Disclaimer & Preface
First, I'd like to thank my wallet (not _______ from __________) for affording me the opportunity to eat poorly for a few weeks in exchange for a new toy. My suffering is mine only. Joking aside, I pre-ordered these earphones after I saw a local dealer teasing its renders. I did some research, and was impressed by the driver setup, the ergonomic-looking housings, and the do-no-wrong frequency response curve. I made the very first mention of the BGVP DMG on these forums, and decided to pull the trigger. (I do not know the distributors at all, but they did seem quite courteous in our correspondence.)

Prior to the DMG, I had zero knowledge of BGVP as a company, but they have apparently been around since 2013, first as 'SIDY Studio', making something or another. They've apparently made a few different products that have made their rounds around here, to mixed reviews.

I normally do not buy from a relatively unknown company without having listened to it beforehand. But I bought these earphones almost instinctively. BGVP claimed to have utilized a large database of scanned ear molds, and the renders looked like the housings would be comfortable. I also wanted to see what the state of chi-fi was in 2018. It had been a while since I last delved into audio, and these companies seem to up their driver counts, their exotic diaphragm materials, and ounces of precious metals used every 3 months. It's a progression that would make Gordon Moore blush (not really, but you get the point).

So what is the driver setup of the DMG? It's got 6 amazing drivers on each side, with lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit (i.e. look it up your own damn self). But it should be noted that I regard these earphones as more of a three-way earphone than a 4-way, 6-driver earphone. It has two dual BAs, and a single dual-coil dynamic driver (BGVP markets this driver as 2 drivers because it has 2 coils, but it's really just one driver). So just think of these earphones as having a similar setup to something like the Fidue A91 or the Meze RAI Penta.

Whoa!!!!!! You mean to say that a $140 product is comparable in driver setup to a $900 earphone? Amazing! No, screw you, and learn a thing or two about high-end IEMs, tubing/chamber resonances, damping effects, IEC 60318-4 measurement standards, and balanced armature drive coil designs, before you go peppering people with questions. Oh wait, no, these are $140, so they're well within reach of 13 year-olds and their Minecraft YouTubing incomes. I shouldn't act so supercilious.

In seriousness, what I really want to say is that the BGVP DMG, in all its multiple driver glory, certainly has a lot of technical potential, but ends up adopting on a more simplistic acoustic design (despite the exchangeable acoustic filters). The inner housings are plastic, and you get three output ports behind the exchangeable filters: one large one for the dynamic dual-coil driver, and two small ones for each of the two dual BA drivers. The treble drivers are damped with a fixed, white color mesh. All three of these outputs port into a shallow, shared chamber.


Does this kind of acoustic design work? In my experience, it does, but it sacrifices separation and layering. So you'll notice that I mention the words 'separation' and 'layering' multiple in the following section.

Sound
This is my idea of a lazy review, so I'm not going to giving out any rankings or stars. The only time I do that is for kids I tutor (you know, to fund this dirty audio habit of mine).

The sound signature is not focused on vocals. It is focused on people-pleasing, i.e. mainstream jack-of-all-trades. There is a mid-bass focused bass tilt to these earphones, but thankfully, however powerful the response is, is not annoying. Instead, the bass is relatively spry, and despite its soft, unetched texture, doesn't bloat.

Initially, I believed there was sizeable bass roll-off as a result of the mid-bass emphasis, but I discovered that, in my quest to find tips that afforded me a more defined upper midrange and treble response, I induced sub-bass leak (with the Aurisonics/Fender oval tips). With another pair of tips (commandeered from my very old and very broken Creative Aurvana In-Ear 3), the sub-bass came out to play. It does, however, still take a backseat to the mid-bass.

Thus, tip selection is absolutely paramount to getting a good experience with the BGVP DMG; since different tips will impart different effects for different people, I won't give concrete advice for choosing tips. But you'll notice that the Aurisonics/Fender tips are very short and soft --- giving off a sparkly, less bass emphasized sound, while the Aurvana tips are very long and firm --- lending to a meaty, bassy, but smooth response that doesn't sacrifice on treble extension.

Soundstage is variable and highly tip-dependent, so tip rolling will impact this aspect of sound as well. Ultimately, there aren't a ton of clear directional cues coming from the DMG, and the soundstage is not well characterized as a result of the DMG's subpar layering. The way it's designed plays a part in this --- the individual frequency ranges aren't piped all the way to the end of the nozzles (to enable the exchangeable filters, of course), and to me, soundstage suffers.

Since I purchased the DMG with every intention of modding them, I decided to remove the fixed treble filter on the internal frame. With them off, the additional treble contributed more detail to the treble and upper midrange, widening the soundstage somewhat. The hit was that certain instruments, like cymbals and hi-hats, sound splashier and less subtle, but with the right tips, can be shaped to a perfectly acceptable degree. If you're wondering, sibilance is not negatively impacted to an appreciable degree. Sibilance is more apparent with the treble damper off, as is the case with any change in sound to improve clarity, but it is not a dramatic difference.

