Many thanks to the people at ETA for organizing a loner for ETA's newest release, the “O2”. I imagine anyone reading this would be familiar with ETA by now, but there is lots of excellent information to be found on their website if you're not familiar with them ( https://etaheadphones.com/pages/about-us / https://etaheadphones.com/pages/meet-the-team ). Like the Mini, this is an on ear headphone but the design is wholly new and created to maximize airflow, among other things. However just like the OG Mini, this was designed from the ground up by the minds at ETA. I'll add that like every headphone I've heard from ETA, I think they've done something special here. I'll try to keep it relatively brief but will gladly answer any questions I can.

Currently my audio chain is comprised of various WAV, FLAC & MP3 files played from JRiver on my refurbed HP Elite Desk via USB to a Schiit Bifrost 2 into either my Pro iCAN (1st version) or ZMF Pendant (also 1st version). The O2 is a 32ohm headphone, and the ifi was a wonderful match on low/medium gain. Interestingly where I found the O2 wasn't too sensitive for the Pendant, there was some slight noise detectable with no music playing (a common occurrence with the OG Pendant). Despite that the sound out of the low Z tap was truly engaging. Sadly I didn't discover this till the end of my listening, which is a shame because I really enjoyed the synergy there. I also experimented with various DAPs, all of which could drive the O2 without noticeable degradation. Keep in mind that although these are very efficient headphones that pair well with a quality dongle or phone, they do scale with "better" equipment IME. I have the word better in quotes because I found that it's more of a synergy than scaling up, so "better matched" might be more accurate. Either way I love the fact that I can enjoy these out of modest gear without feeling like I'm missing out. Puttering around the house with the O2 & an old Fiio X5 (2nd gen I think) was a real joy.


Comfort, Aesthetics and Build

Like almost all ETA Headphones I've handled, with the O2 build quality is quite solid if somewhat utilitarian. ETA utilizes 3D printed cups which may not look opulent, but to me they have an attractive vibe. Many are calling for ETA to produce products with more refined aesthetics, but I'm on board with sacrificing some looks in favor of saving a few bucks. They are still using a Sony headband, which I find to be perfectly adequate. An ETA developed and produced headband is confirmed to be in the works and this would likely dispel the last vestiges of DIY that seem to hang around their headphones. Earpads are of the snug over ear variety and posed no comfort issues during my time with them. It seems the aforementioned "E+" pads were installed and all listening was done with them. I found them more comfortable than any Grado-esque pads I've ever tried and I was able to wear them for hours with out discomfort. The headbsnd on these seem to have been pre-bent into an excellent shape at some point during (or before?) the loaner that minimizes clamp and helps with comfort I think.


Overall Sound

Like every other ETA headphone I've heard, I found the O2 to be a very engaging headphone, probably the closest to a "neutrally tuned" headphone that I've yet heard from ETA. I hear a very balanced tuning from the the O2, with good extension on both ends and a very slight mid-bass accent that play right into my preferences and doesn't intrude into the mids. Definitely some roll off in the sub-bass, but the reach down seems obvious to me and never left me wanting. Full, slightly dry midrange with a little bump somewhere around the 1-5Khz area as well that adds a bit more clarity and bite as it transitions to lower treble (sometimes a touch too much for my tastes), after which everything sounds pretty even to me, elevating incrementally instead of a downslope. Transients are the snappiest I've heard from ETA, staging is Larger than I've experienced with any of their headphones as well. Very good depth, decent width and imaging is slightly indistinct but not bothersome. Detail and nuances are readily apparent and approaching TOTL levels, even if just shy of those last few percentage points.


I'll intersperse my thoughts on sound with impressions with the Mini-S since it's the most comparable headphone I have on hand.

- Bass is fuller with the Mini S, which given the semi-closed nature isn't that surprising. "S" has lower reach to my ears, and a fuller mid-bass as well. O2 is definitely cleaner and tighter, it slams a touch harder as well. A matter of preference really as well as being dependent on the type of music being played.

- Mids are very similar with a bit more lower mid energy from the Mini S and more upper mid energy from the O2. I found O2 upper mids to be a bit too much at times with the Bifrost 2/ifi combo, but much less so with the Pendant. Weather that has to do with the Bifrost or the ifi or the combo itself I'm not sure, but the effect was definitely there. I was pleasantly surprised how much more in tune with my preferences the O2 was when used with the Pendant.

- Treble emphasis is more obviously pronounced with the O2, but I didn't find that aspect to be particularly fatiguing. I think after 2K or so, the O2 has more of an up tilt in frequency, and the "S" has a gentle downward trend. Plankton and detail retrieval would go to the O2, though not by a huge margin.


I found the O2 to have wider & deeper stage than the "S". I've always felt the "S" to be more on the intimate side, but never distracting. When placed next to the O2 the difference is more obvious. Being semi-closed, the "S" does feel more...well, closed in. The O2 is as open & airy as I've ever heard from a headphone. The unique design no doubt plays a big part here.
For my personal tastes, the Mini-S is closer to the sound signature I gravitate towards, but I could definitely be happy building a system around the O2, one that would mitigate the upper mid/lower treble emphasis. One that would likely involve tubes if the Pendant is any indication.

In the end, ETA has done a great job with the O2. At $600 (USD at the time of writing) I'd say the argument could be made for the O2 being a bargain, even if 6 Benjamins is nothing to sneeze at. Personal preference will (always) play a part here of course, but if under 1k is the market you're shopping in I highly recommend checking out the O2.

I’ll start as I usually do with sincere thanks to ZMF for allowing this amazing headphone to go out on loan. They were generous enough to allow a considerable amount of time in order to put it through it’s paces and I sincerely enjoyed my time with them. There’s a lot of info already out there about the Caldera's development and construction, I think it's worth reading & watching:

https://www.zmfheadphones.com/caldera-acoustic-design
https://www.zmfheadphones.com/measurements


Fit, Comfort and build

ZMF has a reputation for making headphones that are on the heavier side, and the Caldera is no exception (490 - 560 grams in current stock wood). IME ZMF also makes these headphones as comfortable as possible with their well padded headbands and suspension straps. Personally I've found that they never disappear on the head, but I've also never had an issue wearing ZMFs for hours at a time.

Like all ZMFs I've seen to date, the Caldera is simply beautiful for my tastes. The craftsmanship is impeccable, and the design is appealing. I'm always surprised how aesthetically pleasing I find each new ZMF release, but I probably shouldn't be. Zach and company have been at this for a while, and the quality of parts as well as the overall care in assembly is evident.
(Obligatory bad photo)


Review Details

Before I offer my listening impressions, I’ll start with a little about myself and other points of interest. I’m over 50 years old and have less than perfect hearing. I’ve been a music lover for as long as I can remember, and my preference leans toward the warm side of neutral. I’m a huge believer in the “my ears/your ears” axiom, and I believe the signal chain makes a difference. Feel free to liberally add as many mental IMOs and YMMVs as you want while reading.

My chain for playback is various WAV, FLAC, & MP3 files from my refurbed HP Elite Desk via USB to a Bifrost 2 to either my ifi Pro iCAN (1st version) or ZMF Pendant (also 1st version). The Caldera sounded wonderful from both the Pendant as well as the ifi, but I had a slight preference for the Pendant and did the majority of my listening utilizing that amp. No need to burn in during this go around since I have it on good authority that it has a couple of hundred hours on it already.

Sensitivity

For a planar the Caldera is fairly efficient with about 95db efficiency and 60 0hm impedance. As mentioned I only used my ifi Pro iCAN & Pendant which can drive them easily, but you can probably get decent results from many lower and mid tier priced rigs. I'd wager synergy will play a part here, but that is usually the case IME. If you're going to invest in a headphone of this caliber it makes sense to play it on a chain that'll maximize performance, but it's good to know that it's not a requirement for enjoyment.

Sound

When you hear the Caldera it is easy to hear the ZMF roots in the sound. I appreciate Zach's commitment to creating something unique with each headphone, which is evident when listening to the 1st fully in house designed ZMF planar. I only had one set of pads on hand which I can only assume were the stock lambskin pads, and I had no issues with them sound or comfort wise.

I think I understand why others have noted that the Caldera doesn't sound like a stereotypical planar. There is a recent trend (that seems to be thankfully changing) of utilizing the thinnest micro-nano-quark-sized diaphragm chasing the fastest transients and the lightest airiest sound. The stereotype speaks more to that trend than to planar technology itself. Obviously a planar can be tuned differently just as any driver out there. Hopefully the caldera will help to hasten the demise of this unwarranted bias.

Even though ZMF doesn't incorporate the thinnest most agile driver here, there is plenty of speed for my tastes. It is definitely faster than any beryllium drivers I've heard, but it's certainly not trying to sound like an electrostat. The flip side of that sonic coin is that there is a certain amount of heft & weight to the notes that you also wouldn't necessarily associate with the current crop of planars. Combined with the novel magnet structure and ADS (Atrium Dampening System, patent pending at the time of writing) the result is something fairly unique, which I believe was Zach's goal.

Bass

If you like the ZMF house sound I think there's a lot you'll like here. Being a planar, sub bass reaches low and it also has decent impact. More importantly there's texture and nuance to the bass; uprights don't sound electric, finger and pick plucking is audible, and electronic music is a joy.

Mid-bass is more subdued but is still full, rich and present. The emphasis is slight here, not bombastic, overblown nor bleeding into the mids. It's still a ZMF so probably more than many would describe as neutral, but Caldera sounds rather even throughout the spectrum to my ears.I found it easy to hear into busy passages, not just in the bass level, but I did notice it the most there.

Mids

The mids sound a bit more dry than I'd expect from a ZMF, but it's far from sterile or brittle. The slight recess around 1khz that others have mentioned didn't bother me in the least and wasn't particularly noticeable for me, unless that somehow contributed to the sense of dryness I noted. Either way vocals, both male and female, as well as all manner of brass & strings had plenty of detail and presence without edging into being perceived as shouty, shrill or overdone.

Treble

The treble is not your embellished over emphasized ear dagger by any means, however I found there to be more sparkle than I'm used to enjoying without fatigue. Despite this I has no issues listening to Caldera for hours on end without discomfort.There definitely could be a YMMV here given hearing loss. Also notably Caldera nails the timber of cymbals and such better than many other planars I've heard.

Detail

Detail retrial is quite good, I'd say among the best I've heard. It's not what I sometimes call hyper-revealing where the presentation is all about magnifying details, but I found plenty of sonic information when I listened for it. I found that if I did concentrate I could isolate many hidden gems in the music, but more often than not I found myself getting lost in the song itself. I think detail is important when it's lacking but at a certain point that emphasis can be distracting for me. Caldera straddles that line without ever crossing over.

Compared to Atrium

I don't have a planar on hand that would be a good comparison here (just the HiFiMan 400i & a memory of some time spent with the D8000 - not the pro) so I figured the Atrium would be a good side by side despite the drivers being different tech. Note I'm using the stock Universe pads with the Atrium & the solid mesh (I'll have to try the perforated mesh one day since many people I know that have heard both seem to prefer it).

Comfort

Despite being about the same weight (cherry Atrium is also supposed to be 490g), I found the Atrium to feel a bit lighter. IDK if it's because of clamp or weight distribution, but it was noticeable for me. Keep in mind I had no comfort issues with Caldera, but it's worth noting.

Bass

Caldera bass definitely reaches lower with a more even mid-bass, and the Atrium has a more pronounced mid-bass accentuation. Atrium sub-bass does roll off yet it is still audible if not as forceful. Caldera is tighter, Atrium looser though no where near flabby or indistinct. Atrium definitely slams harder though Caldera is no slouch.

Mids

Caldera mids are slightly dry and Atrium comes off as more lush yet both presentations I found extremely engaging. Caldera had a bit more lower mid presence and the Atrium a slight push in the upper mids in comparison. Neither sound too forward nor too recessed to my ears, though my mids preference seems to lean toward the Atrium overall. I'll note here that overall I found the Atrium to be more forgiving of sub-par recordings, and the mids may have a bit to do with that I think.

Treble

As mentioned treble is indeed not my strong suit, but from what I can hear Caldera is less rolled off and more even and airy up top. IDK if it's related to the treble but I found that Caldera was more resolving overall in comparison to the Atrium though not by a huge margin. Detail was easier to discern, and I found that especially so in the treble region.

Headstage

Headstage is wide deep & coherent. The Atrium bests it to my ears, but Caldera definitely has a great sense of width & definitely depth. Height isn't lacking, I just didn't find it to be on par with with the other axes, and I didn't find it to be distracting. There is still a great sense of space and "realness" that I don't often find with other headphones. Both headphones draw me in like few others I've heard, and though the Atrium does seem to have an advantage I wasn't turned off by the Caldera staging at all.

End Words

After comparing the two I'm not sure I could pick one over the other, both the Atrium & Caldera are an absolute pleasure to listen to for my tastes. When going back & forth comparing songs I found myself having a slight preference, but it was never for the same headphone. I always enjoyed what each headphone brought to the table, and it was always track dependent. If I didn't already own the Atrium I could definitely see myself saving for a Caldera since the sub bass reach and overall detail appeal to me. Owning the Atrium already I don't feel I'm missing anything, and the Atrium's strengths align well with my preferences. If I had the money, I would more than likely have them both in my stable. IMO Caldera is definitely worthy of it's co-flagship status and is worth checking out.

I’ll start as I usually do with sincere thanks to Meze & Andy Kong for organizing this loaner tour. They were generous enough to allow us about 2 weeks with the Meze Liric to put it through it’s paces and I did indeed enjoy my time with them. There’s a lot of info already out there about the Liric construction and design so I’ll only touch on that as necessary. For more information, check out Meze’s dedicated Liric website: https://mezeaudio.com/collections/all/products/liric

Fit and Comfort
One thing I’ve always appreciated about Meze is their design aesthetic. Every headphone I’ve seen from Meze has been pleasing to my eyes, and the Liric is no exception. From the angle of the extension yoke rods to the gold air vent hole on each cup there is a look to these headphones that I find wholly appealing. Also consistent with my experience with Meze, the Liric is very comfortable, even after long listening sessions. They are light at 391 grams (less than a pound) and more importantly the weight is well distributed. I felt no hot spots or other discomfort, though noggin size (or lack thereof) may play a deciding factor here. As always YMMV.

Review Details
Before I offer my listening impressions, I’ll start with a little about myself and other points of interest. I’m over 50 years old and have less than perfect hearing. I’ve been a music lover for as long as I can remember, and my preference leans toward the warm side of neutral. I’m a huge believer in the “my ears/your ears” axiom, and I believe the signal chain makes a difference. Feel free to liberally add as many mental IMOs and YMMVs as you want while reading.

My chain for playback is various WAV, FLAC, & MP3 files from my refurbed HP Elite Desk via USB to a Bifrost 2 to either my ifi Pro iCan (1st version) or ZMF Pendant (also 1st version). The Liric sounded wonderful from both the Pendant as well as the ifi, but I had a slight preference for the Pendant and did the majority of my listening utilizing that amp. I felt no need to burn in the Meze since it is a review loaner and likely has a couple of hundred hours on it already.


Sensitivity and Isolation
I found the Liric to be very easy to drive, and it sounded excellent from both my (old) Samsung A10 as well as a Fiio M6. I won’t go into much detail there since I rarely use headphones on the go and I did almost all of my listening with my desktop setup. Suffice it to say that for portable use, the sound was very engaging and satisfying, at least with the equipment I had on hand.

Overall the Liric is good at isolating outside noise, if not class leading in that regard. I did wear it solely in my relatively quiet home which admittedly isn’t the best test for sound attenuation. It did a respectable job of drowning out dogs barking and other various noises especially with music playing, but there was always a small sense of being a part of my surroundings as opposed to being in my own world. Depending on your preferences this could be a good or bad thing. Given my usage, it didn’t bother me at all.

I think it’s worth mentioning Meze has a few design choices that may have something to do with that sense of connection. The Liric utilizes a pressure equalization valve and a proprietary ear pad air flow system which seems to add to an “openness” to the sound and I’m guessing has an impact on isolation. I can also tell you that this is one of the only closed back headphones I’ve experienced that doesn’t aggravate my tinnitus, which is a pleasant surprise since most closed back headphones do. I can’t say that has anything to do with the aforementioned features, but it would be a plausible explanation. As always YMMV.

Sound
IMO this headphone does indeed adhere to the Meze house sound. My preference is for headphones that are on the warm side, and I’ve found Meze delivers on that front consistently.

Even though the bass is more subdued than many of Meze’s offerings, it is still a bit north of what many would consider neutral. The bass does seem to be somewhat un-planar like in that I don’t find it to be particularly fast and agile. It does reach deep when called for, and it’s not so slow as to be considered sluggish, it’s just not lightning fast. I’d place it between the Empyrean and the Elite, though I only heard the Elite briefly at CanJam NYC. I still found bass to be satisfying and pleasing for my preferences.

Things sound tighter in the mids but I wouldn’t call them dry. There was good clarity and no fatigue during my listening. There is a bit of a dip around the 1-2khz region and again in the upper mid/lower treble area. I didn’t find it to be bothersome, however those craving the most linear mids will likely be disappointed.

There is extension up above 10khz, but my hearing is spotty at best in that area due to age & job related hearing loss, so I won’t be commenting there.

The Liric is not the last word in plankton, I found the resolution to be on the relaxed side and detail is discernible if not in your face. Though some may crave a more forward presentation, I found enough detail to make me feel as though I’m not missing anything. It might have more to do with the relaxed presentation than the ability to eek out fine levels of sonic detail.

Moving on to headstage, the Liric does have some unique tricks up it’s sleeve...or pads I guess. I’ll start by saying I don’t believe it’s possible to get a “closed back headphone that sounds like an open headphone”. This Meze is no exception, but as I previously stated, there is an openness to the sound that can likely be attributed to the Liric’s distinctive design. The result is a coherent image that has some width but better depth, and an airy quality that seems to give some extra room around the notes. It is a presentation I’ve come to enjoy the more I listen.

Some Comparisons
Unfortunately I have nothing on hand that would be fitting for a direct comparison to the Liric. The closed backs I have are sub $500 dynamic drivers and hardly class leading. I do have the ZMF Aeolus and an ETA “Mini” which I do think would be a couple of interesting comparisons.

Despite being an open back dynamic headphone, the Aeolus & the Liric do have some common ground. They’re both tuned with boosted bass and overall warmth in mind. I am using the ZMF Verite perforated lambskin pads with my Aeolus currently, which retains the downward sloping sound signature, but tames a bit of the Aeolus’ mid bass response. They both seem to have good extension to my ear, though the Liric goes a bit deeper and is a bit more forceful in the sub-bass region then lowers the mid bass more sharply. Aeolus overall has the tighter bass to my ears, though it’s not by a wide margin. The larger difference is in the midrange & treble regions, where the Aeolus dips around 2-4khz, the Meze rises there. Headstage interestingly is fairly similar as well, with the Aeolus just pulling ahead in all directions except depth, where the Liric admirably matches (for a closed back headphone). I’d say detail retrieval is on par with one another as neither headphone was outclassed here.

The ETA Mini is a different beast altogether, being an on ear dynamic driver headphone with a more intimate headstage, but snappier transients and better detail retrieval. I decided to include this comparison because IMO despite being $300 (at the time of writing) the sound can keep up with offerings in this price range. The Sub bass region is slightly better extended on the Liric, and is more impactful as well. The ETA mid bass does not rise as much in comparison, and is tighter and more controlled throughout. There is definitely bass presence with the ETA, but more interesting for me is there is a good amount more slam from the dynamic driver as well. From the mids on up to the treble, the Mini is more linear and revealing, feeling a bit dryer overall but never fatiguing to my ear. Headstage is definitely more the Meze’s strong suit, the ETA being more intimate overall, but maintaining very good imagery and coherence. As I mentioned above, I actually find detail retrieval to be more evident in the ETA overall, the Meze trailing even if not by a huge margin. They are very different presentations that IMO compliment each other well.

