp module 12. As for the intermediary between an amp and my ears, I'm only using IEMs for this review. They are UM Mason Fusang, Final a8000, Leisurely Audio e16. To offer some perspectives for those who haven't heard these IEMs yet, I will try to rank them in a few areas of characteristics:
Overall cohesiveness and completeness: UM>Final>e16;
Details: e16>UM>Final;
Bass: e16>UM>Final;
Mid: UM>Final>e16;
Treble: UM>e16>Final;
I overall tend to reach for the UM buds more. Because they just sound correct and engaging in almost every song.
Build Quality
I think most will agree with me that the CMA15 is an extraordinarily well-made piece of gear. It feels smooth to touch, the weight is substantial for the size. The knobs and dial all scream quality. Some people knock the score down a bit because of the screws, but I feel they actually compliment the overall build with an authentic retro look. The size is perfect for a desktop system due to its shallow depth and thinness. The warm yellow indicator lights illuminate with the right amount of brightness. This is all I have to say about the build, it's awesome.
Sound Quality
I find everything to sound right with my small collection of IEMs. It sounds very similar to my iBasso in almost every way, and I'm not sure how I feel about this.
I had very high hope coming in, thinking a desktop solution will hand down have a leg up in every aspect, if not at least in a few areas. That didn't turn out. But on the other hand, I truly love my Ibasso dx300, it's a capable machine that never failed me, and probably considered one of the best DAPs out there. But with my prior desktop and speakers experience, I just have this belief (justified or not), that a similarly priced desktop Dac must be better than a DAP. I was a little baffled they were performing similarly sonic-wise. Most strangely, they even sound pretty much the same. I think I'd struggle to tell them apart in a blind test. You would think it's more strange when you realize they have very different DAC chip implementations - iBasso has 4 Cirrus Logic chips, and the CMA 15 has an ESS 9038 chip. iBasso is powered by a battery, and CMA15 is by a wall socket.
This all put me in a special reviewer limbo when I can barely tell my baseline and treatment apart. Especially that the audiophile terms are useless all by themselves. But, it's a responsible thing that I at least try to the best of my ability in describing how I experienced it. CMA 15 like the DX300, has an airy treble, albeit not what I'd describe as sweet nor seducing, it's just accurate. It has no obvious flaw, and doesn't bring any extra attention to peaky trebles. It feels as if the DAC/amp is taking a back seat to let the music and earphones express themselves fully without adding artifacts. Mid-range is quite nice with a full body to it that will bring any music to life. Again, no bloat, no additives, just neutral with a slight hint of warmness. Think of it as if the CMA is a neutral-sounding and neutral-looking orchestral hall with a warm AC turned on during a cool autumn evening, just letting the bands be the center of the performance. Bass is nice and without any noticeable flaw, but it's not the deepest I've heard. So, I guess that's something to improve on in the future. I hear no difference in soundstage between iBasso and CMA15. I have to note that headphones experience on these might be different from my IEM experience. I can't compare, because my Utopia had a broken driver recently.
Function
It's my conclusion that the defining hallmark of Chi-Fi is becoming the anti-fragility of functions. Try anything you can think of on it, and use it however you want. It will likely work because features they can add at a reasonable cost, the companies will do it for you without making a fuss about it. For example, my setup isn't a well-treaded pass making 100% emphasis on IEMs, but it worked as intended - no noise floor issue, drivers are not blown, and my eardrums still exist in their perfect state of happiness.
I also have to add the less talked about feature of low latency, latency is non-existent in my setup connecting any source I have. Gaming, movie, conferences on these are perfect. So once again, this is another life-friendly detail that shouldn't get overlooked even if Questyle doesn't advertise it. It probably owns this quality to the newest and the greatest XMOS X216 USB module they put in there. For comparison, my iBasso has a noticeable one-and-a-half-second gap.
Conclusion:
You should seriously consider this if you want to holistically improve life quality while maintaining Hi-Fi integrity.
If you're like me, want to upgrade from a DAP to a desktop solution, prepare to be shocked at how good the DAPS already are these days.
jieranli
Brams, I agree with your philosophy in approaching musical enjoyment. I’m more and more into simplicity. It was those small subjective difference I seek using so much free time and not so free money, when I did hear those difference with something new, I got a rush of geeky pleasure. Then it came with the realization of: what have I done with my space with these clutters, and what have I done with my money.
I have to say, the biggest appreciation for sound quality I get are usually cheap or free. By far the most enjoyable thing I do is hearing consumer level sound quality during commute for a few days and then switch back to my setup listening to the same music. And also upsampling through ROON makes a huge difference for me.
I have to say, the biggest appreciation for sound quality I get are usually cheap or free. By far the most enjoyable thing I do is hearing consumer level sound quality during commute for a few days and then switch back to my setup listening to the same music. And also upsampling through ROON makes a huge difference for me.
In my opinion using this kind of a device with iems is WAY overkill and simply not necessary. I agree with you that today's DAPs are more than up to the task and will also work very well with easy to drive headphones.
A desktop amp is better used with hard to drive over the ear cans that require either a lot of voltage or current. The small size that allows flexible placement is also a huge plus IMO. Where this also shines is its all-in-one capabilities that reduce complexity with little or no compromise in performance. Sell your separate dac, amp and cables and put some money in your pocket. When listening for pleasure do you really care if setup A has a touch better (subjective) performance in one area or another or would you rather just settle into the music?