The exchangeable filters are somewhat boring in effect; there's nothing covering the silver ones (treble), while there is a thin layer of mesh lining the gold ones (bass). The gold ones smooth out the treble response a bit, allowing the bass to be a little more prominent, but vocals seem blunted and more two-dimensional with these filters on, so my idea was to take the dampers that I removed and put them on the front of the silver nozzles.


Source-wise, I'm getting relatively good results from a <0.5 ohm OI source (SMSL iDEA), but I dislike how it sounds from my iPhone 6 (~5 ohms). The difference isn't massive, but detectable.

Comfort, Build Quality, and Accessories

The included tip selection is crap. Don't use the included tips. Well, I like the fake Comply foams. Aside from them, though, skip. Tip roll until you find a pair of tips that work well for you. There is a case for the filters (will fit your tips too), but no case for the earphones. I've been using the FitEar zip-up case. The blue special edition case fits the DMG's housings nicely.

So the housings --- they're not plastic. The CNC quality is pretty good, but won't be acceptable to Steve Jobs. These flaws are most noticeable along the margin of the backplate. They're minor flaws. Don't fret. Just don't gift Jony Ive a pair. Heck, I don't trust the HiFiMAN RE2000 to have better build quality. Why is so expensive? Because it sound good. As I mentioned, DMG sound good too. Minor gripe: the acoustic filters do not have O-ring silicone gaskets. The microphone cable is generically good, but utterly unremarkable.

These earphones are every bit as comfortable as they appear. They're intended to be worn as flush to your conchae as possible, so use tips that enable you to wear them that way. Don't let them hang off your ears in an ugly fashion. Clean up after your ear wax afterward.

Summary

After having listened to these earphones for a while, I can confidently state that it makes no real errors of commission. The mids are not problematic at all, and even with the treble nozzles, there isn't much sibilance. There's some treble roll-off, but I'm fine with it. At least it's not fatiguing. My unit has no detectable channel imbalance, thank goodness. I'd hate to have to RMA these.

For $139, I think they're well worth the price. The satin blue housings are nice, compact, and comfortable, and the DMG has definitely exceeded my expectations. It has a pleasant, if safe (i.e. rolled-off on purpose, rather than by technical limitations) signature. Removing the treble dampers will improve things, but attempt this mod at your own risk. At least it's reversible.

I borrowed my friend speakerphone's (@speakerphone) LG QuadBeat 3 for this micro-review. Thanks to him for the loan. You can check out his measurements (two separate units) of the QB3 on his personal blog: (A) http://clarityfidelity.blogspot.kr/2015/05/lg-quadbeat-3-sample-measurement.html (B) http://clarityfidelity.blogspot.kr/2015/06/lg-quadbeat-3-sample-b-measurement.html
 

 
I've always been intrigued by the LG QuadBeat series of in-ears. They're meant to be bundled with their smartphones --- afterthoughts that many assume can be thrown into the trash. However, the Quadbeat series has garnered consistent praise for being excellent sounding and relatively accurate despite their flea market price.
 
Packaging on these is no surprise: paper cardboard and cheap-feeling ear tips. However, the build on them, albeit of plastic, feels pretty good. The cloth-sheathed cable seems fine in thickness and strength. Good stuff.
 
Comfort is very good. They're shallow-fitting and and have angled ports, which means my ears are happy campers. The plastic contributes to a light weight in the ears.
 
At first listen, I was impressed indeed --- they were most definitely living up to their reputation for excellent sound quality --- and the LG QuadBeat 3 was making my music sing, whether it be bass, midrange, or treble. As per my usual standard operating procedure for products <$100, I listened exclusively to overcompressed popular music. Namely, in the spirit of the QuadBeats, I listened to K-pop, pretty much all the way. Because of this, however, I was able to detect some minor treble splashiness (not serious). The ear tips were also a little scratchy feeling.
 
So, I switched to my one of my favorite ear tips: the RedGiant 'natural acoustic' tips. More treble smoothness (taking away some of the residual splashiness), more open soundstage presentation, and less perceived bass. Awesome.
 
I checked EXID's 'UP AND DOWN' (overplayed) single 'UP & DOWN' for any issues with bass and sub-bass. Nope. Boosted, but tasteful. Awesome. Okay, it didn't give me the kind of texture and layering I was used to at the most upmarket of things, but it was plenty respectable --- I can name plenty of $250+ earphones that don't do bass nearly as well and don't even come close (but I won't). Granted, yes, I was using speakerphone's modded version with the vents taped, but you can do that too!
 
If I had to nitpick --- which would be splitting hairs at the price the QB3 is being offered --- the one thing I could really ding it for is that it cannot replicate timbre as well as other (much, much more expensive) earphones. Imaging is also not precise. What am I saying --- these things are bundled earphones! It's absolutely astounding what LG got their ODM/OEM to produce at this price! If you look at speakerphone's measurements, both samples have excellent channel matching and excellent distortion measurements! These earphones do not sound "plasticky" at all!
 