As I said at the start, I quite enjoyed my time with the Meze Liric. Antonio Meze has a knack for tuning warm and inviting headphones that are also beautiful and comfortable. The Liric is no exception, and is one of the finest closed back headphones I’ve had the pleasure of hearing. If you are at all interested in the upper end of the closed back headphone market, it would be a mistake to overlook the Meze Liric.

Intro

As always I’ll begin with sincere thanks to Zach & all of ZMF for their generosity. Somehow I was fortunate enough to be on the loaner for the Atrium, one of ZMF’s newest and co-flagship with the Verite lineup. The Atrium is a departure from other ZMF headphones in a variety of ways.The concept behind the Atrium includes a new patent pending dampening/airflow scheme combined with an updated biocellulose driver, and the result is IMO a captivating listening experience. I won’t go into the details of the Atrium nor the patent since so many have already covered that better than I could, and you can check out the ZMF website HERE to find out more about the Atrium itself and HERE for more about the patent.

Fit & Comfort

Like every ZMF IMO the appearance, fit & finish is Sterling. Aesthetics are subjective, but the Atrium ticks all the boxes for me and is a beauty to behold.

Physically, the screen on the headphone is larger than any ZMF so far, and the Gothic flair appeals to me. The set I have is a beautifully finished Cherry wood, and comfort is everything I’ve come to expect from ZMF. That is to say very comfortable despite the approximately 490 gram weight. I have always found the headband they utilize to distribute the weight beautifully.

Review Details

Before I offer my listening impressions, I’ll start with a little about myself and other points of interest. I’m over 50 years old and have less than perfect hearing. I’ve been a music lover for as long as I can remember, and my preferences lean toward the warm side of neutral. I’m a huge believer in the “my ears/your ears” axiom, and I believe the signal chain makes a difference. Feel free to liberally add as many mental IMOs and YMMVs as you want while reading.

My chain for playback is various WAV, FLAC, & MP3 files from my refurbed HP Elite Desk via USB to a Bifrost 2 to either my ifi Pro iCan (1st version) or ZMF Pendant (also 1st version). Although all ZMF headphones seem to have a distinct preference for tubes, the Atrium also sounded fantastic from the ifi. I burned the headphone for over 100 hours before critical listening. I found the Atrium relatively easy to drive for 300 ohm headphones (the Verite series is a bit more efficient), however there is assuredly a benefit to be had from a better audio chain.

Isolation

The Atrium is now the most “open” headphone in the ZMF lineup, though it is still not as open sounding as an open Focal or the Sennheiser 600 or 800. It still sounds more like a partially open design to me. It doesn’t bother me in the least, and the sonic presentation is remarkably “airy” and “open” but there is still a bit of isolation when compared to an HD650 or something similar.

Sound

(EDIT: all listening impressions were done with a solid metal mesh filter over the driver which is to be replaced in production models by a perforated mesh similar to but different than the Aeolus mesh.)
This headphone adheres to what Zach is calling “ZMF Neutral”. Those familiar with ZMF won’t have any problem understanding what that means. I think it’s fair to say that ZMFs in general have a rich and full bass response almost across the board, and a more relaxed treble than many other manufacturers would be comfortable with. I have always enjoyed the “house sound” myself, and the Atrium is my favorite example to date. There is a unique sound to any biocellulose driver I’ve ever heard, and I enjoy it. There is a smoothness, but it’s not overly soft IMO. The transients are not as sharp as beryllium but there is still plenty of snap when required. Changing pads will alter the sound, if not the nature of the Atrium and I’ll include a bit after I touch on the basic sound.

The bass is full and rich without being overly sluggish. It extends deep and feels powerful yet manages not to overwhelm the rest of the sound for my tastes. There is a tactile quality I rarely experience with headphones, and I think it’s not due to the quantity of bass as much as the movement of air or some other factor. It makes listening an absolute joy for me. There is a bit more mid bass than sub bass but again I don’t find it to be overdone. Excellent detail from acoustic bass and deep drum hits.

The mids are the most even and the least “peaky” that I can recall from ZMF. I’ve always experienced a bit of fatigue from the mids of the Auteur after a while, but not so the Atrium. There is still a lush feeling in the mids, but it never crosses into being husky or anything unnatural to my ear. Vocals male & female, piano, violin all sounded clear and detailed.

The highs while not the most airy & extended I found to be wholly satisfyingly. This could be due to advancing age/hearing loss but I didn’t feel too much information was lacking, if at all. That being said I doubt these would satisfy a “treble head”. There was sufficient ring to cymbals and the like, and harmonics were audible. Not the strong suit of the Atrium to be sure, but I didn’t find it lacking.

Resolution is fitting of a TOTL headphone IMO, though it might not be on the level of the “detail giants” out there like the Utopia or HD800. Maybe slightly behind ZMFs own Verite, there is enough information discernible even if it’s not presented in your face. The search for a musicians finest breath and every audience member’s cough never thrilled me, but I can hear fingers sliding on frets and bowstrings being plucked quite well.

One of the most engaging aspects of the Atrium IMO is the sense of space it renders to the listener. This is also the most difficult aspect to try and articulate, at least for me. The Headstage doesn’t come off as exaggerated (I’m looking at you HD800) but it does feel deep and wide with good height. I hesitate to use this phrase because it is somewhat hyperbolic but there is a certain “3d-ness” there that I don’t experience with other headphones. The Verite series has it’s own similar quality, but the Atrium presents it differently. Whereas the Verite has a sense of wide open space and excellent imaging, I think the atrium gives a better sense of instruments being in that space, if that makes sense. I guess the best way I can put it is that live music just sounds more “live” to me.

Pads

One aspect of headphone listening that I enjoy is being able to dial in my sonic preferences with a change of pads, and fortunately ZMF likes to accommodate that little proclivity. Zach has been a leader in offering a variety of options to fine tune your listening experience, so I would be remiss not to touch on pads.

After the kudos, I’ll also include what is probably my biggest gripe, which is the difficulty I have in identifying pads. I do keep them organized in zip-locks, and ZMF now seems to ship them in larger more durable zip-locks of sorts which is a great help. However once out of the baggie, they can be comically difficult to identify. I usually write up some index cards to keep in the proper pad until use, but I still got turned around/distracted & mixed them up at one point. Fortunately Zach was quite helpful assisting my to identify which was which. One suggestion I heard was using a laundry marker on the inner cloth which is a good idea, but I’d appreciate if there were some sort of tagging for rapid I.D.

Included with the loaner were the Universe pads, the BE2 pads and the Auteur Pads all of which were lambskin. Each pad did bring something worthwhile to the sonic pallet IMO.

Universe Pads

These are the stock option. The have the largest headstage and the most prominent bass response. Little to no bleeding into the mids, which are rather linear overall. On the flip side of that coin I also found that they had the most delicate treble of the three.

BE2 pads

Bass is more subdued/neutral yet still has plenty of punch. A touch of a sub bass boost I think. I found the treble to be slightly lifted/clearer and not emphasized so much as clarified. The stage is smaller but not collapsed, mids are still magical, and I found no sibilance.

Auteur pads

These are the most linear/neutral pads of the three to my ears. These brings mids out a bit more, and I found vocals both male & female to be hypnotic. While bass and treble are still present, they are slightly more subdued overall. I didn’t find anything lacking, I wasn’t yearning for more bass/treble. While the headstage was probably the smallest of the three it still felt wide & deep, probably due to the Atrium’s uncanny ability to paint a sonic landscape.

Some Comparisons

The most obvious comparison would be to ZMF’s other flagship the VO. I did cover this somewhat throughout, but I’ll summarize again here. I find the VO to be a bit better at retrieving fine details, but the difference isn’t stark. The Verite has a few more peaks & valleys in the mids, whereas the Atrium’s deviations are less pronounced. Transients are faster, sharper with the VO and the Atrium is more visceral. VO goes a bit deeper into the sub-bass I think, again not night & day. Headstage is a similar size & shape between the two I think, VO a bit wider, Atrium deeper but I find the presentation different. It is likely a coin toss as to which you might prefer, but my preference is for the Atrium.

My usual daily driver is the Aeolus. I’ve become addicted to it’s forgiving qualities and (for me) an ear friendly sound. The Atrium is more detailed overall, picking up more “plankton” even though there’s more treble energy found in the Aeolus. Like the VO Aeolus has more peaks & valleys in the midrange in comparison to the Atrium. Also like the VO there is a little more sub bass extension to be found with the Aeolus, but the bass overall is a bit looser and less nuanced. Not surprisingly, headstage is no contest with the Atrium being wider, deeper, and taller than the Aeolus.

End Words
Once again ZMF has created a wonderfully tuned beautifully crafted headphone. I have to admit that I am quite tired of the current trend of TOTL headphones being ever more expensive. Make no mistake that the Atrium is expensive as well, but it is more accessible than many other flagships. Having (mostly?) handmade headphones with replaceable parts and stellar customer service adds quite a bit to the value IMO. I also enjoy supporting a smaller business as opposed to the corporate owned factories churning out mostly plastic headphones. In the end you might think this sounds like I’m trying to talk myself into buying this headphone myself. If so, you might not be wrong.

The Atrium will be available for purchase on April 1st 2022

https://shop.zmfheadphones.com/collections/stock-headphones/products/atrium

Intro

The Sennheiser HD650 has been a standard for audiophiles since its introduction 14 or 15 years ago. Because of its already stellar sound as well as being relatively easy to disassemble, the 650 has also been a staple for headphone DIYers everywhere. The JAR650 (JAR stands for Jupiter Audio Research) is one of the newest takes on a HD650 mod, but this one isn’t geared toward the DIY community so much as those looking to maximize the sound of their 650 or anyone looking to buy one of the best sounding headphones I’ve heard.


(Photo courtesy of Jupiter Audio Research)

Disclosure

Although Jupiter and I have been friendly over the past 1 ½ years or so, I have not (to my knowledge) let that friendship unduly influence my review. We are in negotiations for trading my HD600 for an older prototype of the current JAR650. I can honestly say that after hearing Jupiter’s end product, the review would have happened regardless, and I would have more than likely saved up for my own JAR creation.

Meet the maker

I met Jupiter (the brains behind the JAR650, AKA the J-Mod) online here on Head-Fi. He bought a couple of headphones from me back in November of 2016, and we have kept in touch ever since. When I first heard Jupiter talking about his modded 650, the passion he communicated with was readily evident. He was constantly working on it, tweaking it until the sound was just where he wanted it. Once I got to hear the end result, I finally understood.

I don’t know the whole story, but I do know that the creation of the JAR650 has been a long and arduous journey for Jupiter. He is an engineering student and like most of us here on Head-Fi he loves music. Unlike many he has had the good fortune of owning and enjoying several of the TOTL headphones on the market including Utopia, HD800, and Stax (007 &009). As much as he’s enjoyed them all he always found something to nitpick about and so started where many modders do: The HD650.

The HD650 as a standard

It’s time to give credit where credit is due. Jupiter was kind enough to lend me a stock HD650 for comparison, and I feel it’s safe to say that the HD650 is a fantastic headphone in its own right. There are multiple reasons that this headphone is a classic, and I am very glad I got to spend time with it.

This Senn may be the best known headphone to dance the line between smooth & resolving. A mid-bass bump, and gentle, perhaps slightly rolled off treble were more than likely keys in coining the term ‘Sennheiser veil’, but the details in the music are all there. It should be noted that a good amp is a requirement for getting maximum aural pleasure(which also holds true for the JAR650). Thankfully there is plenty of pleasure to be had with the stock 650.

-The midrange is absolute magic giving vocals and acoustic instruments life.

-The bass is definitely rolled off below 100 Hz or so, but the bass that is there is punchy without being overbearing.

-Soundstage or headstage is not considered to be a strong suit. It is considered more intimate in size, however imaging is quite good.

Either in spite of or because of all these traits, the 650 remains one of the most beloved headphones on the market today, and is a thoroughly enjoyable listening experience. Sennheiser definitely did a lot of things right with the driver and tuning of the HD650.

Setup

All listening was done from my JRiver Media Player on my HP all in one PC feeding a mix of high rez and MP3 files to a Schiit Gungnir D/S into either an ifi iCan Pro or a MCTH with the stock tube. Like the HD650, the J-Mod sounded great through both SS & my hybrid tube amp each bringing its own flavor to the already stellar sound.

The physical headphone

Like all 650 mods there are various parts removed from the stock configuration and dampening applied to key areas. What parts are removed as well as the location and material for dampening vary from mod to mod, but the basic idea is the same: make sure what you add doesn’t take away from the sound. Jupiter tried several of the various mods, but still walked away dissatisfied. Over a period of months, he used trial & error to zero in on the sound he wanted. He also developed a novel idea that I haven’t seen used before. He created 3D printed part for the back of the headphones. This has the dual purpose of further tailoring the sound as well as adding some rear protection. For me, it’s also an aesthetically appealing feature. It’s a shame he wasn’t able to address the clamp of the headband, but he could hardly be considered at fault for that. A new headband would also likely increase the price considerably.




The differences

Personally I have never attempted to mod a headphone beyond adding a filter (TP mod!) or pad rolling, so I don’t know how hard or easy it would be to mess up the venerated stock HD650 sound. I do know there are a variety of mods available, although I haven’t heard any of them up until now. If I had never heard the JAR650, I would be quite happy with a stock HD650 in my collection.

It seems to me that the object of modding any headphone is to tailor the sound to your tastes which is therefore a subjective affair. Obviously, what is a sonic step forward for me may very well be less enjoyable for you. That being said what Jupiter has done is take a classic headphone and worked on evolving the sound into something I find to be all together even more engaging than the original. I’ll do my best to describe the differences.

Starting down low, the bass seems tighter to my ears, but no less impactful. The stock 650 has a loose quality to the bass. Although the Stock bass is punchy, I do hear a smear to the sound of an upright bass, maybe a touch too long in the decay of notes. The JAR has a bit more snap in the bass. The punch is still there but it’s quicker. The bass is still rolled off so there’s no miracle here but as with the stock 650, I didn’t miss it at all for most of my listening.

Thank goodness the mids still sound magical to me. If anything they are even clearer, without edging anywhere close to shouty or strident. If I was to guess I would say it’s because the bass is tighter, making the information in the mids and treble easier to discern. Whatever the reason vocals, strings et al sound phenomenal through the JAR650.

As I hinted at, I found that the treble was more resolving as well with no audible peaks, spikes or valleys. I was treated to what is, for my tastes, one of the best treble presentations that I have ever heard. While still leaning toward a relaxed presentation, resolution was increased to my ears without introducing harshness. The sound was not aggressive, but still detailed. Cowbells, triangles cymbals all sounded crisper, more of the overtones were easily heard, but the tonality remained true. I couldn’t detect the infamous Sennheiser veil at all.

Soundstage seemed relatively unchanged to me, that is to say relatively narrow. Imaging as well sounded on par if not a little better, but I’m not particularly skilled with observing that. When I put it all together though, I find myself struggling not to dip into the big book of audio clichés. This headphone absolutely drew me into the music like few headphones can. That is what I’m looking for in a headphone. That is what I’m listening to music for.

Conclusion

To be fair, there may be those out there that prefer the more laid back stock 650. That headphone is smoother overall, very easy on the ears and the design has stood the test of time (albeit with some silent revisions over the years). The JAR650 on the other hand is more energetic and lively. The difference is not stark but incremental; however the contrast is there nonetheless. For my tastes, if you can add resolution without harshness and increase my desire to keep listening to the music you’ve definitely done something right. I don’t want to sound too effusive, and it’s been a struggle not to in this review. With that being said if your goal is to better a classic headphone and you achieve that goal, it’s hard not to seem overzealous. IMHO Jupiter has achieved that goal admirably.

The JAR650 is available for $390 (USD, plus shipping)*, and the mod can be purchased for any existing stock HD650 for $100 (USD, plus shipping).

(For further information about the JAR650 contact @ext1 on Head-Fi)

*Edit: Price quoted was at the time of writing, apparently current retail will vary.
https://www.head-fi.org/members/ext1.460358/

Let me start by sincerely thanking Unique Melody and Lawrence (cotnijoe) for organizing this tour. I have (gratefully) been selected to participate in this Headphone Tour, during which I am able to listen to the Mason V3 for 2 weeks then ship them off to the next lucky participant. The only requirement is to post the review which you see here. Having the opportunity to sample TOTL equipment in the comfort of my own home, with my own source and music, is an absolute joy for which I am truly grateful. Personally I’ve been gravitating away from IEM usage as of late. This offering from Unique Melody has done a lot to re-pique my interest. The Mason V3 can be bought from MusicTeck for $2699 (USD).

From the Unique Melody website:

“In 2016, Unique Melody introduced the Mason V2. This year, we’re stepping it up with the launch of the Mason V3. We didn’t simply increase the number of drivers and called it V3. With the new generation, the Mason V3 is equipped with a wide range of features such as “dB-Go” bass enhancement module, titanium sound tubes, newly designed shell for optimal comfort, and “Dual-Tone” cable technology. The Mason V3 emphasizes resolution, tonal balance, clear vocals, and an expansive soundstage. Find a dealer near you to try it for yourself!”

https://shop.musicteck.com/products/um-ciem-mason-v3-16-drivers?variant=482151104526

http://en.uniquemelody.org/focusdetail_85.html



Build Quality Comfort and Accessories

Build quality is, by my estimation, excellent overall. Unique Melody has created a very light and compact IEM, which is no small achievement considering that it houses 16 drivers per side (4 Low + 4 Lower Midrange + 4 Upper Midrange + 4 High). To be clear, it is an achievement to make a 16 driver IEM that small, but the achievement isn’t small, the housing is.



To spite being of diminutive size, the Mason V3 is not the most comfortable IEM I’ve used. It does protrude from the ear a bit and the size of the nozzle (relatively short but wide) does make its presence known.



That being said, it should be noted that although it didn’t disappear in the ear, neither can it be said that it caused any discomfort.

Accessories seem to be a toss-up. Mason comes with a good assortment of eartips, what seems to be a painstakingly designed titanium (?!?!?) case, a leather ‘fob’ presumably for holding the coiled cable, a cleaning cloth & user manual stored on a USB drive (cleverly attached to a credit card sized…well, card).

I maintain it’s a toss-up because of a couple of issues, and I think the interpretation can go either way.

I haven’t confirmed that the case is titanium, but it’s a large solid hunk of machined metal and it doesn’t weigh a ton. The problem I found is that size of the case is at the same time too cumbersome for pocketing, yet rather snug for storage. I found if I arranged the cable & IEMs just so I could fit them into the case with the cables still attached. However no matter how hard I tried, I couldn’t also have the tips still attached.



You could say that the premium design & materials are only fitting of a product in this price bracket. You could also argue that although we have no idea how much the case costs to manufacture, it could only increase the price of what is already a premium IEM. I honestly see both sides as being somewhat valid.

The only other issue is the cable which is nothing if not unique, and may be the most polarizing aspect of the Mason V3. Let’s start with what the MusicTeck website has to say: “The brand new and unique "Dual-Tone" cable design also allows you to achieve two distinct sound signatures from the same cable - A pure copper sound or a pure silver sound gives you even more control and customization over the sound signature.” It doesn’t seem possible, or it seems at the very least not prudent to review the Mason V3 without diving into the attributes of the cable.