In short, the LG QuadBeat 3 are amazing bang-for-buck. If you don't want as much bass, tape up the vents, switch out the tips, and you're all good. Maybe convince that friend of yours who just got the LG G4 to give you a freebie. It's totally worth the guilt of swindling a friend.
 
I leave you with some choice K-Pop so you can 'vibe' to the LG Quadbeat 3s...
 

 

---

Note: Review was done with a sample provided by DUNU-Topsound.
For a more complete picture, please visit the dedicated thread for the DUNU DN-2000J (here).
 
The DN-2000J is a classically U-shaped earphone, with a sound signature that sounds most similar to a mixture between the AKG K3003 with Reference filters and High Boost filters, tending toward an analytical, detail-filled, and exacting nature. DUNU has long professed a desire to create an earphone that matches or outperforms the K3003, and has released a couple of well-regarded and affordable hybrid IEMs in the DN-1000 and DN-2000 over the last couple of years.
 
With the DN-2000J, originally created for the Japanese market as a more peppy and more petite version of the DN-2000, they've managed to create their best hybrid earphone yet, and manages to emulate the essence of its target AKG K3003 while preserving its unique identity and lineage from the DN-2000.
 
Perhaps owing to its custom-spec TWFK driver, the AKG K3003 manages to take the edge off some of the harshness in the treble region a little better than does the DN-2000J, but the DN-2000J comes close to the K3003 in spite of the price difference. Harshness between 8.5-10 kHz is controlled in the retail version over the prototypes, but can still be grating to treble-sensitive individuals, especially with silicone tips. Due to the slightly less refined nature of the DN-2000J's treble, Comply foam tips such as the included Ts-500 are recommended for long-term listening. However, as individual preferences vary, users will need to experiment between different tips to find their most preferred sonic experience.
 
The DN-2000J possesses very slightly more warmth but yet is very slightly less forward in presentation for the midrange than is the K3003. The two are remarkably similar in this area, however, and possess a similar degree of forward projection for vocals. Thus, potential buyers should be aware that the DN-2000J is not an especially intimate IEM, but is rather neutrally-positioned in sound space --- neither forward nor overtly laid-back. Its U-shaped nature does implicitly mean that the bass and treble will ever so slightly sit ever so proud of the midrange, making the DN-2000J most suitable for low-volume, Fletcher-Munson compensated listening.
 
In terms of bass, while there is some natural bass roll-off, the DN-2000J possesses some of the most capable, naturally-textured, yet extremely well-controlled bass response around. Apropos this writer's opinion, the DN-2000J's bass performance is top-tier amongst universal IEMs, able to go toe-to-toe with products like the Shure SE846, Sony XBA-Z5, and others --- and managing to outstrip its role model, the K3003, in performance.
 
With this kind of performance, the DN-2000J is a clear winner at $349 USD --- it improves on the performance of its predecessor the DN-2000 (itself a well-regarded IEM), and is of the top tier for sound quality in universal IEMs. Its weaknesses are predicated largely upon its reliance on the polarizing TWFK driver for the mids and highs, as well as its general sound signature tending toward the analytical. Individuals looking for this type of sound, however, will be delighted by the DN-2000J. DUNU deserves a resounding round of applause for a job well done.

If it looks like an Ety, quacks like an Ety...
 
 
I'm not going to go into detail about the way Etymotic earphones work --- you have to insert deeply (up to the second bend of your ear canal, where you'll mostly cease to hear tissue occlusion effects), and no, they don't care if you're not used to it --- you're just going to have to do it. For science.
 
Once you're fitted properly however, and they include two triple flange tips and a pair of foam tips for that goal, the famous Etymotic sound continues in the MK5 with more gusto than ever.
 
Just like the EtyKids, the MK5 can sound a little thin in the lower midrange, and may be slightly too hot in the upper midrange, but overall midrange transparency is great. I find the smoothness and transparency of the ER4PT and ER4S is better, however.
 
The treble extension of the MK5 isn't perfect, but it's acceptable. I wouldn't fault it at all, considering this thing is essentially a $50 earphone.
 
The bass response of the MK5 is where the Isolator really takes its cake. Although the decay is super quick, especially for a dynamic driver IEM, there's so much texturing and resolution there. It also reaches deeper than any Etymotic I've ever heard, while being punchier too. I call it the "basshead's Etymotic" as a joke, but it's really not that far of a stretch. Considering the FR of the MK5 works within the confines of Etymotic's accuracy target, the bass is about as good as it can possibly get.
 
 
In accordance with my tradition of not using supercilious audiophile music to evaluate sub-$100 earphones, I used Thelma Aoyama's single 'Soba Ni Iru Ne' (certified by the Guinness Book of World Records as Japan's best selling digital single of all-time), to really showcase the bass definition of the MK5 Isolator. SoulJa (the producer and featured rapper) really did a great job with the drum programming, making the track sound relaxed, yet highly defined. The YouTube music video is embedded below, but please listen to the CD to get the right idea. The audio quality in the video is beyond lossy.
 
 
BoA & Crystal Kay's duet 'Girlfriend' highlights the slightly "hot" nature of the MK5's upper midrange response. BoA does not have great presence as a vocalist (she rose to fame because of her dance skills), and has the typical upper midrange heavy kind of sound. Crystal Kay isn't really the best singer around either, but she has far more lower midrange presence and clear upper midrange roll-off (she has a small vocal range).
 
 
All in all, considering everything, if you're receptive to the love or hate fit, comfort, and overall sound signature of the Etytmotic brand, you'll love the MK5. It's not only the return of the 'Isolator' tag, it's the best low cost Etymotic yet.
 
If you've always been curious about what an Etymotic sounds like, the MK5 is probably the best option for any head-fier to get into. It's more comfortable than an MC5, and just as affordable, while being far easier to drive than an EtyKids EK5. Get one today.
 

Foreword

 
As the creator of the Titan 1 thread on head-fi, I have most of the information given here placed in the thread; however, this review is a coalescing and enhancement of the various aspects of the DUNU Titan 1 that I've previously discussed in the thread. Anything that I don't bring up here is probably found in the first post, or any of my other posts in the thread.
 
Special thanks goes to Andy H. and the rest of the Taiwanese office of DUNU-Topsound for their graciousness in accommodating me in their office, as well as their continued, forthright attitude toward improvement. I admire their hardworking spirit and hope for their continued success.
 
This review of the Titan 1 was made with a sample unit provided by DUNU. For specifications and a list of accessories, please visit the Titan 1 product page.
 

Introduction

 
DUNU is no stranger to head-fiers around the globe; it's been making its footprint known around these forums for quite a few years now. The Titan 1 is the first dynamic-only product from DUNU in a while; they'd been concentrating solely on hybrid products for a span of nearly two years (and continue to refine those efforts), garnering critical and mass acclaim, so when they quietly slipped the Titan 1 into their late 2014 launch portfolio, few heads turned. It was a semi-open design that looked like it came from the early 2000s, and even if it did contain a titanium diaphragm, a good lot of head-fiers probably didn't expect much out of it. My head did turn because of my prior experience with half-open IEM designs. Early in 2010, my experience with the Superlux HD381F was a revelation that cost was not tantamount to sound quality. In 2012, the crystal-clear Phiaton PS210 reaffirmed my belief in the half-open IEM paradigm. It seemed consistently practicable for audio manufacturers to create a great sounding IEM with this "half-open" style. So when DUNU came out with a titanium-coated driver in this same body design, I knew they were up to something. While titanium-coated diaphragms are not new to the industry, they do have well-documented properties that make the sound they create desirable to audio enthusiasts. Thus, I took the initiative to post about the Titan 1 in the forums. To me, it represented a sweet spot in value and performance, at the expense of absolute sound isolation (which really isn't the strength of a dynamic driver IEM anyway). Slowly but surely, interested mounted, and the Titan 1 is now a well-regarded product in its price category.
 

Build, Ergonomics, Accessories

 
The Titan 1, made from cast metal components, is one of the more solid offerings in its price bracket. Build quality has never been an issue for DUNU; they're known for delivering robust builds at every price point, from the body to the cables, and even its accessories. It comes with a simple plastic hard case that, while not declared to be waterproof, probably can withstand a two second dip in a bowl of water because of the ruggedized rubber on the inside surface that extends all the way to the top of the case. DUNU continues its tradition of offering great carry cases with the Titan 1.
 
It has a ton of tips available, including a whole set of faux Sony hybrid tips, which is the tip that DUNU designed the Titan 1 around. DUNU also included another set of red core, dual-density silicone tips. Both sets were accompanied with a redundant pair, which makes the Titan 1 one of the most well-appointed IEMs in its price range. Personally, I settled on a third party brand of tips from RedGiant (see explanation here), but because these tips are difficult to come by unless you buy a pair of RedGiant IEMs, I won't attempt to recommend them to others. In fact, I hesitate to recommend specific tips for people, as everyone reacts differently to different tips.
 
 
Finishing of the cables above the Y-split is very good, almost Audio-Technica like in its texture; the thinness doesn't bother me. It's the cloth sheathing of the section below the Y-split that can be prone to tangling at times. Luckily, DUNU integrates its awesome rubber cable tie into all of its products, and that thing definitely promotes good storage habits. I don't imagine too many people shoving the Titan 1 into their pants pockets recklessly when coiling the cables in advance is so easy. I don't think I need to comment much on the quality of the Y-split and 1/8" plug; DUNU's cable joints are always well relieved.
 
The only thing is that, as a $115-ish unit, the kind of attention to detail paid to the metal finishing is limited. No one will really mistake the Titan 1 for something more expensive. The brush metal finish is more Timex to the K3003's Omega. However, as it does have a rugged metal body at this price point, I won't complain.
 
Comfort is great, personally. This sideways-mounted, half in-ear design tends to fit in most peoples' ears pretty well, and I never really feel any wear fatigue with the Titan 1. The body of the Titan 1 is small enough such that it should fit comfortably within most peoples' conchae with ease (even females'). When used properly, I don't anticipate any risk of them falling out of users' ears. The weight of the metal shells, however, will take some adjustment time for people used to very lightweight plastic-bodied earphones.
 