Full disclosure: I am a cable agnostic. I enjoy cable rolling for aesthetic purposes, to achieve a desired length, or maybe to reduce what is often called microphonics. I have never had an epiphanistic experience when switching cables. I do hear subtle differences, but nothing so grand that I couldn’t attribute it to other factors. It may be possible that I haven’t compared the ‘right’ cables, or maybe I haven’t compared the cables the right way. Whichever reason it was, I also didn’t hear an appreciable difference between the different configurations of the Dual-Tone cable.

The Dual Tone is to my knowledge the only cable that attempts to utilize two separate cable configurations in one strand of cable (one copper and one silver), and it employs a proprietary screw on 4 pin connection to achieve this design. There are no ‘L’ or ‘R’ markings to be found on the cable or the driver housing. This makes a certain amount of sense since the housings can only be inserted in the ear one way. There is a small notch on the connector which allows the cable to be connected only one way as well. What happens when you swap the cable from the right and left drivers is you wind up switching from the copper to the silver cabling and/or vice versa. Of the 4 pins, only 2 transmit the audio signal at any one time. Ergonomically, I found the orientation pin difficult to see without glasses, and for the life of me I could not differentiate between the silver & copper cable configurations by sight.



The cable appears to be of high quality and feels very robust; however I did find it to be somewhat stiff, kind of bulky and it transmitted a fair amount of noise while moving about. The quality of the cable itself seems obvious to me, but it does seem best suited for desktop use.



Once again I feel Unique Melody has created something that can be looked at as either a boon or a bane. The workmanship and novelty of the Dual Tone cable is readily apparent. If you enjoy the sonic variety that using different wire material can bring, this may be the cable of your dreams. If you are someone that likes to have the ability to try different cables, finding an aftermarket replacement will likely be challenging at best.

Sound

Before I offer my listening impressions, I’ll start with a little about myself. I’m 50 and have less than perfect hearing. I’ve been a music lover for as long as I can remember, and I learned to listen a little more critically during the few years I sold audio equipment (and the more I listen, the more I learn). My fascination/infatuation with headphones began about 5 years ago, and has only gotten stronger. The majority of my listening was done listening to FLAC, WAV & various MP3s through my HP all in one PC (Feeding a Schiit Gungnir D/S & ifi iCan Pro) or with my Shanling M2/ Fiio x3 (1st gen.). I wasn’t able to pair them with my Samsung Galaxy S7, as the robust cable connection wouldn’t connect through the protective case I have.



My listening centered on classic rock, folk, jazz, classical and various genres of EDM. Since these have already been played for (at least) a few hundred hours on this tour, I did not burn them in prior to critical listening, nor did I hear any notable difference throughout my evaluation.



While not as efficient as some BA driver IEMs, I found that I could achieve good volume with any source I tried. No matter the source or amp, these IEMs never sounded strained to my ears. Because of pervasive tinnitus I’m not particularly good at detecting hiss, and there was none to report on the lowest impedance on my ifi, nor either of my DAPs. If I bumped the impedance or the volume, some hiss was present, but not obtrusive. Obviously YMMV.

I achieved a good seal and great performance with the stock Comply tips, so I did all my listening with them, and the isolation that combination provided was among the best I’ve heard from any IEM. I did not partake in any tip rolling during my time with the Mason V3.



Whereas I felt the accessories were somewhat questionable, I found the overall tonal balance to be another matter altogether. The sound from the Mason V3 was entirely captivating for me, drawing me into the music like no other IEM I’ve heard. Tonality is spot on, with each instrument sounding as it should. It’s easy to distinguish electric & acoustic bass, upright & grand piano, viola & cello. Breaking the sound into the usual categories, I’ll work from the bottom up.

Sub bass is present, but not overly accentuated. Roll off sounded like it was in the area of 30Hz, which is more than adequate for 99% of the music I have. While I wouldn’t consider this a candidate for Bassheads, EDM was well represented and thoroughly enjoyable, having good authority when called for if not the last degree of slam and impact. I’ll note here the inclusion of the DB-Go modules since these modules are said to affect the sub-bass most.



In my experience using the modules the change was subtle at best; I could barely discern any difference at all with the ports fully open or closed. Since my preference is for a more robust bass response I did all my listening with the port knobs adjusted forward.

Mid bass was tight and solid, dancing squarely along the line of ‘just enough’. Although my personal preference is for a touch more in quantity, I can’t say I ever felt short changed. Bass lines were always fairly full yet nowhere near bleeding into the mids. Although very recording and source dependent (so again, YMMV), I was overall satisfied in the bass department. Again, even though these might not be the 1st choice for EDM, Rap etc., I still felt that these IEMs handled everything I threw at them well.

Moving into the midrange I’d have to say this is where this earphone shines. During my time with the Mason V3, I was treated to the singular experience of having loads of detail without experiencing pain or listening fatigue. I felt the lower mids were smoother in character, with a few minor peaks in the upper midrange, but this played to my particular tastes. Vocals and strings sounded heavenly bringing out nuances without feeling unnatural or pushed.

The highs were absolutely perfect to my ears, having the right amount of sparkle & shimmer without straying into exaggeration or overemphasis. Cymbals, string overtones, ambient cues in various tracks were easy to hear, yet not ’in your face’. Once again I was treated to the experience of hearing a high level of detail without it becoming bothersome. I imagine with a dryer/brighter audio chain, the detail could be too much of a good thing, but that was never my experience. Once again I find the Mason V3 to dance along a line. This time the line was between enough and too much, and again I found these IEMs on the right side of the line.

The headstage was pleasantly wide with a good amount of depth, and a bit less height. I have never experienced an IEM with this level of isolation and a headstage this good. It’s not HD800 good, which is recognized as being almost artificial in its grandeur, but it casts a coherent believable image that is a pleasure to listen to. Sonically it seems to me that Unique Melody knocked it out of the park with this IEM. It’s neutral in the very best possible way.

Conclusion

My thanks again go to Unique Melody & Lawrence without whom I wouldn’t have had the opportunity to enjoy my time with the Mason V3. Although I question the value of some of the accessories, if you put together all the sonic observations above you get a one way ticket into Audiophile Cliché-Speak. All the tired & worn out phrases actually do apply. In particularly, I constantly got lost in the music & gradually stopped listening critically. The sound was so beguiling it was almost impossible not to listen for pleasure. In the end that is the highest praise you can give to an IEM, and it’s exactly what I hope for when listening to music.

In early 2016, I had the pleasure of participating in the Meze 99 Classic tour. To say I was impressed would be an understatement. A new release from a relatively unknown company that sounded that good was impressive, not just to me but to many of those who had the pleasure of hearing them. When I heard that Meze had planned to release a less expensive version, ($249 USD MSRP, and an advertised $50 discount for Black Friday 2017) I was excited to sign up for the Neo tour. To see how the 99 Neo stacks up to its more famous older brother, read on.



I found the 99 Classics to be a beautifully designed headphone, and the 99 Neo doesn’t fall far from that mark. Where the Classics had wooden earcups (Walnut is all that is offered on their website currently with either silver or gold trim) the Neo is listed as having “coal black textured earcups” made of ABS plastic, but I personally find them to be solidly built and no less attractive.



The rest of the build is (from memory) all but identical to the 99 Classics, and the website states “As the Neo shares the DNA of the Classics, we guarantee that the 99's are serviceable if any parts ever need to be replaced.”

Comfort wise, the Neo feels exactly how I remember the Classics to be, which is to say very comfortable (in fact the larger pads provided are even more so). The weight (260 gr or 9.2 ounces without cables) is very well distributed with no hot spots noted and the clamping pressure never caused me any discomfort (larger heads may have different results).

There has been much discussion (here and elsewhere) about the earpads, so I’ll put a bit of my 2 cents in here. When the Classics were 1st released, there was much ado about the size of the earpads. Many felt that they were too small and uncomfortable (I and a minority of others had less of a problem with them). Meze, being the responsive company that they are had issued a couple of different pads to counter this, eventually settling on the size that is offered with the 99 Neo here. Since Tyll from Innerfidelity reviewed the Neo, there has been even more of a kerfuffle around how they affect the sound. I’ll leave my sound impressions for the appropriate section, but comfort wise, these earpads certainly fit the bill for me. Plush, fairly roomy, and made from medium density memory foam, I have no real complaints with the comfort these pads provide (of course YMMV, yadda yadda…).



Accessories are very good for this price range. 1st off, there is a useful & sturdy carry case which is a decent size for throwing into a backpack without taking up too much room. The case could be smaller, but like the Classics, the Neo doesn’t fold flat. My major criticism is that you have to unplug the cable to fit the Neo into the case. Although the review unit came with a 10ft long cable more suited for desktop or living room listening, the Neo is only shipped with a 4’ cable best used portably, but long enough if you sit close to your computer. That cable has an inline button remote which is said to be compatible with Smartphones and Android capable DAPs, but I didn’t get the chance to test this myself. The headphones themselves are symmetrical, so the only way to tell the left from the right is the white on silver writing on the connections, which I found to be difficult to read without glasses.



Rounding off the accessories is a 1/8” x ¼” adapter, as well as an airplane adapter.





Before I offer my listening impressions, I’ll start with a little about myself. I’m 50 years old and have less than perfect hearing. I’ve been a music lover for as long as I can remember, and I learned to listen a little more critically during the few years I sold audio equipment (and I continue to learn the more I listen). My fascination/infatuation with headphones began about 5 years ago, and has only gotten stronger. The majority of my listening was done listening to FLAC, WAV & various MP3s with my Shanling M2 (1st gen), Fiio x3 (1st gen.) or through my HP all in one PC and Audioquest Dragonfly(V1.2). My tastes are fairly eclectic, but my listening centered on classic rock, folk, jazz, classical and some of the genres of EDM. I didn’t bother with burning in the headphones since this is a review pair and probably already have a few hundred hours on them, nor did I hear any difference throughout my evaluation.

Isolation is about average for a closed back headphone, muting outside noise but not totally blocking it out. Even with music playing at reasonable volumes, some sound can intrude .The metal frame I found to be highly microphonic, noisily clanging whenever knocked against just about any object. The cable seems to be improved from the Classics in that regard; I experienced less microphonics than I remember with the Neo’s older brother. The Meze is incredibly easy to drive, reaching deafening volumes with any source I tried, but they did scale up with better sources.

I’d describe the Neo as a lush and warm headphone. It’s not the most resolving headphone by a long shot but it is enjoyable to listen to nonetheless. It throws a fairly wide and deep soundstage for a closed back can, which I find particularly impressive in this price range.

The bass on the Neo is pretty far north of neutral. Since the emphasis is more on the mid bass, I wouldn’t call these basshead cans. In fact there does deem to be bass roll off starting in the neighborhood of 50Hz. The lowest notes are audible, however they aren’t presented with authority. The quantity of bass can be problematic as it does bleed into the lower midrange, and it’s not the most detailed bass either. While not as crude as ‘one note bass’, upright bass can sound smeared and indistinct if the recording isn’t up to snuff. To spite all that, I found the presentation is pleasant, if not downright addictive. I doubt that the lack of nuances would be noticed by the majority of listeners, and most will enjoy the extra boom the Neo brings.

The midrange is present and has good clarity overall. The biggest problem here is a slight ‘cupped hands’ resonance with certain voices, which is further evidence of the pumped up bass. It’s most obvious with male vocals, but it’s not a glaring problem and is fairly track dependent. There is little to no problem with sibilance or other upper midrange anomalies, so guitars and such sound natural with a good amount of bite, without glare or fatigue.

The treble isn’t horribly rolled off, but I wouldn’t call it airy and extended either. There does seem to be a dip between 5 & 8K, but I found that to be pleasant and not ‘sucked out’ but rather smooth. Occasionally some of the more delicate cymbal work and other audio markers can get lost in the mix, but that is track (and age) dependent, I think. If you’re a fan of shimmer and sparkle, these won’t likely scratch your itch, but in the other direction all but the most treble sensitive would likely find these to be a satisfying headphone. The highs can be a tad coarse in ‘texture’ on some recordings, but again it’s never piercing, and it’s not horribly egregious.

As I alluded to before, I feel any review I did would be incomplete without touching a bit more on how the earpads affect the sound. When Tyll from Innerfidelity reviewed the Neo, he concluded that “the sound is more colored and uneven” with the newer pads and that Meze had “gone backwards with these pads”. Anyone who hears the original 99 Classics & the 99 Neo will notice the difference in the bass right away. Even from memory, the difference was pretty stark. Personally, I’m not nearly as critical of the sound of the Neo. Is it a reference quality headphone? No…no it’s not. Nor was it intended to be, unless I miss my guess. Tyll is absolutely correct (IMO) that the Neo comes off as “colored & uneven”. This is a take on a ‘fun’ sound signature, and fun it is. There are always tradeoffs when designing headphones, and Meze made their choices.

I couldn’t help but be curious how much the sound would change with a little pad rolling, so I did experiment a little. The closest pads I have on hand to the original Classics pads would be the stock AT M40X pads.



The plastic lip on the rear of the pads are a little different in size compared to the Neo, so it was a bit of a PITA to get the pads on properly, but once I did, the Neo did come much closer in sound (from memory) to the original Classics. The Neo retained most of its bass slam, but there was less bass bleed into the mids. Clarity overall was improved, and a bit more air and definition was added to the treble. It didn’t work miracles, no sub bass was gained, and the bass was still on the loose side, but it was very similar from memory to the 99 Classics with the original pads. The other thing it had in common with the original pads was, yes, the comfort. Every complaint lodged against the original pads would apply here as well. It wasn’t unwearable to me, but others with larger (or different shaped) ears would likely have a problem. The newer pads are indeed more plush and roomy, and for many that could be a deal breaker. What a difference a pad makes.

I have to stress that to spite all its flaws I thoroughly enjoyed my time with the 99 Neo. I was fairly critical of the Neo in my review because if you look (or listen) from a ‘reference sound’ perspective, this headphone falls short on several points. However, if you’re looking for a smooth bass enhanced sound signature that’s definitely more on the ‘fun’ side of the audio equation, The Meze 99 Neo is hard to beat. It is like audio candy for me. It's great every now & then, and satisfies a craving but I wouldn't really want it as a steady diet. Imperfect or not, I smiled many times while using the 99 Neo. In the end, that’s what many of listen to music for anyway

Let me start by sincerely thanking Youhey Ohnagi for contacting me on Facebook. I had heard of Ocharaku before, but have never had any direct experience with them, nor have I seen or heard any of their products at any meets or shows. I’m guessing that because I am on the Head-Fi forum on Facebook that Youhey decided to offer me some time with the Flat4-KEYAKI Plus. Whatever the reason, I am certainly glad I got a chance to listen. I was given 10 days to listen to the Ocharaku Flat4-KEYAKI, after which I retuned them to CD Japan (from whence they came). No other compensation was given to me, and the following review is my own honest opinion (YMMV of course). At the time of this writing, the Flat-4 Keyaki was selling for 85,000 Yen ($767.98 in USD) from CD Japan: http://www.cdjapan.co.jp/product/NEOACS-68935

I'll start off by saying that build quality is something I was unsure of at first. One could make the argument that anything this light can’t be well made. Whereas they chose an admittedly beautiful wooden cabinet made from Solid Japanese Zelkova coated with raw lacquer, there is no detachable cable and the remainder of the housing is a liquid crystal polymer.

Also I’ll note that although I would prefer a detachable cable the one provided seems robust enough, with minimal microphonics and a quality 3.5mm Rhodium Plated Stereo Mini Plug (a balanced version is also available).


I couldn’t help but think I was missing something. Even if they do feel light and insubstantial, I imagine that is intentional to keep the earphone better seated in the ear. Many IEMs in this price range and higher use quality plastics and silicone, so I can’t really knock Ocharaku for this. Looking for more information, I checked the CD Japan website where they noted that this is a “collaborative product between Ocharaku and OAK VILLAGE - a woodcrafts company based in the forests of Takayama, Japan.” Obviously a lot of thought went into the design and overall aesthetic of these earphones. So although they feel somewhat cheap, the actual materials used should stand the test of time. Viewed through the lens of an artisan, you can come away with a much deeper appreciation of what they were trying to achieve.

Accessories, while not exactly skimpy, aren’t overabundant either. What’s included is Comply T-200 Ear Tips (x 2), SpinFit ear tips (x 3 Sizes: S, M, L), L type cable adapter, cleaning cloth, a wooden case (Japanese Zelkova & Paulownia Solid Wood)

and the obligatory Instruction Manual / Warranty Card. Instead of investing in the admittedly lovely storage box, a carry case would have been a welcome addition, maybe a few more tips (at least 2 sets of each size would be nice) and an earwax cleaning tool.

Although this is a light pair of earphones, they are on the larger side and protrude from the ear.

There will be no sleeping on a pillow while using the Flat4 (obviously not named for the shape). Even though these are an incredibly light pair of earphones, the fit was difficult for me. I often have a challenge finding the right tips, and unfortunately it was more of the same with the Ocharaku. In the end, the Comply tips required the least amount of adjusting, so I did the majority of my listening with them. Isolation was about average, blocking out most ambient noise adequately, but these wouldn’t be my 1st choice when traveling. The port also occasionally picked up wind noise while moving about outside.

Before I offer my listening impressions, I’ll start with a little about myself. I’m about 50 and have less than perfect hearing. I’ve been a music lover for as long as I can remember, and I learned to listen a little more critically during the few years I sold audio equipment (and the more I listen, the more I learn). My fascination/infatuation with headphones began about 4 years ago, and has only gotten stronger. The majority of my listening was done listening to FLAC, WAV & various MP3s with my Shanling M2, Fiio x3 (1st gen.) or through my HP all in one PC and Audioquest Dragonfly1.2. My tastes are fairly eclectic, but my listening centered on classic rock, folk, jazz, classical and various genres of EDM. I didn’t burn in the Ocharaku prior to listening, nor did I hear any difference throughout my evaluation.

There are actually 4 versions of the Flat4 available, with only slight differences between them. The Flat4-KEYAKI and Flat4-AKAKEYAKI differ only in the “effective length of the ear canal”, which is set different as represented by the color codes. When they say “effective length of the ear canal” I understand that they mean the length of the ear canal is on average 25 to 30mm, and they tune the earphone to sound best depending on your ear canal. The black ‘Phase Correction Tube’ (more on this later) is set for the average length, whereas the red (the ‘AKA’ in AKAKEYAKI means ‘red’ in Japanese) is set for a longer “effective length”. On the CD Japan website, it states: “Sound quality will be better if the effective length is set closer to your ear canal length.” How you are supposed to know the effective length of your ear is not mentioned.

I was sent both the Ocharaku Flat4-KEYAKI Plus and the Ocharaku Flat4-AKAKEYAKI Plus so that I can use the one that sounded best for me (There are also balanced versions of the Flat4-KEYAKI and Flat4-AKAKEYAKI available, hence the mention of 4 versions). I honestly couldn’t detect much of a sound difference (maybe my ear canal is borderline…) so I stuck with the Ocharaku Flat4-KEYAKI Plus, which according to the website “is relatively appropriate for more people than that of its counterpart.”

Any intelligible talk about the sound quality should have some mention of the (as far as I know) unique design Ocharaku utilized for the Flat4. They use what they call a “Twin Equalized Element System” which employs 2 dynamic drivers (they call them a primary element & a secondary element) in the housing, utilizing the aforementioned ‘Phase Correction Tube’ which reportedly ” suppresses the closed-ear canal resonance and eliminates the masking effects, dramatically improving sounding in mid- and high-tone range.”

(photo from CD Japan Website)

This is obviously an oversimplification of what is a more complex technological philosophy, which can be seen more in depth on the CD Japan website here:

http://www.cdjapan.co.jp/feature/ocharaku_technology

The Ocharaku Flat4 was slightly challenging to drive, needing just a more volume than most of the IEMs I have on hand, although I was able to reach unsafe listening with any device I tried. When briefly testing with my Samsung Galaxy S7, I was pleasantly surprised at the quality of sound. While no real competition for higher quality gear (the Samsung, not the Ocharaku), the Samsung/ Ocharaku Flat4 combo was overall a satisfying listen for non-critical listening on the go. I didn’t do much in the way of tip rolling, although I did experiment with Sony tips which did work well. I found the fit to be on par with the included SpinFit tips, and no major discernible change in SQ, so I stuck with the stock tip, trading between the SpinFit & Comply as needed. I found the Comply tips didn’t change the overall sound at all.

That 1st thing that jumps to my mind when I think of the Flat4 is ‘smooth’. I’m not really a fan of using non descriptive elements in my reviews, but there is an easy quality to the sound if you will, lacking hard edges. To break it down more traditionally: I find the sub bass solid with a pleasant amount of emphasis for my tastes. The bass was deep and satisfying, with the mid-bass having a bit less emphasis while being no less engaging. Listening to jazz, double basses sounded woody & acoustic, unlike some IEMs that mar enough to mistake the bass for an electric. The mids retain the smooth theme, sounding lush, with a good amount of detail. These aren’t what I would call ‘Mid-Head’ earphones, but I found the relaxed smooth presentation addictive with almost everything I listened to, and noticed little to no lack of detail. Male & female voices sounded realistic and consistent with their respective recordings. The highs have plenty of sparkle, and no major dips or spikes are evident. Cymbals could occasionally sound overly metallic depending on the recording, kind of like a ‘tick’ instead of a ‘ting’, but it did seem track dependent. Soundstage was fairly wide and tall, especially for an IEM, but not overly deep . Complex passages were handled well with very good instrument separation. I was thoroughly engaged listening to classical and big band as well as rock & dance music. In fact, there wasn’t a single type of music that wasn’t well represented by the Ocharaku.

In the end, I’d have to say that Ocharaku did a wonderful job with the Flat4-KEYAKI Plus. Whether or not you feel the investment in Japanese Zelkova and the collaboration with Oak Village was worth it or not may be questionable, I personally cannot deny the beauty of the wooden housing. By the same token, the technology that the Flat4 was designed with can be debated as well, but for me they did achieve a compelling, articulate and enjoyable earphone. I would definitely recommend a demo to anyone shopping for an Earphone in this price range.

DAPs are our portable music companions. Many will rely on their smartphones for musical enjoyment on the go, but I like to have something a little better sounding, with a bit more power. On the more affordable end of the DAP spectrum, Cayin is offering the N3. Chock full of features, and a MSRP of only $149(USD), read on to find out if Cayin took a big bite out of the Law of Diminishing Returns. The Cayin N3 is on loan from Cayin for a listening tour. I receive no other compensation than my time with the unit in exchange for the review you are now reading. I’d like to thank Andy Kong & Cayin for organizing this tour, and giving us a chance to experience the N3.

Intro

At $149 (USD MSRP) the N3 is the lowest price DAP that Cayin offers, yet it still is fairly feature rich. Some of those features are Bluetooth (4.0 aptX), file sharing with a compatible smartphone, compatibility with some wired headphone controls, quick charging (quoted as 2 hours), USB to coaxial capability (type C to coaxial cable wire sold separately), USB DAC function, up to 256G micro SD card capable, as well as the ability to decode a plethora of file types, including native DSD256. Quite a lot for the asking price IMHO.

Build Quality

The build of the N3 is excellent overall with an aluminum chassis and pleather back it feels solid in the hand. It’s relatively small (10 x 5.4 x 1.3 cm) and only weighs about 100g. It’s easily transportable and fits well into an empty pocket. Everything felt solid, all buttons worked without issue. The only niggle I can find is really not the fault of Cayin. Since this unit was on tour, one of the previous members accidentally jammed an SD card into the slot, not realizing that there was a plastic ‘slot holder’ already inserted. Unfortunately, the card that came with the unit (only 4 GB) was stuck inside and was the only card I was able to use.

Ergonomics

I found the ergonomics fairly intuitive, with physical controls and memory card slot on the left & right sides,


Audio & USB jack on the bottom,

and nothing on the top. The front panel array has the display, a center input button surrounded by 4 capacitive buttons (they’re touch sensitive, no physical button) with defeatable haptic (vibration) feedback. Unfortunately, the capacitive arrows are the only ones that work when adjusting the menu.

I found myself occasionally attempting to adjust with the arrows on the right side since I find I prefer the physical to the capacitive, but I adjusted quickly. I was happy to find that the volume can be adjusted without the screen being activated.

Display

The display Cayin uses is clear and bright, although somewhat fingerprint prone, though if I’m being honest, not more so than other DAPs. The N3 uses a 2.4″ 400 x 300 screen, which is a decent size, but I often found the font for the songs & artist to be difficult to read without glasses. Those with better vision will likely have no problem. The viewing angle is terrific, slightly prone to glare, and it’s dimmable to conserve battery power.

Battery & Amp

I found that battery power is rated somewhat generously since I got more in the neighborhood of 10 hours at a clip. Charging was close enough to the rated 2 hours for me not to take notice. The Amp has a decent amount of juice under the hood (rated at 130 mW+130 mW @32Ω), powering reasonable full size cans without complaint. The N3 did shine with all the IEMs in my collection, having a particular synergy with the Audiofly AF56, as well as my 64 Audio U6 (Adel version). It was able to power the Sennheiser HD600 to an unsafe listening volume, but it was a bit too shrill. The N3 actually fared better with my ZMF Eikon. While not the best pair, the bass was surprisingly pleasant, full & rich if a bit on the loose side. It sounded much better with my AT M40X with which I noticed nothing at all to complain of.

Ins & outs

One of my biggest gripes is that Cayin decided to handle just about everything through the USB interface. Other than the headphone out, the USB is the only way to connect the N3 to an external DAC/amp. I understand this is likely a cost saving measure, but personally I would have liked a dedicated coaxial out, even if there was a (reasonable) price increase. I was never able to test the Coaxial out since you need a USB to coaxial wire which was not included. Too bad, though, I really wanted to hook it up to Hugo to see what it could do.

The Headphone out can be configured as a line out, which sets the volume to 100, however the next time you turn it on, the H/O goes back to the last volume it was set at. The only work around seems to be setting the volume at 100, which will be remembered on the next boot up. When using the N3 as an external DAC/amp, you can’t set the out as a L/O, but you can again set it to 100.

The Bluetooth option worked as advertised. I had a little trouble initially pairing with my Samsung S7, but a quick reboot took care of that. Fidelity over Bluetooth was decent if not quite on the level of the wired options. Obviously in this mode you consume more power for transmitting, and also because you need more volume when using Bluetooth as a source.

One of the listed features is using the N3 as a USB OTG device. You need an adapter to do this. I do have a USB coupling of sorts, but I was unable to use that successfully. Any other OTG adapter I have is for micro USB, so I can’t confirm this feature works, though it is widely reported in other reviews to be functional.

Sound Quality

When I’m listening to a DAP, I’m really listening for any sonic anomalies, anything that draws me’ too far out of the music’. Anything that sounds different with music I am familiar with, while using headphones/earphones I’ve also become accustom to would be a strike against it. On this front, the N3 passed easily, everything sounding as it should.

I found the sound quality to be on par with or better than my current DAPs in this price range (which is all I currently own). The Cayin has a more lively quality than my Fiio X2(1) or my Shanling M2, but it isn’t an overly exaggerated sound. There’s also a smoothness I’m experiencing, a warmish quality rather than clinical without straying too far from neutral. Bass through treble are well represented, and I’m not hearing any roll off at either end, which is what I expect from a quality DAP. As far as I can tell SQ is identical in low or high gain, the only difference being volume, which would obviously benefit more sensitive IEMs. My most sensitive is the aforementioned U6, and I heard no noise while using the N3. I’d say as long as you’re not trying to push it too far, the N3 is a capable musical companion.

Conclusion

I found the N3 to be a well thought out and very capable DAP, with great sound quality (especially for the price) and a whole lot of features for the price. Sure there are a few things I’d like to change, but I can’t deny that Cayin has put out a very competent performer in the N3. If you’re in the market for an affordable, feature rich DAP with great sound and adequate power, the N3 should definitely be on your short list.

Anyone that has been around this hobby for a while knows that there are many different things that influence the quality of sound we get from our gear. Countless articles are written about different amps, dacs, ear tips, ear pads, cables, etc. and the added nuances they can bring to the listening experience. All of these items have a primary function, ear comfort, isolation, signal transmission, signal conversion etc., with changing the sound supposedly being a secondary benefit. The ifi iTube2 is the only piece of equipment other than an equalizer that I can think of whose primary function is to alter sound,. It’s an interesting component that I likely would never have had the opportunity to hear; so my thanks go to Lawrence and ifi for organizing a tour for the Micro iTube2. For those who are unfamiliar with review tours, I receive no compensation other than my time with the review unit in exchange for my honest opinion to be posted here.(please forgive the images, which were all borrowed from the internet)

So what is the Micro iTube2? To paraphrase the ifi website,

“The micro iTube2 is a tubed output stage, tube preamp, tube buffer AND an impedance-matching device all in one. There is nothing like it. You can put the micro iTube2 before a solid-state preamp and another one after it, creating the effect of tubing the whole audio chain. Or you can choose to simply use the micro iTube2 as a very high-quality preamp by itself.”

So it seems the iTube2 is created to impact the sound by adding a tube filter into the signal path. Whereas an equalizer targets a specific bandwidth, the iTube2 is geared more towards the overall tone, although it does have some equalizing properties. At first I was quite intrigued with the idea of adding the ‘tube sound’ to my setup. Then I had some doubts…it seemed a lot of trouble to go through for a ‘tonal shift’ if you will, and I wasn’t exactly sure how to integrate the iTube2 into my setup, so I originally decided to back out of the tour (more on that later). Finally, curiosity won out, and I asked to be included once again, and I can honestly say I am glad I did.

This is, to my knowledge, a unique product. I have heard of tube buffers and the like in guitar set ups for performance or recording, but not in the audio community. The iTube2 can be configured either as a preamp or as a filter between just about any source and an amplifier. I wasn’t able to run the iTube2 as a preamp in my 2 channel home setup, which was one of my hesitations in participating. Since it can be inserted into a headphone audio chain, that’s where I concentrated my listening, with pleasing results. Obviously that’s where my review will concentrate, and I’ll do my best to touch on some of the relevant features, as well as give my impressions of how much the iTube2 impacted my listening experience.

Anyone familiar with the ifi line of products will recognize the shape & layout of the iTube2. On the front from left to right there is the 3D Holographic+® matrix control used for Speakers (off, default & 30˚+), the Xbass+ control (OFF, 20 Hz [+6dB] and 20 Hz [+12dB]), the Tube+® circuit which selects the ‘sonic flavor’ you want ( Push-Pull tube power amplifier, classic tube amplifier, and Single-Ended Triode [SET] power amplifier) and a volume knob which presumably is only functional when set in preamplifier mode since it had no impact during my use as a buffer.


On the rear you’ll find the input/output RCA jacks to connect the iTube2 to your source and amplifier, one side has the power input for attaching the charger, and on the bottom are the ‘dip switches’ for configuring the unit’s output as a preamp or a buffer, and the various adjustments to those settings. As confusing as those switches seem to be, there are only 4 settings listed; 0db & +9db as a buffer, and 0db & +9db as a preamp. There is a handy diagram for setting them printed on the bottom of unit for quick reference.



In keeping with my experience with all ifi products, the iTube2 is built solidly, although it is lighter than I might have expected. The knobs and switches feel solid, and the traditional ifi silver finish is quite attractive IMO. The accessories are fairly sparse, with a charger, ifi’s trademark purple RCA jacks (a unique cord color I haven’t seen anywhere else), a mini screwdriver (presumably for changing the tube), and I believe a right angle plug, which wasn’t in the box I received, so I won’t comment on it (things do get lost in transit on these tours). Sparse in this case is not a negative, because all the essentials are covered and there’s not much more I’d expect to find. I imagine there are no stacking bands because the Itube2 does run a bit hot (common for tubes) and benefits from having good ventilation. (ifi does sell a stacking rack made for their products, info here: http://ifi-audio.com/portfolio-view/accessory-irack/ )

My major hesitation in participating in the ifi tour is that all the dacs I own are integrated (Hugo V1 & Dragonfly V1.2), so the iTube2 would have to be utilized between them and another amp. I thought that it might be interesting to try to run an RCA to 3.5mm cable from the ifi’s outs directly to some headphones, but I was informed that the iTube2 is NOT intended to be used as a headphone amp. One of the benefits listed for the iTube2 is as an impedance matcher, so as far as I can tell that benefit is only to the input of whatever amp you’re using. Regardless, I settled on using my Hugo to the iTube2 to my ALO Continental after my source (either directly from my computer via USB, or from my Shanling M2 by coaxial). The headphones I used were my ZMF Eikon and Sennheiser HD600.

I have to say that once I stopped trying to figure out the best hook up and let myself simply listen, I began to really enjoy my time with the iTube2. Keep in mind that there seemed to be no way to feasibly test my setup with & without the iTube2, so my impressions are in no way scientific. My conclusions could be conformation bias, but I honestly don’t think so. The difference was audible to me, and I stand by what I heard.

Although it seems these settings were engineered for use with speakers, they worked fairly well with headphones as well. The Xbass I found to be very well implemented. At 12db the bass was really thunderous yet I was surprised to find it wasn’t overly distorted with my ZMF Eikon. When set at 6db there was still a very effective boost, and even though I did most of my listening set to ‘off’, I found myself indulging in a bit of basshead pleasure from time to time, with both the HD600 and the Eikon. The 3D+ had a more subtle effect with headphones. I found any change to be concentrating on the treble, adding some clarity and ‘air’ with certain recordings (not very noticeable on others) which I found to be particularly pleasing with my Eikon. I don’t recall ever thinking it was too much.

Of the different tube modes, my favorite was the classic tube amplifier. That setting had the best clarity IMO and it sounded the most dynamic. The highs were a touch clearer, the bass vivid and the mids equally present. Both the Push-Pull tube and Single-Ended Triode [SET] softened the sound a bit too much for my tastes, of course YMMV. I imagine each setting could change depending on the audio chain. Describing sound in words is difficult at best, but what I did find overall was a smoothness, perhaps a refining of the edges of the notes. What I didn’t find was a lack of clarity or a decrease in resolution. Everything still sounded ‘there’; I couldn’t pinpoint anything missing. What was ‘there’ didn’t change in tone, or go so far a smearing, but did seem to soften a touch. It was an addictive sound to be sure, and I found myself getting lost in longer listening sessions than I usually would.

I genuinely enjoyed my time with the Micro iTube2. With a MSRP of $375, it is not for everyone. I’ve heard things like un-digitize, analog-ize and other such phrases that seem a bit over the top to me. I did experience a subtle warmness infused into my music, which once I heard, l wanted to hear more. Value is certainly in the pocket of the beholder, but I can think of worse ways to spend my cash. The iTube2 does seem to live up to it’s promise of adding the often sought after tube flavor to almost any set up.

The item for review is the Shanling UP, which is a Dragonfly-esque USB DAC/amp for use from a computer or mobile phone. A huge thank you goes to nmatheis for lending out the UP for the purposes of this review. Shanling is a relatively lesser known audio company that has actually been in existence in one form or another since 1988, officially taking the name Shanling in 1996. Recently Shanling has been making a bit of a buzz in the personal audio world with their DAPs (I own the M2), and now they have introduced their first portable DAC/amp, the UP.

 
 
I’ll start with a little about myself. I’m pushing 50 and have less than perfect hearing (50 is pushing back). I’ve been a music lover for as long as I can remember, and I learned to listen a little more critically during the few years I sold audio equipment (and the more I listen, the more I learn). My fascination/infatuation with headphones began about 4 years ago, and has only gotten stronger. I’ve only recently taken a more serious look at the hardware end of the audio equation, and I’m enjoying the journey.  The majority of my listening was done listening to FLAC, WAV & various MP3s with my Samsung Galaxy S7, and my HP all in one PC being used as a source. My tastes are fairly eclectic, but my listening centered on classic rock, folk, jazz, classical and various genres of EDM.
 
 
The UP comes in a relatively small box, and not surprisingly there were few accessories (The Audioquest Dragonfly 1.2 I bought had only a storage pouch). The Dragonfly is made to go right into a USB type A slot in a computer or laptop, no wires required. Shanling took the other route, utilizing a USB type C connection for the DAC/amp and including various wires to connect to your source (USB C to A, USB C to micro, USB C to lightning and Type C to Type C).

 
Physically, the UP is similar in size to the Dragonfly, though unlike the Audioquest, UP is made from “2.5D Glass” which I found very easy to smudge with fingerprints.
(Fingerprint Magnet!!)
 
There aren’t any controls to speak of, just a headphone out, a USB in and a low/high gain control.

 
Set up was very straightforward. It was nothing more complicated than plug and play with my Phone. My PC required a driver download to get started. When plugging in the UP for the 1^st time, it did seem that there was an attempt to self-install the driver, but that failed, Unfortunately, I also had bad luck downloading the driver from their website. I’m not sure if the file itself was corrupted, but it was a no go until I got a little help from originalsnuffy, who informed me that any of the Shanling USB drivers would work. After downloading one of the other drivers on their website, I was good to go. If you’re a fan of DSD files, I can report I had no problems playing the few files I have for test purposes.
 
 
My first surprise came as soon as I received the package in the mail. I was excited to try out the UP, and all I had on hand was my HD600 & my phone. I figured, ‘why not? Let’s give it a torture test right off the bat.’ I won’t BS you, it was nowhere near the full potential of the HD600, but at the same time, it wasn’t bad at all. In fact, it was better than the rated 65mW@32ohm has any right to sound driving a 300 ohm 102 dB SPL/V headphone from a smartphone. The bass was loose, especially on demanding tracks, the treble was a bit peakier, but the midrange, that beautiful Sennheiser midrange was still intact. I was surprised how listenable that combo was, but boy did it drain the battery quickly.
 
 
Emboldened, I set up the UP for my PC. The results with the HD600 were better, but marginally, so I went on to see what kind of synergy the Shanling had with some of my other headphones. As you would expect, the UP pairs best with lower impedance headphones, and that’s what I concentrated on. I found the UP to add a slight “U” to most headphones I paired it with, and the result was pleasing with everything I tried. Starting with my 64 Audio U6 (ADEL), I was concerned the pairing would be less than ideal, but It was musical and not over done at all. The U6 is a pretty neutral earphone, and the UP didn’t change that. It did bring a touch more emphasis to the bass and treble without sounding unnatural, or impacting the midrange. The fantastic Cymbal work in Alex Skolnick Trio’s version of ‘Still Loving You’ had a bit more shimmer in the intro, and the bass had slightly more impact.
 
 
Moving on to my AT M40X was a match made in Heaven. They are relatively easy to drive (98db, 35 ohms) but they can sound shrill when underpowered. Paired with the UP, they sounded as good as I’ve heard them.  The pair gave ‘Love Will Keep Us Alive’ from Eagles’ Hell freezes Over a terrific sense of space, highlighting the best of this well recorded tune. Similarly pleasing results were found trying my Cardas A8 with the Up. The A8 does bass really well (IMO) and listening to deadmau5 ‘Bad Selection” from 4x4=12 is a perfect example. When the synth drops at about 30 seconds in, it’s as clean and powerful as you could hope for. The bass has distortion in the recording itself, so if the audio chain isn’t up to snuff, it’ll sound really loose and break up. No such problems here. If you like EDM, I can’t see you not moving your feet with that combo.
 