Design & Packaging

 
The aesthetics of the Titan 1 body lean toward the traditional; the sides exposed to the outside are reminiscent of the Sony MDR-EX90LP and the Superlux HD381F, while the inside half is similar to that of the Atomic Floyd Hi-Def Drum, along with a color coding ring of red or blue in the middle to denote right or left. As so, the Titan 1 isn't flashy in the least bit, save for the splash of chrome on the brushed finishing. Nevertheless, I doubt the Titan 1 would attract too many sticky-fingered bandits, and that may be a good or bad thing, depending on your perspective.
 
Here comes arguably the weakest part of DUNU's products --- the packaging and associated graphic design. The graphic design on the Titan 1, and quite a few of DUNU's other products, is a bit unrefined. It's not for lack of effort; it's obvious DUNU has taken great pains to illustrate all of the great features found within the Titan 1 and other products, but the execution doesn't quite work in its favor. Certainly, DUNU has gotten a lot better over the years, but the design still feels a little cluttered, a bit lacking in typographic awareness, and a bit try hard --- not everything absolutely needs to be explained on the box itself. There were quite a few rough inconsistencies with regard to typography; fonts would switch from Arial to Calibri to Times New Roman, ever so distracting to even the untrained eye. I was even surprised to see that the Chinese punctuation marks, normally set centrally in space, were set down low like their Western counterparts, which is normally an error created by WYSIWYG layout programs like Microsoft Word. I won't bother discussing the English grammatical errors --- I actually believe that's easily corrected --- many head-fiers could volunteer to copy edit these box descriptions.
 
Of course, being a company that spends the majority of its product development budget on R&D, DUNU delegates these graphic design responsibilities to a single product manager who doesn't necessarily have the kind of visual pedigree of a dedicated graphic artist and layout manager. If DUNU were to spend more money outsourcing its packaging design to a third party source, I suspect the Titan 1 would end up costing at least 10% more. That's 10% more burden on the consumer, as well as 10% more burden on the distributor, who doesn't necessarily want to take the risk of carrying products from a lesser known company. Nevertheless, I continue to encourage DUNU to take steps in improving their package design --- doing so probably begins with lessening the workload of that said product manager for a few weeks, allowing him to freely explore the realm of graphic design and typography, and having him return with a newfound sense of direction to bestow upon his fellow coworkers. I sincerely believe a boost in graphic design and layout will do wonders for DUNU's public image, especially for the all-important headphone market of Japan.
 

Sound

 
But enough with my snooty rant on design. Onto the good stuff. When I first listened to the Titan 1, this is what I thought:
 

...the Titan 1 sounds mildly V-shaped; there's a bit of lower midrange boost to accompany a 1-2k relaxation. Mid-highs and lower treble are fairly present, but the granularity of the treble is quite fine, so I don't feel that the Titan 1 is harsh at all. Bass speed is quite good. It's tight and solid feeling, with good slam when warranted. Detail levels and driver control are by far the best of the half-open IEM that I've had.

Click to expand...

 
People have different metrics for what they regard as good sound --- the Titan 1 will fit most peoples' definitions, as I surmise most will say, "Whoa, that's pretty good sound!" when they put them on for a few moments. With a longer listen, my thoughts evolved into these:
 

The overall signature of the Titan 1, [  ], is still a mild classical V-shape. The lows and highs take precedence over the midrange, which is clear but not forward positioned within the stereo image.
 
For this reason, I still find the midrange of the Sony MDR-EX1000 to be more transparent, despite the former Sony flagship's lower treble resonance that occludes some of the treble detail, its midrange is better formed, and thus its center image (which usually comprises vocals) projects deeply and three dimensionally. The same is true for some of the better CIEMs that I have --- their neutrally-tuned midrange responses enable their vocals and center image in general to project forward with warmth and body without sacrificing clarity.
 
On the other hand, the Titan 1 is good at delineating voices because of its elevated upper midrange and parts of the treble. Coupled with the fast transient characteristics of this titanium-coated diaphragm, the Titan 1 exudes excellent "edge clarity". However, because the central midrange portion is still a bit recessed in relation, imaging cues are relayed mostly side-to-side, with far less front-to-back information.
 
So yes, make no mistake, this is no back of a smoky jazz club, listening to a sultry-voiced siren kind of earphone. The Titan 1 is most at home when its given a lot to do, leaving the sprightly titanium-coated driver to sort out the details and separate out the instruments. Thus, the V-shaped response of the Titan 1 makes it palatable for many types of popular music where the beat, not the voice, is the focus.

Click to expand...

 

Bass

 
Thus, bass is where the titanium-coated driver makes its presence known best. It feels quick, and brings out multiple nuanced layers in bass-forward music. There is quite a bit of boost to the range, so the Titan 1 will sound thumpy enough for those that desire a little bit of kick to their bass drums. Thanks to the open feel and diaphragm material, however, the Titan 1 never smothers the listener with bass. I believe this is the best kind of bass response for those that want to hear a thumpy low end but still desire a clean sound. If only more mainstream earphones exhibited this kind of response...
 