 
When comparing the Shanling UP to the Audioquest Dragonfly 1.2, one advantage that goes to the UP is being able to pair with a smartphone. Having a high quality audio source that can literally fit in your pocket is a convenience only rivaled by a decent DAP. It could definitely be argued that the UP/smartphone pair is a more convenient solution, especially if you factor in streaming (which I have no real experience with). So I’d give +1 for Shanling.
 
 
In direct sonic comparison, the playing field is more level, and it becomes a matter of preference. I found the Shanling to have a little more power on tap, and to be more sparkly overall, with the 1.2 sounding more smooth. The ‘edges’ around cymbals and such are more etched with the UP, which depending on the recording (and the volume), can be a boon or a bane. I didn’t experience the Audioquest as having any less detail, but rather a more laid back presentation to the upper register.  I found the midrange to be marginally more vivid on the Audioquest, male and female vocals sounding a little further back on the Shanling. Bass was the most similar, with the UP having a bit more mid bass overall, but otherwise being close in quality and quantity.
 
 
On sound quality alone, I’m not sure there is an obvious winner between the two. Feature wise, it’s really not a fair fight. Whereas comparing Audioquest’s more current models would be more appropriate, the Shanling up has the clear advantage here, pairing with a smartphone as well as handling DSD 128 and a max PCM sampling rate of 192 kHz (Dragonfly 1.2 maxes out at 96 kHz). The 1.2 is discontinued, but is still reported to be available on Amazon for $115-$125 USD. The UP retails for about $150, but is currently on Massdrop for $125 (Which means it will be again). Shanling just gives you more for the price.
 
 
Shanling did a really good job with the UP. It’s easy to use, and more importantly it sounds great. It can do justice to some more demanding headphones, but really starts to sing when paired with lower impedance headphones & earphones. If you’re looking for an easy portable solution that can pair with a smartphone or a laptop, you owe it to yourself to check out the Shanling UP.

It is with great pleasure, and with thanks to RHA (as well as nmatheis for helping to organize the North American leg) that I can say that I have been selected to take part in the RHA listening tour. During this tour, I have 10 Days to listen to & evaluate the CL750, CL1 ceramic earphones, and the Dacamp L1, a digital-to-analogue converter with class AB amplifiers. Although I am very grateful to be able to participate in this tour, I receive no compensation other than the joy of listening to these items in the comfort of my own home, and the following review is my honest opinion.

 
I’ll start with a little about myself. I’m pushing 50 and have less than perfect hearing (50 is pushing back). I’ve been a music lover for as long as I can remember, and I learned to listen a little more critically during the few years I sold audio equipment (and the more I listen, the more I learn). My fascination/infatuation with headphones began about 4 years ago, and has only gotten stronger. I’ve only recently taken a more serious look at the hardware end of the audio equation, and I’m enjoying the journey.  The majority of my listening was done listening to FLAC, WAV & various MP3s with my Shanling M2, Fiio x3 (1st gen.), Samsung Galaxy S7, or through my HP all in one PC as a source for the Dacamp L1. My tastes are fairly eclectic, but my listening centered on classic rock, folk, jazz, classical and various genres of EDM.
 
Here’s some features paraphrased from RHA’s website:
 
-High-Resolution Audio certified by Japan Audio Society
 
-Dual ESS SABRE32 ES9018K2M digital-to-analogue converters and class A/B amplifiers,
 
-The Dacamp L1 has a fully balanced circuit configuration; support for audio formats up to 384kHz/32bit PCM and Quad DSD
 
-Bass, treble and gain control
 
-Compatibility with current smartphone OS systems (Android 4.0+ with OTG, iOS)
 
-The Dacamp L1 easily integrates into Linux, Windows and Mac operating systems
 
 -Encased in machined aluminum, formed using aluminum extrusion, resulting in a single, durable piece
 
-The all-metal outer doubles as an electromagnetic shield, protecting against signal interference
 
-Using a 4000mAh lithium ion battery, the Dacamp L1 is able to power headphones from 12 - 600 ohms for up to 10 hours via the 3.5mm headphone out and 4-pin mini XLR connections
 
-While not in use, it can be set to charge portable devices via USB connection
 
-3 year warranty; $549.95 (USD)
 
Accessories are fairly sparse, although I don’t feel as though they left anything out. The box contains Silicone stacking bands, a cleaning cloth, USB micro to USB micro (male x male) cable, USB A to USB micro (male x male) cable, Manual and warranty card. Perhaps they could have included an optical cable of some variety, but given I have no use for it, it wasn’t missed.
 
This tour is my 1st time experiencing any RHA products. RHA has a reputation for a robust build quality, and I can honestly say, that the Dacamp L1 lives up to that reputation. It feels robust in the hand, with solid connections and firmly turning dials. The smooth edges were welcome, and the size was very manageable, feeling comfortable in my hand. This is easily the most portable battery powered DAC/Amp combo I’ve used. There are a couple of ergonomic niggles I’d personally like to change. The fine black on gold input labels I found difficult to read with my aging eyes unless viewed in very strong lighting, or wearing reading glasses. I also would have liked to see a little more travel in the volume wheel, finding the right volume often presented a challenge and was particularly awkward since the only option is to roll the wheel with one finger. Other than that, the Dacamp L1 was easy enough to use and fairly intuitive.
 
The Dacamp L1 has Controls and inputs/outputs on the front left side & rear panel only, the right side being a smooth curved edge that fits nicely in the hand.
The front panel, from right to left has the proprietary 4 pin mini XLR headphone connection, (I think it’s proprietary, it’s made to be used with their Flagship CL1 IEM, and I don’t know of any other manufacturer using this connection) which is only active when using as a DAC/amp combo, an indicator light, (steady when in use, blinking when charging) the horizontally oriented volume wheel, and 3.5mm headphone input.

 
On the left side, also right to left,  there are treble/bass controls (+9/-3 for both) and gain/charge control (3 gain levels, Lo, Med & Hi, and a lightning bolt symbol, when selected will charge an external device through the rear USB Type “A” connection).

 
On the rear there’s a dual purpose 3.5 mm line in/optical input, a micro USB input for use with a computer, the Type “A” USB input for charging, and a 3.5mm line out. Directly underneath the micro USB input there is a selector switch for which input/output you’re using: only one can be used at a time.

 
When using the L1 as an amp only, I found that it had sufficient power to drive my Sennheiser HD600, and enough delicacy to handle my 64 Audio U6 (Adel) with no discernible noise (keep in mind I am not the best judge of hiss due to persistent tinnitus, but other reviewers seem to agree). There was a particular synergy with RHA’s other IEMs on this tour, (The CL1 and the CL750, reviewed separately) but I found that the Dacamp L1 sounded fantastic with my Sennheiser HD600, which could be driven to insane levels, even on low gain. The L1 did warm up with extended use, but I found this was marginal, never feeling hot to the touch. 
 
Personally, I’m a firm believer that amplifiers for the most part (at least amps of the solid state variety) should be the proverbial “Wire with Gain” in that they shouldn’t impart much “color” onto the sound. That being said, in reality I think there is always some sonic coloration passed along when creating an audio chain and an amplifier is no different. I’ll admit that there is the possibility that I haven’t acquired the skill of breaking the sonic influence into bass/mids/treble/soundstage, but I believe that these influences are much more subtle than that. I would go so far as to call an amp full, thin, warm etc. but not much more, especially without having equipment to back up my claims. I find the amp section of the L1 to fall on the warm side of neutral, sounding lush without crossing into thick or muddy territory. When comparing to other amps I have on hand, my ALO National or the ifi micro iDSD BL, (On loan for a listening tour, comparing amp only here) I find there to be more similarities than differences. Because they are all so close in fidelity, without volume matching, it’d be impossible to comment on detail retrieval and the like, but the overall impression I had was that they are all warm-ish amps: everything I played sounded full bodied and satisfying.

 
Unfortunately, I don’t have anything with which to test the optical input, as all of my DAPs only have coaxial outputs. It did pair instantly with my Samsung Galaxy S7, and I found that to make a terrific portable solution, and a distinct improvement in fidelity when compared to the line in. Pairing with a smartphone using the ubiquitous rubber bands is never ideal, but it’s the only real option without resorting to Velcro or something more permanent, which really isn’t an option for a tour unit.


 
If you’re using a PC and you want to use the iDSD BL as a DAC, you need to download the driver from their website (https://www.rha-audio.com/us/downloads ). If you’re a MAC lover, I believe it is supposed to be plug-n-play). Once the driver was downloaded, my HP all in one PC recognized the L1 immediately, and listening could begin. The bass and treble controls are quite effective when adding what’s missing, going all the way to +9, but less so if you’re trying to dial down the tone, only going as low as -3. I did have some fun playing with them from time to time, but in general I found I enjoyed the Dacamp L1 best in its neutral tone settings (excepting when using the RHA CL1, which I cover more extensively in that review).
 
Since fortune smiled upon me and I happened to have the ifi iDSD BL (also priced $549 USD) on hand at the same time, it seems only appropriate that I give my impressions of both.  Build quality between the two is about on par, with the RHA being just a tad more robust overall IMO. The RHA also has the smaller more portable form factor: it’s smaller in every dimension. The RHA does have the balanced headphone output, but being a 4 pin mini XLR input, which seems to only be compatible with their own headphone the CL1 Ceramic ,(at least I don’t know of any other headphone using that connection) which calls Its usefulness into question. Furthermore, and perhaps most disappointing, the benefits of using that connection was not readily apparent…it sounded virtually the same whether used single ended or balanced (reviewer Brooko did record measurements that seem to back this up). The RHA does have bass/treble controls (+9/-3 for both) and 3 gain levels, but the iDSD BL has 5 gain levels, Xbass+, 3D+ and a preamp output. They both can be used to charge a dying cellphone, have about the same battery life/charge time (on paper and in use) and have digital inputs (coaxial and optical for the ifi, optical for the RHA). I’d say all the bells and whistles come down to a matter of preference, and I’d give RHA a slight advantage being more portable. Ergonomically, there isn’t too much to complain about in either case. The biggest problem with the ifi is a somewhat crowded front panel, on the other hand the volume wheel RHA chose, while having better resistance than the ifi, is much harder to control…it steps up in volume more rapidly and is awkward to turn. Sound quality is where the rubber meets the road, as they say, and sonically I’d say it would be a matter of preference. Power output seems comparable overall, with the ifi being more versatile (at least 5 different gain levels). While I find both of these to be on the warm side, I’d say that the ifi is more on the analytical side of warm, while the RHA sounds a touch smoother. These are not night and day differences, and there was no clear sonic winner for me. I’d honestly be more than happy to have either of these in my audio chain. I lean slightly toward the ifi, simply because my DAPs utilize coaxial outputs and I could see myself using that often, but that could easily change with a DAP upgrade.
 
I really enjoyed my time with the Dacamp L1. The combination of portability, power, and great sound is hard to beat. Factor in the fantastic build quality and tone controls and you have a real winning combination. My only real issues are with the over sensitive and awkward volume wheel and the usefulness of the balanced output. $549 is by no means chump change, but for the level of performance you get, there are definitely worse values out there. My thanks again go to RHA as well as nmatheis for including me in this tour….it was a great experience.

It is with great pleasure, and with thanks to RHA (as well as nmatheis for helping to organize the North American leg) that I can say that I have been selected to take part in the RHA listening tour. During this tour, I have 10 Days to listen to & evaluate the CL750, CL1 ceramic earphones, and the Dacamp L1, a digital-to-analogue converter with class AB amplifiers. Although I am very grateful to be able to participate in this tour, I receive no compensation other than the joy of listening to these items in the comfort of my own home, and the following review is my honest opinion.
 
Here’s some info paraphrased from their website:
 
-Stainless steel housings for durability and longevity in addition to low internal resonance
 
-High conductivity oxygen-free copper cable, coated in durable TPE with stainless steel reinforced cable divide and terminations
 
-High impedance (150 Ohms), it is recommended that you use them with a headphone amp (such as the RHA Dacamp L1)
 
-3 year warranty, $139.95 (USD)


 
This is my 1st experience with any RHA products. RHA has a reputation for a robust build quality, and I can honestly say that the CL750 lives up to that reputation. The Stainless steel housings are striking, and their long term durability seems evident to me. They do feel heavy in the hand, but they never felt uncomfortable during any of my listening sessions. The cable is braided oxygen free copper, quite robust, attractive (IMO) and was mostly microphonic free during my listening due to the over ear orientation. As durable as the CL750 seems, there is an incident of note that needs to be mentioned. While shoveling snow, the volume in the right earpiece dropped to an unlistenable level. It seems likely that this was due to moisture since I was exerting myself, however the cause has not been diagnosed. This leads me to believe that these would not make good earphones to exercise with. I am not overly concerned since every manufacturer has problems occasionally, and I haven’t heard of anyone else having problems on the tour. The defective unit was quickly replaced so that the tour could continue.
 
Comfort was very good overall, with the housings sitting securely in my ears. The biggest problem for me comfort wise pertains to the size of the nozzle which exerts a little pressure with any tip I chose. This wasn’t enough for outright discomfort, but I was always aware that there was something stuck in my ear (more so than with some more comfortable IEMs I’ve used from Shure & Westone). I personally have a challenge with IEMs in general due to my left ear canal being smaller than my right, but I found a good fit among the abundance of tips provided by RHA. There are a good amount of accessories included with the CL750. There’s a 3.5mm to 6.35mm adapter, a truly generous amount of tips (11 in all, including 6 pairs in various sizes of single flange, 2 double flanged and 3 genuine Comply Tsx-200 ) a stainless steel holder for the tips, shirt clip, and a fairly large carry case.




 
Before I offer my listening impressions, I’ll start with a little about myself. I’m pushing 50 and have less than perfect hearing (50 is pushing back). I’ve been a music lover for as long as I can remember, and I learned to listen a little more critically during the few years I sold audio equipment (and the more I listen, the more I learn). My fascination/infatuation with headphones began about 4 years ago, and has only gotten stronger. The majority of my listening was done listening to FLAC, WAV & various MP3s with primarily RHA’s own Dacamp L-1, assisted by my Shanling M2, Fiio x3 (1st gen.) or my HP all in one PC  acting as a source. My tastes are fairly eclectic, but my listening centered on classic rock, folk, jazz, classical and various genres of EDM.
 
At 150 ohms and 89db sensitivity, The CL750 is not easy to drive. These earphones do best with a decent amplifier, whether separate or within a dedicated DAP. Plugged directly into my Samsung Galaxy S7, I could certainly achieve adequate volume and the dynamics didn’t suffer much, however I found my Fiio and Shanling to be a noticeable step up in fidelity. The Shanling sounded great at about 30-35 out of 60 on low gain, and when paired with the ALO National the CL750g faired even better. However when paired with the Dacamp L1 I found there was a certain synergy (no surprise there) which is why I did the majority of my listening with that combo.
 
The CL750 is endowed with a full and healthy bass that isn’t overly pumped for my tastes, and supports a fairly neutral mid bass, which is slightly elevated but not overdone. Listening to the song ‘Moorish’ by The Funky Knuckles, the synth intro & kick drum sounded rich with plenty of life, and never crossed into sounding boomy, which can happen on more bass oriented sets. The bass, while energetic enough for EDM, didn’t sound out of place when listening to classical or other acoustic music. Well done RHA.
 
Describing the midrange, the word ‘lush’ comes to mind. Vocals never fell so far back as to be called recessed, but there is a bit of a shroud that mid-heads would not appreciate. While on random, I came across George Thorogood singing ‘Purple People Eater’ of all things, and I found myself enjoying the song. To use this song as an example his voice, which sounds fairly neutral on, say, the HD600, sounds like he’s standing a step further back in the room with the CL750. A song like Madeline Peryoux’s ‘Instead’ sounded a bit more natural overall, even if her voice sounded a little less husky than I’m used to.
 
Moving into the treble is where we run into some potential issues. While I found the treble to be somewhat peaky I didn’t find it too bothersome. There is a little extra shimmer up top that some will find problematic, yet some will likely enjoy. The tone never sounded unnatural to me, but there were times I thought the treble was a little over energetic, again, without being annoying. The cymbals & high hats in Cheryl Crow’s ‘My Favorite Mistake’ took on a pleasant forwardness, and the strings in Zigeunerweisen Opus 20, (written by Pablo de Sarasate) had a wonderfully vivid presentation.  The biggest problem, though is that sibilance is present in the lower treble region, so be forewarned. The S’s in the MP3 I have of Valarie June’s ‘Somebody to Love’ is unpleasant at best. Letting RHA’s Dacamp L1 work its magic by decreasing the treble helped tremendously. Once I dialed it back to -2, the treble became much less obtrusive.
 
Overall, RHA did a heck of a lot right with the CL750. Whether you hold the driver problem against them or not, the build quality, from the stainless steel housing to the robust braided cable and steel termination suggests a product more expensive than its present price. The sound signature has a lot going for it, even if it's not for everyone.There is an issue with sibilance, and some will prefer the midrange to be more forward, but when you tally up a great build, excellent bass, decent midrange, and energetic treble and you have an IEM that I think is going to appeal to a lot of people.

It is with great pleasure, and with thanks to RHA (as well as nmatheis for helping to organize the North American leg) that I can say that I have been selected to take part in the RHA listening tour. During this tour, I have 10 Days to listen to & evaluate the CL750, CL1 ceramic earphones, and the Dacamp L1, a digital-to-analogue converter with class AB amplifiers. Although I am very grateful to be able to participate in this tour, I receive no compensation other than the joy of listening to these items in the comfort of my own home, and the following review is my honest opinion of the CL1.

 
Here are some features paraphrased from their website:
 
-Dual transducer configuration combines the precision CL Dynamic and dedicated high frequency ceramic plate driver
 
-Injection molded ZrO₂ housings for low acoustic chamber resonance and durability
 
-Detachable cable system using custom, locking MMCX connections
 
-Two cables: Ag4x Silver cable with fully balanced  4pin Mini XLR termination for use with Dacamp L1, and a braided high-purity OFC (Oxygen Free Copper) cable terminated in  3.5mm with a 6.35mm adapter, also channel separated to eliminate risk of cross channel interference.
 
-3 year warranty;
 
 -$449.95 MSRP (USD)
 
This is my 1^st experience with any RHA products. RHA has a reputation for a robust build quality, and I can honestly say that the CL1 lives up to that reputation. The fit & finish is simply beautiful. The injection molded housings look sleek, feel durable, and are very comfortable in the ear (at least my ear, as with all IEMs YMMV). The cable is a thing of beauty (IMO…eye of the beholder and all that) and was mostly microphonic free during my listening due to the over ear orientation. The only potential caveat I can find pertains to the proprietary MMCX connectors. I never felt 100% confident that they were properly seated when connecting them, even though they have a tab which leaves only one way to marry the wire & housing. They don’t “click” the way many others do, and I did find myself misaligning them occasionally, though the reseating them was usually easy enough.

 
As previously mentioned, comfort was very good overall, with the small housings sitting securely in my ears. The biggest problem for me comfort wise pertains to the size of the nozzle which exerted a little pressure with any tip I chose. This wasn’t enough for outright discomfort, but I was always aware that there was something stuck in my ear (more so than with some more comfortable IEMs I’ve used from Shure & Westone). I personally have a challenge with IEMs in general due to my left ear canal being smaller than my right, but I found a good fit among the abundance of tips provided by RHA.
There was a good amount of accessories included with the CL1. There’s 2 cables and a 3.5mm to 6.35mm adapter, a truly generous amount of tips (11 in all, including 6 pairs in various sizes of single flange, 2 double flanged and 3 genuine comply Tsx-200) a stainless steel holder for the tips, shirt clip, and a fairly large carry case. I feel the need to take a closer look at the second cable they include with the CL1. This cable has a balanced headphone plug terminated in a 4 pin mini XLR, which seems to only be compatible with their own Dacamp1 (at least I don’t know of any other manufacturer using that connection). While that could be a worthwhile addition even if the connector is proprietary, what struck me as odd was that the benefits of using that connection was not readily apparent…it sounded just about the same when used single ended or balanced (reviewer Brooko did record measurements that seem to back this up). In any case, utilizing a more common connector, such as a TRRS would have been much more useful.



(I forgot to take a pic of the 4 pin XLR connection)


 
Before I offer my listening impressions, I’ll start with a little about myself. I’m pushing 50 and have less than perfect hearing (50 is pushing back). I’ve been a music lover for as long as I can remember, and I learned to listen a little more critically during the few years I sold audio equipment (and the more I listen, the more I learn). My fascination/infatuation with headphones began about 4 years ago, and has only gotten stronger. The majority of my listening was done listening to FLAC, WAV & various MP3s with primarily RHA’s own Dacamp L-1, assisted by my Shanling M2, Fiio x3 (1st gen.) or my HP all in one PC  acting as a source. My tastes are fairly eclectic, but my listening centered on classic rock, folk, jazz, classical and various genres of EDM.
 
At 150 ohms and 89db sensitivity, The CL1 is not easy to drive. These earphones do best with a decent amplifier, whether separate or within a dedicated DAP. Plugged directly into my Samsung Galaxy S7, I could certainly achieve adequate volume and the dynamics didn’t suffer all that much, however I found my Fiio and Shanling to be a noticeable step up in fidelity. The Shanling sounded great at about 30-35 out of 60 on low gain, and when paired with the ALO National the CL1 faired even better. However the CL1 paired with the Dacamp L1 had the best synergy I heard (no surprise there) which is why I did the majority of my listening with that combo. The impressions I’ll share are with the default tuning, without EQ which I’ll address later on.
 
Starting with the sub bass, I found it to be pretty pumped up, giving ZZ wards ‘When the Casket Drops’ a solid though overzealous foundation. I am often drawn to an extra dollop of sub bass, but this tuning is farther north of neutral than I typically enjoy. I did appreciate it on many tunes, though, particularly older recordings like Cream’s ‘Badge’. The bass added a healthy amount of oomph down low, without jacking the mid bass.  The mid bass does sound slightly elevated, but definitely not overblown. On Sarah Jaffe’s ‘Watch Me Fall Apart’, the bass notes have a good amount of presence and texture, but again I’m struck more by the sub bass emphasis the kick drum has, which lends an overly thunderous quality to the track.
 
The mids are relatively scooped, sitting further back in the mix than I would anticipate on a flagship IEM. Cueing up some Stevie Nicks, she sounded more distant than I’m used to hearing on her already relaxed recordings. On ‘Stop Draggin’ My Heart Around’ both she and Tom Petty sound further back from the microphone. RHA’s other new release, the CL750, (reviewed separately) has a similar dip in the midrange, but it doesn’t sound nearly as pronounced, probably because the “V”  shaped tuning isn’t as severe…the bass & treble aren’t as elevated, so the mids have more presence to spite the dip.
 
Moving into the treble, I think we find the area where most people will have the largest problem. There is a very sharp spike somewhere around in the 4k to 6k range that makes the CL1 hard to listen to without EQ. Personally, I am not very treble sensitive, but I found myself rapidly fatigued  listening to the default tuning. Cymbals strike with an unnatural shimmer and are more forward in the mix than was likely intended. The prominent finger snaps in Lorde’s ‘Royals’, which is already recorded hot, takes on the sonic quality of wood sticks striking together. Any tracks that you might usually find to be sibilant are that much more so. Crystal Bowersox singing ‘Speak Now’, or Kacey Musgraves singing ‘Silver Lining’ are tracks that are already sibilant. Through the CL1’s default tuning, they become almost painful.
 
Tip rolling did help a bit; using Comply tips with a wax guard did mitigate the effect slightly. I found Sony tips sounded the same as RHA stock & fit me better, so I stuck with them or the Comply T200 w/wax guard. To really appreciate what the CL1 is capable of I found it was imperative to add EQ. Using the Dacamp L1, tuning the bass -1 and the treble -3 helped tremendously.  Using a graphic EQ you can fine tune the sound even more carefully. On my all in one PC using JRiver, I applied a small drop at 60 Hz, a bump at 310 Hz & 600 Hz, with an equal drop at 3 kHz, a larger drop at 6 kHz and another at 12 kHz and had terrific results. This of course raises the question of whether or not EQing to achieve the desired sound is “cheating”. Should someone have to spend premium prices for a headphone, only to add EQ and change the sound? Many people do buy the Sennheiser HD800 and do just that, so the question is, is it unwarranted here? Only you can answer that for yourself, but I personally am not a fan. It’s one thing to judiciously adjust the SQ in order to dial in the perfect sound; it’s another to significantly alter it through EQ.
 
I can’t help but feel that the CL1 comes off as a work in progress. Whereas RHA got a lot right IMO concerning the build, overall quality, and ergonomics, the sound signature they chose I find to be too extreme to outright recommend. This can be fixed through applying EQ, but I feel that shouldn’t be necessary, especially in a flagship. I’m not a fan of Baseball, but the analogy I would draw wouldn’t be so much a swing and a miss, it would be more like a foul tip. If they can drop the sub-bass a bit, bring the mids a touch forward and tame the treble, they’ll have something very special on their hands indeed.

It is with great pleasure that I can say that I have been selected to take part in the iFi Micro iDSD Black Label listening tour. My thanks to Lawrence from iFi for helping to organize the USA East leg of the tour. What this means, is that I have 1 week to listen to & evaluate the ifi Micro iDSD Black Label, which is a DAC utilizing a dual core Burr-Brown DSD512/PCM768/2xDXD chip and headphone amplifier. Although I am very grateful to be able to participate in this tour, I receive no compensation other than the joy of listening in the comfort of my own home, and the following review is my honest opinion. This is my 1^st ever review of a DAC/amp, so please bear with me as I try to hit all the pertinent points.
 
 
I’ll start with a little about myself. I’m pushing 50 and have less than perfect hearing (50 is pushing back). I’ve been a music lover for as long as I can remember, and I learned to listen a little more critically during the few years I sold audio equipment (and the more I listen, the more I learn). My fascination/infatuation with headphones began about 4 years ago, and has only gotten stronger. I’ve only recently taken a more serious look at the hardware end of the audio equation, and I’m enjoying the journey. I've never had the opportunity to hear the original iDSD, so I'm particularly glad to spend some time with the Black Label. The majority of my listening was done listening to FLAC, WAV & various MP3s with my Shanling M2, Fiio x3 (1st gen.), Samsung Galaxy S7, or through my HP all in one PC as a source for the iDSD BL. My tastes are fairly eclectic, but my listening centered on classic rock, folk, jazz, classical and various genres of EDM.
 
 
First, let’s get a couple of ergonomic niggles out of the way. When using the iDSD BL as an amp only, the front panel gets awfully crowded, (especially if you’re using a ¼” to 1/8”) adapter making it difficult to adjust the volume or activate/deactivate the Xbass+ or 3D+. Perhaps changing these 2 filters to the right side would alleviate this issue, especially since I didn’t find myself using them a whole lot. Occasionally, I found the selectors on the bottom of the unit to change positions during normal movement of the unit from one place to another. In fact, at one point one of the plastic knobs fell off of the selector switch it was attached to (giving me a slight heart attack since I don’t own the unit)

 
Fortunately I found and reattached it without further incident. A set of raised feet would likely prevent this from happening.  I also found the volume pot can use a bit more resistance. It was too easy to turn, and although I give kudos for the orange font on the bottom, a volume indicator line that’s not black on black would be much more useful (and greatly appreciated).
 
 
The iDSD BL came with a generous amount of accessories. There are 2 of the usual rubber bands for stacking, RCA cables for preamplifier use, a storage pouch, USB A to USB B cable, 3.5mm (male x male, for use with the line in) adapter, 3.5mm x 6.35mm adapter (the front panel has a ¼” headphone out only), an optical by RCA adapter, USB A (female to male) adapter, and a rubber mat. There’s really not much more I could say I’d like to see included.
 
 
There are so many things this little beast can do I feel a bit overwhelmed trying to cover it all. On the front panel from left to right, you have a ¼” headphone input jack, Xbass+ control (on/off), 3.5mm audio input jack,  “3D+” control (a filter said to create a larger soundstage, also on/off), and the volume control dial.

 
The right side is bare, except a USB Type 'A' Female connection for charging other devices.

 
Around the rear there is an “Intelligent In/Out SPDIF Digital Optical/Coax” connection that automatically configures to Coaxial or Optical use, a left & right female RCA output, and a USB Type 'A' male digital input.

 
Moving along to the left side, there is one portion of the gain control (Eco/Normal/Turbo), a polarity switch (+/-) and filter control (Bit Perfect/Minimum Phase/Standard).

 
On the bottom of the unit, there are markings to identify all the controls on the sides and back (orange on black is very legible, thank you!)
as well as the other portion of the gain control called IE Match (Off/High Sensitivity/Ultra Sensitivity) and control for the rear RCA outs (Preamplifier/Direct).As I said there is a lot the iDSD BL can do, and given I was only able to spend a week with it, I’ll concentrate on what I did use.

 
There are five power output modes, Eco, Normal and Turbo, High Sensitivity, Ultra Sensitivity. Their website states that the micro iDSD BL is able to have the power and gain dialed-in to”perfectly suit all headphones”. In truth, everything from my 64 Audio U6 to my Sennheiser HD600, the ifi easily delivered whatever power was needed. It had copious amounts of power when called for, never needing to go over 11:00 on Normal gain with the HD600, and more often closer to 9:00. I am not the best judge of hiss due to persistent (and tenacious) tinnitus, however without music playing using my U6 on Eco gain, there was no discernible noise whatsoever (YMMV). Obviously, when using the High Sensitivity or Ultra Sensitivity settings, there would be even less noise. I’ll note that I’m not sure what “type” of amp the iDSD BL utilizes, but it never felt more than warm to the touch, even during heavy usage.
 
 
 I’m a firm believer that amplifiers for the most part (at least amps of the solid state variety) should be the proverbial “Wire with Gain” in that they shouldn’t impart much “color” onto the sound. That being said, in reality I think there is always some sonic coloration passed along when creating an audio chain and an amplifier is no different. I’ll admit that there is the possibility that I haven’t acquired the skill of breaking the sonic influence into bass/mids/treble/soundstage, but I believe that these influences are much more subtle than that. I would go so far as to call an amp full, thin, warm etc. but not much more, especially without having equipment to back up my claims. I find the amp section of the IDSD to fall on the warm side of neutral without sounding thick or muddy in any way. When comparing to other amps I have on hand, my ALO National or the RHA Dacamp1 (On loan for a listening tour, comparing amp only here) I find there to be more similarities than differences. Because they are all so close in fidelity, without volume matching, it’d be impossible to comment on detail retrieval and the like, but the overall impression I had was that they are all warm-ish amps: everything I played sounded full bodied and satisfying.

 
If you’re using a PC and you want to use the iDSD BL as a DAC, you need to download the driver from their website ( http://ifi-audio.com/micro-idsd-ifi-xmos-firmware/ ). If you’re a MAC lover, it is supposed to be plug-n-play, I believe. Downloading and installing the appropriate driver was more of a challenge than I expected (IOS users, this is your cue to laugh). Every time I downloaded the driver to install, it would literally disappear after a few seconds. It was there, and then it wasn’t. To say I was perplexed would be an understatement. I assumed that there must be an explanation, so I read a bit online until I came across one post noting that you may have to turn off your anti-virus. How a driver could look like malware is beyond my computer knowledge, but someone figured it out, and I’m glad they did. I turned off my Norton, and we were back in business. Once the driver was downloaded, and the  ifi took over DAC duties, the synergy of the DAC/amp combo became readily apparent.
Since the front panel does get crowded once the line in is being used, I mostly opted to use it through the Coaxial input or as a DAC/amp. The coax from my Fiio or Shanling sounded terrific, with plenty of detail and space, definitely a step up from the line out IMO. The iDSD BL is unwieldy, but is indeed portable enough to move from room to room, or to take with you for listening while writing in a coffee shop or other stationary activity. This was quite welcome if I didn’t feel like being tied to my computer to listen, or wanted to continue my listening session elsewhere if it was getting noisy. The iDSD BL did pair easily to my Samsung Galaxy S7, and though there was no faulting the sound quality, it was awkward at best given the size difference. Again, if being used while stationary, it wouldn’t be a big issue, but it’s not really a portable solution.

 
 I do think most people will opt to use this primarily as a DAC/amp, either on a desktop, or portably with a laptop. If I were to do a blind test, I would be very hard pressed indeed to distinguish between the coax & the USB, at least with my current sources, and I think that’s a very good thing since I enjoyed the iDSD BL so much either way. Again, without a proper A/B test I don’t feel confident enough to give a definitive answer as to which one is better, but I am inclined to say the DAC in the iDSD BL would be the superior choice. It definitely has a synergy with the amp section, and benefited from being fed higher bitrate files without being too unforgiving of MP3s. I could (and did) listen to this for hours, enjoying every minute.
 
 
Moving on to the filters, I’ll start by saying, I’m not a huge fan. When testing the polarity switch and filter control, I heard no appreciable difference at all, regardless of the position, so I left them in positive & Bit Perfect respectively. There is a possibility that they would have a greater effect on speakers if the DAC was used through the line out, but I never got the chance to test it that way. I don’t know if the Xbass+ and 3D+ switches are considered filters, but even though I didn’t use them much, I did hear an effect on the audio when using them. The Xbass+ seemed to have an effect primarily on the sub bass, whereas the 3D+ is intended to be a spatializer of sorts, to widen the perceived soundstage. I found the 3D+ to effect the treble mostly and added some “grain” up top. I mostly left these off, but did occasionally find them helpful when used together as a sort of loudness control, adding a bit of clarity for low level listening. My personal preference (and recommendation to RHA) would be for the iDSD BL to have an adjustable treble and bass control, +/- 5 or so, which seems to me would be a more universally useful tool.
 
 
Since fortune smiled upon me and I happened to have the RHA Dacamp L1 (also priced $549 USD) on hand at the same time, it seems only appropriate that I give my impressions of both.  Build quality between the two is about on par, with the RHA being just a tad more robust overall IMO. The RHA also has the smaller more portable form factor: it’s smaller in every dimension. The RHA has a balanced headphone output as well, but it’s a 4 pin mini XLR input, which seems to only be compatible with their own headphone the CL1 Ceramic (at least I don’t know of any other headphone using that connection). Furthermore, the benefits of using that connection was not readily apparent…it sounded just about the same when used single ended or balanced (reviewer Brooko did record measurements that seem to back this up). The RHA does have bass/treble controls (+9/-3 for both) and 3 gain levels, but the iDSD BL has 5 gain levels, Xbass+, 3D+ and a preamp output. They both can be used to charge a dying cellphone, have about the same battery life/charge time and have digital inputs (coaxial and optical for the ifi, optical for the RHA). I’d say all the bells and whistles come down to a matter of preference, and I’d give RHA a slight advantage being more portable. Ergonomically, there isn’t too much to complain about in either case. The biggest problem with the ifi is a somewhat crowded front panel, on the other hand the volume wheel RHA chose, while having better resistance than the ifi, is much harder to control…it steps up in volume more rapidly and is awkward to turn. Sound quality is where the rubber meets the road, as they say, and sonically I’d say it would be a matter of preference. Power output seems comparable overall, with the ifi being more versatile (at least 5 different gain levels). While I find both of these to be on the warm side, I’d say that the ifi is more on the analytical side of warm, while the RHA sounds a touch smoother. These are not night and day differences, and there was no clear sonic winner for me. I’d honestly be more than happy to have either of these in my audio chain. I lean slightly toward the ifi, simply because my DAPs utilize coaxial outputs and I could see myself using that often, but that could easily change with a DAP upgrade.
 
 
I am truly sorry to see the iDSD BL leave. In my opinion, except for some small niggles, ifi has done a great job with the iDSD BL. It’s well built, very versatile, has plenty of power on tap, and sounds fantastic. The price is a bit high, but you do get a lot for your money. My thanks again go to Lawrence and ifi. After spending a week with the iDSD, I can definitely recommend checking it out if you‘re in the market for a DAC/amp. It is definitely worth a listen.

       Let me start by sincerely thanking Meze for organizing this tour. I have (gratefully) been selected to participate in this Headphone Tour, during which I am able to listen to and keep the 11 Neo. The only requirement is to post the review which you see here. Having the opportunity to sample equipment in the comfort of my own home, with my own source and music, is an absolute joy for which I am truly grateful. The Meze 11 Neo’s MSRP is $59 (USD) and can be found here: https://mezeheadphones.com/collections/all/products/meze-11-neo-iridium-earphones
 
 
Build Quality Comfort and Accessories
 
 
       Let’s put the first thing first. My pet peeve: Manufacturers, can we PLEASE make it easy to distinguish right from left? The Meze are symmetrical earphones, and there is no angle to the nozzle. While listening to the Meze 12 Classics (Meze’s step up offering, for $20 more) for review, I figured out that the mic is to the right by listening for the breath in the right channel of Zep’s “Going to California” long before I noticed the markings on the strain relief just below the driver housing. They aren’t colored, just raised and rather small (which is necessary given the gauge of wire used, but still). I think all manufacturers need to approach this in a more user friendly way.
 
       Beyond that, I’d say Meze did very well. The real metal housings look awesome, (my sample was the Iridium color, which I find reminiscent of Apple’s Rose Gold) and I found them to be very ergonomic…easy to grip and the end of the barrel is concave making it easy to insert in the ear. Comfort was never an issue. Nothing rubs against my ears, and once a good seal was made, I never experienced any discomfort during long listening sessions. The cable appears to be of high quality and feels very robust; however the cable is VERY microphonic in my experience. Wearing them cable up didn’t work well, either. The cable may be durable, but it is too stiff, so it wouldn’t stay wrapped around my ear. Wearing the cable in that manner also put the microphone next to the angle of my jaw, which isn’t ideal for conversations and made it awkward to use the control. I found that using the included shirt clip mostly mitigated the problem, so it wasn’t a big deal for me in the long run. The clip was a royal PITA to put on, but once attached was in no danger of falling off. Meze included a good amount of accessories for this price; 5 different pairs of tips (silicone S, M, L, bi-flange, and genuine Comply), a semi rigid clamshell case (zippered & a good size to fit in your pocket) and a Velcro cable tie, as well as the aforementioned shirt clip. 
 
       Before I offer my listening impressions, I’ll start with a little about myself. I’m pushing 50 and have less than perfect hearing. I’ve been a music lover for as long as I can remember, and I learned to listen a little more critically during the few years I sold audio equipment (and the more I listen, the more I learn). My fascination/infatuation with headphones began about 4 years ago, and has only gotten stronger. The majority of my listening was done listening to FLAC, WAV & various MP3s with my Shanling M3, Fiio x3 (1st gen.), Samsung Galaxy S7, or through my HP all in one PC and Audioquest Dragonfly1.2. My tastes are fairly eclectic, but my listening centered on classic rock, folk, jazz, classical and various genres of EDM. I did burn them in for 36 hours prior to critical listening; however I did not hear any notable difference throughout my evaluation.
 