Midrange

 
Midrange is a different matter. Depending on personal taste, you might run hot or cold with the midrange response. People who mostly desire to hear instruments and rhythm will be absolutely thrilled with the midrange on the Titan 1; vocals are never the centerpiece of music, but they also never sound muffled --- always clear.
 
However, I'm not so high on it because I just don't feel a lot of emotion to the midrange --- the laid-back midrange signature, to me, would be the Titan 1's biggest weakness. I hear a lot of detail, but to me, it doesn't do much to enhance a piece of music --- it's mostly just there and will never stand out as the centerpiece to a piece of music. Human beings, regardless of musical preference, are still emotionally most in-tune with, and physiologically most sensitive to the midrange, and thus for me, I tend to harbor very stringent standards for midrange performance in an IEM, regardless of price range.
 
To me, more analytical earphones like the Etymotic ER4, UERM, and even DUNU's own upcoming DN-2000J (which itself is slightly laid-back in the midrange) are able to convey the emotional component of music through their transparency and vocal definition. In the same price range, the HiFiMAN RE-400 also does a better job in this regard.
 
It's not to imply, however, that the Titan 1's midrange is bad. It's anything but. You'll be hard pressed to find more detail from other earphones competing against the Titan 1, especially as the upper midrange does have a bit of kick to it and is highly detailed.
 

Treble

 
The Titan 1 will be perceived by the majority of folk as being somewhat bright, especially in the context that the midrange is "recessed" with respect to the treble --- that alone gives listeners the sensation that the Titan 1 is "bright". The midrange, prominent is in the upper reaches, is typically responsible for vocal harmonics that often extend into the treble; thus, prominent upper mids and lower treble both add equally to the perception of brightness.
 
Brightness shouldn't be misconstrued as overtly harsh or sibilant, however. In general, I expect sibilance with many pieces of modern music these days. People should not be confusing recording sibilance with earphone sibilance. That said, the Titan 1 is a tiny bit prone to sibilance; the time course of it is very quick, however, so the sibilance is not bothersome. Rather, the overall brightness of the earphones can be a little off-putting at times. On a track like Stacey Kent's "So Many Stars", lower sibilance (6-7 kHz) is not the issue to my ears, as the decay speed is pretty quick. Yet, I tend to hear some 8+ kHz harshness, which I tend to call "sonic junk" rather than overt "sibilance".
 
The smoothness of the treble will depend on the tip pairing; it shouldn't be too difficult to find a pair of tips, whether they be silicone or foam-based, that help shape the treble to personal taste. Just be prepared to do some experimentation.
 

Sensitivity

 
The Titan 1 is remarkably easy to drive. It's sensitive to the point where it really takes very little for any underpowered iPod or laptop to easily drive it to loud volumes. As a low volume listener, I usually set the volume slider in the Windows environment at 2-4%. Luckily, the Titan 1 also still benefits from a higher quality source, as all things being equal, the Titan 1 is nevertheless still a low impedance (16 ohm), reactive load (dynamic moving coil). This means that better, more efficient and current and voltage delivery will allow the Titan 1 to perform better. So yes, if you want to amp it, you can. From my Resonessence Labs Concero HP, which outputs a nominal 3.5 Vrms, I'm also listening at 2-4% (usually 2%),
 
 

How I Use the Titan 1

 
So here's the part where most people would expect to see that because I have "better" equipment like TOTL CIEMs, the Titan 1 gets thrown in the dust bin. That assertion is simply not true. Because to me, the Titan 1 is remarkably easy to insert and remove, and performs well from a variety of sources, I find myself gravitating to it as my daily use desktop IEM. It's just easy to get along with. The isolation is at a level where fan noise is cut down, but won't prevent me from noticing a ringing phone call. At very low volume levels, the laid-back midrange is less of a liability because of hearing threshold levels.
 

Summary

 
With the titanium treatment to the Titan 1, DUNU has launched their "Titan Series" of products. I'm looking forward to seeing them further enhance this technology, and optimize it for use in future offerings. Already, the upcoming flagship DN-2000J, with an enhanced titanium-coated LCP woofer, is sound very good indeed, and I expect DUNU to continue this trend of excellence.
 
As a product, while not the versatile and isolating indoor/outdoor unit, the Titan 1 is an extremely capable IEM. It provides the listener spades of tactile detail with celerity, and while it isn't a product that will be tugging at your heartstrings, you'll still be able to hear just about everything else in your mix with immense clarity and transparency. For new entrants to the in-ear world, the Titan 1 is great because of its shallow, easy fit; newbies will undoubtedly be wowed by how clear it sounds. Veteran head-fiers will equally enjoy it as a speedy toy that transcends its price point with detail reserved for much higher-end products. Individuals craving an intimate, husky response will want to look elsewhere, but for nearly everyone else, the Titan 1 will be a very nice addition to their collections.