 
Sound
 
 
       While not as efficient as BA drivers, I found that I could achieve good volume with any source I tried. With my Samsung Galaxy S7, the volume isn’t graded by numbers. The volume tended to edge toward the red “unsafe” listening mark when listening to some tracks, yet the Meze never sounded strained. I found the Neo to be more forgiving of lower quality recordings, likely due to the more relaxed sound signature, and scaling up to better sources did help with detail retrieval, but it wasn’t a night and day difference. I achieved a good seal and great performance with the stock silicone tips, so I did all my listening with them. Whether because of the shallow insertion, or the vented enclosure, isolation was average, muting outside noise but not totally blocking it out. I found they performed well while traveling, but personally they wouldn’t be my 1st choice, since I tended to bump the volume a bit too much to compensate in louder environments.
 
       I found the tonal balance to be very smooth. Breaking the sound into the usual categories, I’ll work from the bottom up. Sub bass is solid, but not overly accentuated. Listening to Lorde singing ‘Royals’, I can discern the lowest notes clearly, but the mid bass has a little less punch and doesn’t grab my attention as much. I didn’t find any aspect of the bass to be sloppy at all. Listening to ‘Defense’ by Sarah Jaffe, if found it easy to distinguish between the electric bass and the lower octave synth notes. In ‘I Said’ (Michael Woods Remix) by deadmau5 the bass was powerful and energetic without becoming a sloppy blurry mess. My personal preference usually leans toward a weighty sub bass & more linear mid bass, and I think the 11 Neo’s presentation delivered in spades.
 
       Moving on to the mids, there is detail and articulation, but it is more subdued without sounding veiled. When listening to hotter recordings, sibilance was minimal, smoothed out by the more relaxed presentation. Even though there may be a perceived lack of crispness, tonally male & female vocals both sounded natural. Starting with ‘The Sound of Silence’, as reinterpreted by Disturbed, David Draiman’s voice still sounded thick rich and gravelly, which is how it is supposed to sound. The punctuations on the letter “S” in this song can accent sibilance on many earphones, but that effect was lessened here. In order to totally discredit my musical taste, I’ll confess to enjoying several of American Idol’s Alumni. In particular, the voice of Crystal Bowersox mesmerized me from the 1^st time I heard it and still does to this day. Her first release, Farmer’s Daughter, is a fine example of a recording where the vocals can be a bit too energetic on many headphones. Hearing ‘Speak Now’ on the 12 Neo, her voice wasn’t harsh, and had just the right amount of detail. Another highlight was listening to Miley Cyrus (am I discredited yet?) sing ‘Two More Lonely People’ which is a song that is reminiscent of 70’s disco. On this track the Meze accented the rich tone of her voice and the bass never intruded on the mids.
 
       Treble had a touch less shimmer for me than I’m used to but was no less enjoyable. Strings and cymbals sounded slightly further back in the mix avoiding any hint of shrillness. The cowbell played throughout the Stone’s ‘Honky Tonk Woman’ may not have sounded quite as bright as on other headphones, but it rang true and clear, and the strings on Snarky Puppy’s ‘Sintra’ were thicker than I’m used to, but very clear. Another example, ‘Funky Lover’ by Neon Grandma (a funk band released in ’98) has plenty of complex cymbal work throughout and sounded brilliant on the 11 Neo. The Neo is mellower, and may be a touch less resolving than the step up Meze 12 Classic, but there is still plenty to enjoy here.
 
       While not outstanding, the soundstage was fairly wide with a good amount of depth, and a little bit less height. Listening to Jeff Beck Live+, I felt as if I was about 3th row center in a fairly large venue. I never felt the soundstage to be overly constricted or flat, even on older recordings like the Fats Domino’s ‘Blueberry hill’. The soundstage may not be dramatically large and impressive but it never drew attention to itself at all unless I was listening for it.
 
 
Quick Comparison
 
 
       Since I was fortunate enough to be chosen for the Meze 12 Classic tour as well, I thought it would be useful to do a comparison to the 11 Neo’s more expensive sibling (retailing for $20 more). The build quality, isolation, comfort and accessories are all but identical between the two pairs (Same mic, remote, cable, and 3.5mm connectors). Whether you like the dark walnut barrel of the 12 Classic or the smooth metal appearance of the 11 Neo, the overall quality is undeniable.
 
       While sonically comparing both, there is enough of a similarity to begin to define a house sound, yet enough differences to distinguish each of them. I found the Classic to be a bit crisper overall, with a slight mid-bass emphasis, well-defined mids and slightly more energetic treble. This is not like comparing a Sennheiser HD 650 to a Beyerdynamic T70, because they have more in common than not. ‘I Said’ (deadmau5) had a little less oomph in the sub bass, and a touch more in the mid bass on the 12 Classic. Voices on the Classic were crisp without being strident; the sibilance noted in Disturbed’s ‘The Sound of Silence’ was evident and a little more pronounced. Listening to Tina’s cello in ‘First Embrace’ by Peter Kater and Tina Guo, I found the Neo to have a shade more richness in the cello; the Classics revealed a touch more bite. As much as I thought I would gravitate toward the Neo, I can honestly say I enjoy the Classic equally. If you have über-revealing sources, the Neo might be the perfect fit. If your sources are the dark and rich, the Classic could be the ticket. It really boils down to a matter of preference, and I am thrilled that I have them both.
 
 
Conclusion
 
 
       My thanks again go to the Meze team. I am very pleased to have been introduced to the Meze brand and to the 11 Neo. The 11 Neo are a smooth, musical, engaging earphone that perform well with any type of music you throw at them. Solid Build, beautiful appearance and quality accessories are the icing on the cake. If I hadn’t been familiar with Meze, and you handed me a pair and let me listen for a while, I’d have no problem believing these were easily twice the price. At $59, I’d call these a steal. Well done, Meze. Well done indeed.

       Let me start by sincerely thanking Meze for organizing this tour. I have (gratefully) been selected to participate in this Headphone Tour, during which I am able to listen to and keep the 12 Classic. The only requirement is to post the review which you see here. Having the opportunity to sample equipment in the comfort of my own home, with my own source and music, is an absolute joy for which I am truly grateful. The Meze 12 Classic’s MSRP is $79 (USD) and can be found here: https://mezeheadphones.com/products/meze-12-classics-gun-metal-wood-earphones
 
 
Build Quality Comfort and Accessories
 
 
       Let’s put the first thing first. My pet peeve: Manufacturers, can we PLEASE make it easy to distinguish right from left? The Meze are symmetrical earphones, and there is no angle to the nozzle. I figured out that the mic is to the right by listening for the breath in the right channel of Zep’s “Going to California” long before I noticed the markings on the strain relief just below the driver housing. And I looked hard when I first got them. If it wasn’t for a particularly sunny day, (and the fact that I happened to be wearing reading glasses,) I’m not sure I would have found the markings at all. They aren’t colored, just raised and rather small (which is necessary given the gauge of wire used, but still). I think all manufacturers need to approach this in a more user friendly way.
 
       Beyond that, I’d say Meze did very well. The walnut wood housings look awesome, and I found them to be very ergonomic…easy to grip and the end of the barrel is concave making it easy to insert in the ear. Comfort was never an issue. Nothing rubs against my ears, and once a good seal was made, I never experienced any discomfort during long listening sessions. The cable appears to be of high quality and feels very robust; however the cable is VERY microphonic in my experience. Wearing them cable up didn’t work well, either. The cable may be durable, but it is too stiff, so it wouldn’t stay wrapped around my ear. Wearing the cable in that manner also put the microphone next to the angle of my jaw, which isn’t ideal for conversations and made it awkward to use the control. I found that using the included shirt clip mostly mitigated the problem, so it wasn’t a big deal for me in the long run. The clip was a royal PITA to put on, but once attached was in no danger of falling off. Meze included a good amount of accessories for this price; 5 different pairs of tips (silicone S, M, L, bi-flange, and genuine Comply), a semi rigid clamshell case (zippered & a good size to fit in your pocket) and a Velcro cable tie, as well as the aforementioned shirt clip.  
 
       Before I offer my listening impressions, I’ll start with a little about myself. I’m pushing 50 and have less than perfect hearing. I’ve been a music lover for as long as I can remember, and I learned to listen a little more critically during the few years I sold audio equipment (and the more I listen, the more I learn). My fascination/infatuation with headphones began about 4 years ago, and has only gotten stronger. The majority of my listening was done listening to FLAC, WAV & various MP3s with my Shanling M3, Fiio x3 (1st gen.), Samsung Galaxy S7, or through my HP all in one PC and Audioquest Dragonfly1.2. My tastes are fairly eclectic, but my listening centered on classic rock, folk, jazz, classical and various genres of EDM. I did burn them in for 36 hours prior to critical listening; however I did not hear any notable difference throughout my evaluation.
 
 
Sound
 
 
       While not as efficient as BA drivers, I found that I could achieve good volume with any source I tried. With my Samsung Galaxy S7, the volume isn’t graded by numbers. The volume tended to edge toward the red “unsafe” listening mark when listening to some tracks, yet the Meze never sounded strained. (How does the phone know the actual SPL output, anyway? I appreciate the effort to fight hearing loss, but it seems a bit impractical to have to hit “OK” every time the volume creeps past the threshold.) As good as the Meze Samsung combo was I did find them to scale well with my better sources. I achieved a good seal and great performance with the stock silicone tips, so I did all my listening with them. Whether because of the shallow insertion, or the vented enclosure, isolation was average, muting outside noise but not totally blocking it out. I found they performed well while traveling, but personally they wouldn’t be my 1^st choice, since I tended to bump the volume a bit too much to compensate in louder environments.
 
       I found the tonal balance to be captivating. Breaking the sound into the usual categories, I’ll work from the bottom up. Sub bass is present, but not accentuated. Listening to Lorde singing ‘Royals’, I can discern the lowest notes, but the mid bass has more punch and grabs my attention. I didn’t find the punch in the bass to be sloppy at all. Listening to Casey Abrams’ fingers pluck his standup bass during ‘Blame It on Me’, the attack and tone sounded natural not blurred. ‘I Said’ (Michael Woods Remix) by deadmau5 was stand up and dance good…I just couldn’t get enough. My personal preference usually leans more toward a weightier sub bass & more linear mid bass, but the 12 Classics presentation was totally engaging and enjoyable.
 
       Moving on to the mids, we have detail and articulation a plenty, with only a hint of sibilance in hotter recordings. Even though we’re not on the level of refinement found in TOTL offerings, male & female vocals both sounded natural. A good example is ‘The Sound of Silence’, as reinterpreted by Disturbed. David Draiman’s voice sounded like thick hot gravel, which is how it is supposed to sound, but the punctuations on the letter S were a tad sharp. The 2 collaborations between Joe Bonamassa & Beth Hart are among my favorite Rock recordings. When Beth is bringing it home at about 2:08 into ‘Chocolate Jesus’, I literally got chills. I discovered Carla Huhtanen from a free MP3 Download, “Eternal Baroque”. Hearing her sing ‘Griselda’, RV 718 (Vivaldi) on the 12 Classics, the reverb from the space was clearly discernible and her voice rang out powerfully. It amazes me how enjoyable a well recorded 239 MBPS MP3 can be, and playing this one on the Meze was the perfect reminder.
Treble had just the right amount of shimmer for me. Strings and cymbals sounded wonderfully crisp and resonant without entering into shrillness. The high hats in ‘Bad Asteroid’ by The Aristocrats, or ‘After the Thrill is Gone’ by Eagles (it’s so hard not to write “the Eagles”) was well defined not pushed back in the mix, and the strings in Mozart’s Symphony #1 in E-Flat major had the right amount of presence and bite. In song after song, no matter the genre, the Meze’s highs proved to be well defined without becoming overwhelming.
 
       While not outstanding, the soundstage was pleasantly wide with a good amount of depth, and a bit less height. Listening to Jeff Beck Live+, I felt as if I was about 5^th row center in a fairly large venue. I never felt the soundstage to be overly constricted or flat, even on older recordings like the Stone’s ‘Street Fighting Man’. The soundstage may not be dramatically large and impressive but it never drew attention to itself at all unless I was listening for it.
 
 
Quick Comparison
 
 
       Since I was fortunate enough to be chosen for the Meze 11 Neo tour as well, I thought it would be useful to do a comparison to the 12 Classic’s little sibling (retailing for $20 less). The build quality, isolation, comfort and accessories are all but identical between the two pairs (Same mic, remote, cable, and 3.5mm connectors). Whether you like the dark walnut barrel of the 12 Classic or the smooth metal appearance of the 11 Neo, (my sample was the Iridium color, which I find reminiscent of Apple’s Rose Gold) the overall quality is undeniable.
 
       While sonically comparing both, there is enough of a similarity to begin to define a house sound, yet enough differences to distinguish each of them. I found the Neo to be a bit smoother overall, with more of a sub bass emphasis, well-defined mids and a more relaxed treble. This is not like comparing a Sennheiser HD 650 to a Beyerdynamic T70, because they have more in common than not. ‘I Said’ (deadmau5) had a little extra oomph in the sub bass, and a touch less in the mid bass. Voices on the Neo were lush without being recessed; the sibilance noted in Disturbed’s ‘The Sound of Silence’ was still there (it’s in the recording) but less pronounced. Listening to Tina’s cello in ‘First Embrace’ by Peter Kater and Tina Guo, I found the Neo to have a shade more richness in the cello; the Classics revealed a touch more bite. As much as I thought I would gravitate toward the Neo, I can honestly say I enjoy the Classic equally. If you have über-revealing sources, the Neo might be the perfect fit. If your sources are the dark and rich, the Classic could be the ticket. It really boils down to a matter of preference, and I am thrilled that I have them both.
 
 
Conclusion
 
 
My thanks again go to the Meze team. I am very pleased to have been introduced to the Meze brand and to the 12 Classics in particular. The 12 Classics are an energetic, musical, engaging earphone that perform well with any type of music you throw at them. Solid Build, beautiful appearance and quality accessories are the icing on the cake. If I hadn’t been familiar with Meze, and you handed me a pair and let me listen for a while, I’d have no problem believing these were twice the price. At $79, I can’t think of another earphone I’d recommend as highly. Well done, Meze. Well done indeed

       Let me start by sincerely thanking Luke for organizing this tour. I have (gratefully) been selected to participate in this Headphone Tour, during which I am able to listen to the Aria for one week, at which time I am to mail the earphones to the next participant on the tour (done). The only requirement is to post the review which you see here. Having the opportunity to sample TOTL equipment (or a step below in this case) in the comfort of my own home is an absolute joy for which I am truly grateful. The depths of that gratitude will not however influence me to alter my honest opinion about the Aria, which I guess is unnecessary, because (spoiler alert) it is in fact quite positive.
 
 
       There is one thing I feel I need to address after reading some questioning (grumbling?) about the value of the Aria concerning the driver count to price ratio. I feel this is a rather unfair stick to measure with, although I understand the logic. “It has more, so it MUST be better!” It seems to me that when assigning value to headphones, it has less to do with the driver count than it does the overall implementation. Why else would there be such a large disparity throughout the headphone world? Like the Aria, the Shure 846 is equipped with quad BA drivers and the MSRP is $999, the Campfire Jupiter (also quad) is priced at $899, the new CTM VS-4 (quad) is $599, the Earsonics velvet is a triple driver retailing at $699, and how many drivers are actually in the Noble Audio Savant (MSRP $599)? The question should not be “how many drivers” but “how does it sound”? Since Vibro Labs has dropped the price to $499, I’d consider Aria to have a particularly good bang for the buck (All prices quoted are MSRP in USD).
 
Build Quality, Accessories, isolation and Comfort
 
       Build quality I found to be quite good, with solid, high quality plastic and beautiful (IMHO) dark colored wood. No seams were visible, and no bubbles found in the plastic. I had no worries about the cable connection. There were no audio drop outs, and the memory wire worked well enough (never an issue for me). I never attempted to remove the cable, but a quick wiggle confirmed a secure connection. The cable itself did seem fairly generic yet appeared comparable in quality to the one included with my 64 Audio U6 (MSRP $899 USD, although I bought the Adel version on sale) and performed without issue. I’m not sure what accessories come with a retail purchase, but the tour setup had the Earphones in a zippered semi-rigid case, a pelican style case, a plethora of genuine Comply tips (both comfort & isolation style) and a generous supply of alcohol wipes for the remainder of the tour. The only odd omission was an earwax cleaning tool (unless it was lost in transit).
Although this is a light pair of earphones, they are on the larger side. If compared with my Shure 535 (3 BA drivers and they feel like they disappear in my ears) the Aria felt ginormous, although they don’t look that much bigger in photos. In fact, Aria stuck out of my ear a bit further than my U6 (6 BA drivers). This is because the nozzle too is quite large, with 2 bores through which sound is delivered. The bore size is again reminiscent of my quad bore U6. Tip selection becomes even more paramount to getting a good seal since you can’t overcome any deficiencies with deeper insertion. I wouldn’t say they were uncomfortable when worn, but I was always physically aware that Aria was there. To spite the size of the nozzle and the shallow fit, the isolation was among the best IEMs I’ve tried.
 
Listening Impressions Intro
 
       Before I offer my listening impressions, I’ll start with a little about myself. I’m pushing 50 and have less than perfect hearing (50 is pushing back). I’ve been a music lover for as long as I can remember, and I learned to listen a little more critically during the few years I sold audio equipment (and the more I listen, the more I learn). My fascination/infatuation with headphones began about 4 years ago, and has only gotten stronger. The majority of my listening was done listening to FLAC, WAV & various MP3s with my Shanling M3, Fiio x3 (1st gen.) or through my HP all in one PC and Audioquest Dragonfly1.2. My tastes are fairly eclectic, but my listening centered on classic rock, folk, jazz, classical and various genres of EDM. I didn’t bother with burning in the headphones even though Luke did have the tour earphones sent in for re-conditioning before I received them. Corresponding with Luke he noted that the drivers were not affected and additional burn in was not necessary, nor did I hear any difference throughout my evaluation.
 
Sensitivity & Tip Rolling
 
       Aria was very easy to drive, needing just a tad more volume than the IEMs I have on hand. I was able to reach unsafe listening with any device I tried. When briefly testing with my Samsung Galaxy S7 and Samsung Nook tablet, I was pleasantly surprised at the quality of sound. While no real competition for higher quality gear, the Samsung/Aria combo was overall a satisfying listen for non-critical listening on the go. I didn’t do much in the way of tip rolling. I did experiment with the double flange tips that came with my 64 Audio, which worked well. I found them to tighten the bass a hair, with an equal peak in the treble, which I didn’t think Aria needed, so I did the majority of my listening with the isolation style Comply tips.
 
Sound
 
       My initial impressions were not what I was expecting. I’ve read so much about the extension in the bass and treble, I was anticipating a more “v” shaped sound signature, which I guess is technically true, because the mids are not as prominent. I would not call them recessed, though. I’ll go ahead and break the sound into the usual categories.
 
Bass
 
       I find the sub bass solid, with just the right amount of emphasis for my tastes. A quick tonal sweep (thank you, YouTube) showed fairly strong presence at 30 HZ, and I heard the tone as low as 24 HZ. Anything in my collection with notes that low (basically Dance, I don’t have any Organ Concertos) sounded awesome, with deep rich bass that never sounded bloated or distorted (unless recorded that way). The mid bass sounds less bumped up to my ear, definitely enhanced but not intruding in the mids at all. During songs like “Different Shades of Blue” (Joe Bonamassa) or “Another One Bites the Dust” (Queen…one of my favorite mid-bass tests), the bass line always sounded full, rich & detailed, but never overbearing unlike some bass enhanced headphones. All of my Rock and Dance music had a solid, vibrant foundation that I particularly enjoyed.
 