Disclosure: This review is based off a review unit of the retail version of the S5, provided by Brainwavz. This is my first in-depth encounter with a Brainwavz product, having only demoed previous Brainwavz products very briefly in Hong Kong three years ago.

 

Brainwavz S5, with a 10 mm dynamic coil driver and CNC metal body
 

Battleground: The Sub-$100 Price Category & The Dichotomy of Sound Philosophy

 
The sub-$100 price category is an all-important battleground for earphone manufacturers. It used to be the sub-$60 or sub-$80 category that was a hot topic of debate, but pricing expectations for earphones have gone up in recent years and $100 is a viable option for everyday consumers that desire to stretch their (usually zero) budgets in the name of better sound quality.
 
Year after year, premium earphone makers throw their entrants into the ring --- for less than a single Benjamin, you can buy into a HiFiMAN RE-400, an earphone almost universally lauded for having performance that stretches well beyond its price point, or urBeats as a status symbol of the consumerist premium earphone.
 
Sound quality ranges widely in this area, from painfully accurate in the lower-end Etymotics to bass cannons like *redacted*, and thus the sub-$100 category also represents a fork in the road for manufacturers --- a point where they either decide to pursue acoustic performance or go after nice materials and design.
 
So where does Brainwavz stand in this conversation? Brainwavz started out essentially rebranding OEM products as IEMs were just beginning to take off in an industry littered with $5 throwaway earbuds. Typically, OEM acoustic designs are quite competent and follow conventional rules of sound design; it's the manufacturers that tend to come in and say, "Can you add more bass? More treble?", and end up stretching a reasonable, low-cost design into distorting monstrosities.
 
Brainwavz, on the other hand, has mostly kept on its own path, carving out a niche market that allows discerning listeners a price-conscious alternative. It is this niche that has allowed Brainwavz to flourish with a loyal customer base that has continually increased over the years. It does, however, face the same dichotomous question that other, larger manufacturers have long considered (and decided on): do we want to grab the mainstream, or do we keep the enthusiasts happy? The businessman's answer is "both", but real-world execution doesn't come down to a one-word summary.
 

Brainwavz includes a great, semi-hard carrying case with the S5, along with lots of accessories.
 

Build Quality, Ergonomics & Accessories

 
This area is Brainwavz' strongest suit. With ruggedized strain reliefs to the rock solid machined metal earphone housings, the S5 sports a tank-like build that puts the Westone ADV series of adventure-driven products to shame. Some might even argue that recent Brainwavz products are even "overbuilt", opting for big, bulky Y-splits in the name of indestructibility.
 
One thing's for sure, however: even if you stash the S5 in your pockets in the most ham-fisted manner on the daily, it'll stand up to basically any kind of abuse imaginable. The S5 was built for the 14 year-old that tosses his earphones (and smartphone) four feet into the air toward his bed when he gets home from school. It was built for scrunching up into a tangled ball and stuffing into a pants pocket. The S5 needs not be babied.
 
The overall shape and design of the S5 reminds me of an old mainstream bestseller IEM --- the Klipsch Image S4. The wear style is very similar, and so a secure fit will actually make the earphones look like they're slightly sticking out of your ears (not too much).
 
The fit kit is generous; Brainwavz includes two sets of S/M/L single flange silicone tips (one set is black, the other translucent grey, the two are of differing density), a set of wide-mouthed double flange tips, a set of triple-flange tips, and a set of Comply foams. Isolation was surprisingly good with the included bi-flange tips. For me, the bi-flange tips also yielded the smoothest treble as well, so I've settled on them as the de facto tips for the S5. Delightfully, isolation with the bi-flange tips was much better than expected. I rarely have high expectations for isolation in dynamic driver earphones, but I was able to obtain a great seal with the S5 and remove myself from ambient noise.
 
To top things off, included inside the excellent semi-hard carrying case is a 3.5-to-6.3 mm adapter for plugging the S5 into 1/4" jacks. Service-wise, Brainwavz allows for a two-year warranty. Their magnanimous protection plan is considerable for a circa $100 product.
 
It's strange that the S5 doesn't have an in-line remote version, though. Perhaps it'll come in due time.
 

Extremely robust strain reliefs and Y-split. Almost too much so.
 

Sound: What The S5 Does Well

 
The S5 feels designed specifically for music that populates today's Top 40 charts.
 
RiRi's (or is it Sia's? ) Diamonds is "perfect" with the Brainwavz S5:
 

 
The bass slam is just the right amount to keep club-goers interested, while Rihanna's voice is spacious without being overwhelmingly forward. In reality, the S5 imparts a V-shaped signature that will set vocals back just a bit for every track. The balance is such that you'll feel the space in every track, relative positioning isn't necessarily its forte.
 
If you like big, hard-hitting bass, the S5 will deliver on that front --- the S5 possesses quite the adept low end. This isn't the kind of soft, spongy overly decaying bass found in most bassy IEMs --- no, this is solid, in-your-face, quick-on-its-feet bass. You'll hear (and sometimes feel) the bass all the down to 20 Hz. It doesn't drag its feet.
 