Mids
 
       The mids sound lush, with a good amount of detail. These are definitely not ‘Mid-Head’ earphones, but I found the relaxed smooth presentation addictive with almost everything I listened to. The possible exception is a couple of binaural recordings I usually use for reviews (I just love the recording). Aria had the vocals on “Bring it on Home” by C.C. Coletti sounding a bit too distant; however I found the mellow mids to benefit many other recordings with vocals placed more prominently in the mix (Adel comes to mind). Keyboards & guitars were well served, even if there was a touch less intimacy than I prefer.
 
Highs
 
       The highs were definitely endowed with extra presence, bringing a little more life to many recordings. “Meatball Love Tone” is a wonderfully odd tune by a band called Vinyette, and the cymbal work throughout the song was well served by the treble lift. On the flip side, the treble could be a little much in certain ‘hot’ low res (192 mbps) recordings such as Ritchie Kotzen’s cover of “I Want You Back”. Aria rendered the high hats and such here with a little too much of an aural sheen that borders on the unnatural, but I’d guess that also to be a reflection of the lesser quality file.
 
Soundstage
 
       Soundstage was wide and tall, but not overly deep. Complex passages were handled well with very good instrument separation. I was pleasantly surprised listening to classical and big band and less surprised with denser rock & dance music. I did in fact find Aria to pair particularly well with classic rock. While not the widest soundstage I’ve heard, I felt Aria was above average in this regard and a pleasure to listen to. One soundstage anomaly I thought worth mentioning was listening to Green Day’s “Basket Case”. The harmonies sounded as if they were coming from about six feet above and to the left of Billy Joe’s head. This is the only time I was drawn out of the music, and I didn’t hear anything else out of place throughout my listening. (I repeated it during couple of tries and damn, I thought it was weird at the time!)
 
Comparisons
 
       I know many readers are itching for comparisons with other earphones, so I’ll do my best to give some observations. I’ll start by saying these are general impressions only, I did all volume balancing by ear, and this is obviously in no way scientific. I have too much respect for the reviewers, here on Head-Fi & elsewhere who use calibrated meters and software to make any claims of accuracy. As much as I try to balance by ear, even a small difference in volume would change my (or anyone else’s) opinion as to which is better, so without proper testing equipment, that would be impossible. Whatever opinions I am about to offer are just that, opinions. If that sounds like it might be of interest to you, please read on!
 
Westone UM 20
 
       I have 3 IEMs that might be appropriate for comparison: Westone UM 20, Shure SE 535, and 64 Audio U6. The Westone is a dual BA driver IEM that retails for $299.  Build quality is on par overall, with the UM 20 being smaller & more comfortable, and isolation being comparable. (Although it’s subjective, I found Aria to be the prettier of the two.)The Westone has a similar amount of sub-bass as Aria, but it is overshadowed by a more zealous (but not overbearing) mid-bass, which is more relaxed on Vibro Labs’ offering. The mids on the Westone are slightly more forward, with Aria taking a step back, and the highs are more rolled off with the Westone, Aria having the more vivid presentation. The UM 20 has the most intimate soundstage of the bunch, feeling noticeably narrower than & not as tall as Aria, with similar depth. Although there is a tonal difference, Westone does nothing wrong, per se and does a lot well. Only you can decide if Aria is worth the extra $200. My preferences lean toward Aria.
 
 Audio U6 (Adel B1 Module)
 
       On the other end of the spectrum, is the 64 Audio U6. Again I feel build quality to be similar, with Aria getting the aesthetic nod (I just love the way Aria looks). As earlier described, comfort in this comparison is a dead heat. U6 may sit a little more flush to my ear, but I find it no more comfortable. Aria has better isolation, likely because of the Adel technology in the U6. Sub bass has the edge going to Aria, and mid bass is a touch more plentiful as well, 64 Audio being just a little more linear. The U6 have the mids more forward and detailed, Aria sounding more relaxed. Moving on up to the highs, Aria again shines the brightest, not with more detail, but more forward in the mix, 64 Audio sounding less vibrant without sounding rolled off. Aria may have a slight height advantage, but U6 is both wider and deeper. I agonized over my 64 Audio purchase, but I still find it to be the sound signature I return to again & again.
 
Shure SE 535
 
       I saved the Shure for last, because at $499 retail, this seems to be the closest value. Build is once again on par, Aria being the reigning beauty queen. Comfort is no contest, the Shure all but disappearing into my ear. The Shure also edges out the Aria in isolation, but barely. Sub & mid bass are much livelier from Aria, with the 535’s lower region being what textbook neutrality is in my mind. Shure is known for midrange, so it’s no surprise that they are more prominent than Aria, though that wasn’t always a positive. There are recordings that have the Shure sounding a bit too ‘in your face’, and in those instances Aria’s midrange warmth was the more welcome of the two. The highs are more stepped up with Aria, the Shure taking a backseat, although I didn’t notice any less detail here either. The Width and height go to Aria, and the depth being too close to call. With 2 very different sound signatures, it really comes down to a matter of preference, and for my money, I’d be happier with Aria.
 
Conclusion
 
       There you have it. I think Luke has designed a fine IEM that remains competitive in this constantly growing market. With Aria, you have a beautifully built earphone with soaring highs, lush mids supported by a solid bass foundation, accented by a fairly wide and tall soundstage. While certainly not everyone’s sonic cup of tea, I more than enjoyed my time with Aria. If you get a chance to hear them, I think you would understand why.

If you would have asked me a couple of months ago about Meze (I’ve read it is pronounced meh-zeh) I would have thought you were referencing a Sci-Fi character I’ve never heard of. To spite the fact that Meze has been around since at least 2009, they certainly haven’t been a household name, nor have I read much about them here or on any other audio website. After hearing the Classic 99s, I’d say that’s about to change (at the very least here on Head-Fi).
 
Meze has created a simply beautiful (IMO) headphone with a MSRP of $309 (USD).I don’t often refer to the esthetics of headphones. I generally don’t care too much what it looks like; I care more about the sound. Looks are subjective anyway. But with the Meze, I feel I must touch on the looks for a second. Subjective or not, these headphones visually tic all the right boxes for me. From the wood, to the lines of the headband arch and the shape of the holes for the cable connectors on the ear cups, everything is just visually pleasing to me. The gold is not as flashy “in person” as they seem in photos, but if that is still not your style, there are 3 other options (different wood, white trim, silver accents etc.) available on their website (https://www.mezeheadphones.com/headphones).
 
The materials used in creating the Classics are a welcome departure from the plastic world in which we live. Real wood and metal are used, and everything is replaceable down to the tiniest screw. From their website: “Besides the usual warranty everybody is offering we guarantee that the 99's are endlessly serviceable if any parts would ever need to be replaced because we built these headphones to last”. Thankfully, even though these are constructed with wood & metal, the headphones are relatively light, weighing 290 grams (approx. 10.3 ounces).
 
 I have had no problem at all comfort wise, other than my ears getting a little hot occasionally, which I’ve experienced with every over ear headphone. They weight is well distributed, and the pressure is fine for my small to medium sized head, though I can see the potential for larger noggins to experience some discomfort. If your experience is different, the metal frame seems pliable enough to stretch or compact as needed (of course I did not experiment as these are a review pair and I found them to be comfortable enough as is). The ears pads, although on the small size, fit fine over my ears, and were comfortable enough to be forgotten once the music started.
 
 I feel as though I have to give a little more attention to the ear pads, since many reviews have more to say about them than how the headphones actually sound. Lots of manufacturers use ear pads that both fit over the ear (on most people), yet still rest on the outer portion, and the Meze are one of these headphones. This is obviously an intentional design choice, whether it’s to have the headphone be as portable as possible, or to help create a better seal around the ear for better noise isolation, there are lots of examples of this design choice. As divisive as these ear pads are, I was impressed to learn that the Meze team is listening, and working on addressing this issue. They are constantly trying to better their products, and responded to my inquiry as follows: “…we take headfi reviewers feedback very seriously and will do our best to perfect every detail that can be improved with every production batch we release.” Well done.
 
Before I offer my listening impressions, I’ll start with a little about myself. I’m pushing 50 and have less than perfect hearing (50 is pushing back). I’ve been a music lover for as long as I can remember, and I learned to listen a little more critically during the few years I sold audio equipment (and I continue to learn the more I listen). My fascination/infatuation with headphones began about 4 years ago, and has only gotten stronger. The majority of my listening was done listening to FLAC, WAV & various MP3s with my Shanling M3, Fiio x3 (1^st gen.) or through my HP all in one PC and Audioquest Dragonfly. My tastes are fairly eclectic, but my listening centered on classic rock, folk, jazz, classical and some of the genres of EDM (dubstep? electro house? I can’t differentiate it, but it is enjoyable). I didn’t bother with burning in the headphones since this is a review pair and probably already have a few hundred hours on them, nor did I hear any difference throughout my evaluation.
 
Isolation is about average for a closed back headphone, muting outside noise but not totally blocking it out. The metal frame I found to be highly microphonic (or is it prone to microphonism?) and the cable did as well, although to a lesser extent. Even with music playing at reasonable volumes, some sound can intrude, giving a small measure of situational awareness outdoors, however I did almost all of my listening at home. I never felt the need for more amplification during my time with the Meze, even when I briefly tested them through my cellphone (Samsung Galaxy Core Prime) and my old 512 MB SanDisk Sansa. Both were able to drive the 99 Classics to unsafe listening levels, but I found that they  scale well. The better the DAC, the better the files, the better they sang.
 
And sing they did. This was another example of a headphone that grew on me the more I listened. Not that they didn’t grab me on first listen…I’d say they did. It’s just that I usually find myself drawn to headphones with more neutral bass. The Meze have a “fun” mid bass hump that doesn’t stray too far from neutral to be bothersome. In fact I found the bass to be engaging almost to the point of being distracting from the other things the Meze can do (but not quite). Especially on well recorded Rock & other genres of music that have a driving bass line, the bass simply demands attention, and for me it was not unwelcome. It upped the enjoyment factor and I was surprised how much I was digging the presentation.
 
 I wouldn’t call these basshead cans, though. Looking at the graph from Innerfidelity (http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/MezeClassic99.pdf ) there is a roll off starting about 50 Hz (more steeply rolling after 40 Hz). At first, I wasn’t able to clearly hear anything lacking, mostly because there isn’t a lot of music with bass that low. I’m sure there are some that will clearly hear the difference with the lowest notes of an Organ Concerto, but my musical preferences don’t include a lot of sub bass oriented music. I thought I could just discern a subtle difference when listening to deadmau5 and Fatali comparing them to the Sennheiser Momentum (1^st gen.), but that could be me tricking myself, and I found those tracks no less pleasurable through the Classic 99s.  
 
The midrange of the Meze is clear and doesn’t sound to be effected by the bass. There does seem to be a slight elevation in the upper mid-range, but I found this to be very track dependent. I don’t think it’s a matter of male vs. female vocals, so much as how the track was recorded. Vocals with less mid-range presence sound natural and well balanced. The mids never called attention to themselves when listening to Boston, Rush, or Vanessa Carlton. Live recordings, Opera and Binaural recordings also had no evidence of mid-range elevation. However, on certain pop recordings (Sia, Shel, Joe Bonamassa come to mind) where the vocals are a bit more prominent in the mix, they sounded a tad too forward, or at least more forward than I’m used to. I also noticed this was most evident when listening to lower bit rate file (MP3s). For me this was never too bothersome, and did help with intelligibility on some older recordings.
 
The highs I found to be detailed and well enough extended with high hats & cymbals sitting further back in the mix than my personal preference would dictate. For instance, in Crystal Bowersox’s title track from Farmer’s Daughter, just before the bass kicks in the splash cymbals are just a touch more recessed than I like, but I accustomed myself to the difference fairly quickly. Soundstage I found to be above average for a closed back headphone, wider than any I own, with decent depth and height (I never feel it to be fair to compare soundstage between closed and open backed headphones).
I have been asked to do a comparison between these and some of the other closed back headphones I have. The only headphones I have that (I think) warrant a comparison would be the Sennheiser Momentum (I have the 1^st gen.), being in a similar price bracket (the original MSRP. was $349 USD.). I’ll start by saying these are general impressions only, I did all channel balancing by ear, and the Meze are definitely more sensitive than the Senns, so getting the levels right was a challenge. If I erred I always tried to give the Senns the volume advantage, and this is obviously in no way scientific, but this is what I heard.
 
The bass on the Sennheiser seems to go a bit deeper and has more of an emphasis with just about everything I played, so you can say I find the Momentums to be more “V” shaped in their sound signature. The mids on the Senns have more of a wooly quality and seem more distant than on the Meze, making the Momentums bass sound a bit more thick and impactful, whereas I found the Meze to be tighter and more articulate overall in the bass and clearer in the midrange. The treble between the two was surprisingly similar with a good amount of detail and extension in both. Soundstage was wider and deeper when listening to the Meze, with similar height, and the Meze are more comfortable to me, too. For a relative newcomer to the headphone world, I’d say Meze knocked this one outta da park.
 
So the bottom line is: I thoroughly enjoyed my time with the Meze Classics 99, even though these don’t have what I usually find to be my preferred sound signature. Once I let my ears settle into what the Meze can do, I found myself more & more looking forward to listening, not for evaluation, but for pleasure.  I’d say Meze has made a headphone that doesn’t just fit into the (already competitive) price point they’re in; I’d say they stand out. They are a most welcome surprise, indeed.
 

 

 

 

 

       Having participated in the Oppo PM3 lending program, I was afforded a good amount of time to demo this headphone more extensively and under better conditions than in a store or headphone meet. I honestly wasn’t sure what to expect. All the usual suspects in reviewing were chiming in with positive reviews, yet here on Head-Fi, I noticed a number of opinions counter to these. The most common observation I read was that of the headphone being boring, or lifeless. Once I spent some time with these ‘phones in hand (and on my ears) I decided I’d give my 2 cents as well, since I found them to be very capable headphones.
 
       The accessories included are a semi-rigid denim carrying case, a screw-on 6.35mm adapter and 2 cables (if you order through Oppo). One is 3 Meters long and there’s a shorter Android or IOS compatible cable with an integrated remote and microphone both of which are terminated with a 3.5mm jack. This seems an adequate, if not a particularly plentiful lot of accessories for this price point ($399 MSRP), but considering this is the bottom rung of the Oppo headphone ladder, one can argue that adequate is…well, adequate. My one small grip would be that it’s necessary to unplug the cable for storage in its case. The case itself appears to be sturdy and is thin enough to toss into a backpack or potentially even a briefcase.
 
       One of the benefits of participating in a lending program or “headphone tour” is that if you’re not one of the first to get the headphone, you get an idea of how durable it will be, and burn in is not an issue. I found the build quality to be excellent, with not much plastic, actual aluminum, and high quality pleather that I wouldn’t guess to be synthetic by look or feel (you can smell the difference). Some would expect genuine leather, however I find the better quality synthetics to be just as durable & comfortable. There were some small smudges on the ear cups, but they wiped away easily with a moist cloth. The biggest nit I have to pick, and this may be a deal breaker for some, is the omission of user replaceable ear pads. This is something I expect from any headphone priced north of $100, and so seems particularly hard to swallow here.
 
       The use of metal does add some weight, as these are 320 g., or just over 11 oz., but I never found them to be too heavy for long listening sessions. Clamping force was damn near perfect for me, (ymmv) and the adjustments were easy and familiar. The sliders adjusted with a solid click and held the position well. The ear cups are on the small size, so there is contact between your ear & the pads, but this was never uncomfortable for me, and likely created a better seal for noise isolation, although I could see a problem for those with larger ears. I found the isolation to be just about the best of any closed back that I’ve had experience with, and with music playing, the world just slips away. (I’ve owned the Sony ZX-700, Shure 840, Beyer COP [possibly a tie], and I still have the 1st gen. Momentum and Torque t402v).
 
       Before I offer my listening impressions, I’ll start with a little about myself. I’m pushing 50 and have less than perfect hearing (50 is pushing back). I’ve been a music lover for as long as I can remember, and I learned to listen a little more critically during the few years I sold audio equipment. My fascination/infatuation with headphones began about 3 years ago, and has only gotten stronger. The majority of my listening was done listening to FLAC, WAV & various MP3s with my Fiio X3 (1st gen.) or through my HP all in one PC and Audioquest Dragonfly, occasionally assisted by a 2nd hand ALO National (which proved to be unnecessary). My musical taste is fairly eclectic (rock, punk, metal, jazz, folk, blues, world, dubstep, classical etc.) but the majority of my listening was with classic rock, jazz and instrumental (rock/fusion).
 
       I’ll begin with the bass, which I found to be the most addictive quality of this headphone’s sound signature. The bass was on the neutral side, with a boost in the sub bass region, adding just the right amount of rumble for my taste. Although I would caution that Bassheads need not apply, I personally never found the bass lacking. There wasn’t as much mid bass “wow factor” as the Sennheiser Momentum, but I found the bass tighter and no less pleasing. There were occasions I thought the bass to be a tad loose, but I soon discovered that only occurred with lower bit-rate recordings, and even then I didn’t find it to be bothersome.
 
       The midrange is very well done (IMO) dancing elegantly between very articulate/detailed, and smooth/mellow. This was particularly engaging with acoustic music, accenting finger scrapes and bow plucks without any unnatural punctuation. Vocals, both male and female sounded natural and had plenty of detail. Many have said that music lives in the midrange, and the Oppo delivers admirably in that department.
 
       The treble I found to be subdued for my tastes, but articulate none the less. I usually enjoy a little more zip in the treble, but I still found plenty to enjoy. There was no veil to speak of, and I never felt detail was lacking. I sometimes had to listen a bit harder for some of the cues I can hear more readily with brighter headphones, but it was all there.
 
       Soundstage was wider than deep or high, but also immensely enjoyably. I didn’t experience the confined feeling I usually get with closed back headphones, which is something I usually find bothersome with the Momentum. Listening to a Binaural recording of C.C. Coletti reimagining Led Zeppelin songs was particularly revealing. Like all binaural recordings I’ve experienced, a wide stage is cast in this recording, and the PM3 conveyed that beautifully.
 
       I found myself enjoying my time with the PM3 and I wanted to reconcile the “boring” comments I’ve read with my experience listening to the Oppo. As I reflected on the disparity, the word cohesion kept coming to mind, and so I looked it up (thank you Dictionary.com). “Cohesion: cohering or tending to cohere; well-integrated; unified.” That hit the nail on the head for me. I’m not sure there is one thing about the sound of the PM3 that is particularly stellar. Sure, I loved the bass, but I’ve heard deeper (Ultrasone comes to mind) as well as tighter/ better defined (some offerings from AKG, Sennheiser etc.). I can make similar observations about the mids, treble & soundstage. They’re all good (very good IMHO) but I think it’s how it all works together that really draws me into the music.
 
       The more I used them, the more I just simply listened. I wasn’t amazed by details, or wowed by thunderous bass; I simply enjoyed whatever was playing. Getting “lost in the music” is a cliché often bandied about in reviews, but I find that phrase particularly appropriate here. I’d sit down, start the music, and the next thing I know an hour (or two…or three) has past & my wife is wondering What am I doing for so long? That is one very important thing I look for in this hobby. A way to escape, or rather engage in the music. There is no higher praise I can give than to say that a pair of headphones is able to achieve that…and the Oppo PM3 deserves it.