Because of the bass' sprightliness, the S5's midrange comes across relatively well despite its reluctance to come to the front row. Detail levels are admirable for an earphone of this price level; considering the amount of bass present in the S5, anyone can hear a copious amount of detail in both the midrange and the treble.
 

Sound: What The S5 Needs to Improve On

 
The S5 goes quite a bit beyond "balance" for the bass, though. People used to listening to earphones tuned in the vicinity of "neutral" will find the balance patently tips in favor of the bass. You'll always hear the bass line, and sometimes that effect is distracting. Should he ever put on a pair of Brainwavz S5, Swaggy P might bob his head to 'Fancy', but he might also wonder where Charli XCX ran off to, because the S5 makes it seem like she stayed in Tokyo.
 
In addition, despite clear improvement within the first twenty or so hours of runtime, treble can come off a bit splashy. Its aggression definitely can be reined in by a little bit, as it makes the Shure SE215 sound like an innocuous kitten. Treble extension, while not exactly poor (probably above average for its price range), can be better. The clearest evidence against the S5 would be in the synthesized crash cymbals of the first half of K.Dot's 'M.A.A.d City' --- they do not fade away as naturally as they do with the Zero Audio Carbo Tenore.
 

Why I feel a little "meh" about the S5

 
For a minute, allow me to veer away from political correctness and pander strictly to the male crowd. To me, the S5 feels like Kate Upton --- bountiful blonde locks, buxom curves and all. The S5 is absolutely great if you dig that style. I, however, prefer the sensibilities of Audrey Hepburn. While I appreciate the multiple SI covers, the zero-G photoshoot, and transformative All-American image, I can't help but continue to seek out my huckleberry friend. You can deck Miss Upton out in Tiffany & Co. and zip her into a Givenchy dress, but she'll never channel Holly Golightly authentically, and that's where I have a problem with the S5. I'm continually searching for an earphone of timeless persistence, but the S5 seems like it's built for "right now". If so, it's curious that Brainwavz has chosen to go this route, as it has traditionally attempted to appeal first to enthusiasts before the masses. This time, they seem to have gone full bore for the casual listener. It's the difficult, dichotomous choice that manufacturers have to take when navigating this price category.
 
I do give Brainwavz an "A" for effort, especially in the accessories and bulletproof build quality, but the sound of the S5 doesn't quite speak to me on the whole. Brainwavz has been successful in appealing to the consumer that wants superior sound quality for the money. In my opinion, however, it hasn't been successful in coming out with an "iconic" product --- something that'll last in the eyes of the consumer. It doesn't have an ER4, a Klipsch S4, or even a CX-300. That's probably what's missing from Brainwavz at the moment. In my estimation, they need a product that emphatically spells, "This is a Brainwavz product, and we stand for great sound," and will continue to do so for years to come.
 
As I've mentioned, the kinda-sorta premium earphone market is a brutal, cutthroat segment of the industry. It's almost required for manufacturers to roll out yearly with new things to keep the peanut gallery happy. However, in the eye of the enthusiast, it is the lasting product that stands the test of time that is most worthy of loyalty.
 

Suggestion: A "Pro" Version of the S5?

 
Originally, the Brainwavz S5 was supposed to be called the "S5 Pro". Upon release, however, the "Pro" was dropped from the name. I found that choice interesting, as though Brainwavz decided the S5 was for the masses rather than the prosumer. Perhaps the omission of the "Pro" connotes that a more enthusiast-oriented version will come to light.
 
With a single 10 mm dynamic driver, the S5 is a conventional design. Last year, Brainwavz released the R3, a dual dynamic driver design with the drivers pointed opposite to each other, injecting into a single resonant sound chamber. However, the single dynamic driver paradigm will forever be viable; should Brainwavz decide to release an "S5 Pro" version in the future, it should consider using a dynamic driver with a superior diaphragm technology, such as titanium coating or liquid crystal polymer coating. Breakthroughs in material science are allowing moving coil diaphragms to transcend limits of breakup resonance nodes, ridding the S5 of splashiness and enhancing its treble extension. Of course, Brainwavz should also pay attention to the housing chamber as well, as housing resonance control is as equally important to acoustic performance as is diaphragm technology, if not more. Should the end product be an S5 with even better controlled, tamed bass, smoother highs, and more prominent mids, it should prove to be a hit with demanding listeners.
 

A better diaphragm with revised body and venting would go a long way in creating a superior S5.
 

Concluding Thoughts

 
Overall, the Brainwavz S5 is a rock-solid product. It's well-built and has good sound quality. With respect to sound signature, it hits the spot for the mainstream consumer looking for an alternative or upgrade to premium "fashion" headphones --- its sound is tuned for modern pop music, and it'll deliver satisfying music reproduction for most of the populace. However, I can't imagine the S5 being a permanent fixture in the collections of head-fiers. For the head-fiers out there, keep your fingers crossed for an "S5 Pro", or perhaps yet another model that can take on the iconism of the most revered. Until then, keep at it Brainwavz, and fight the good fight.
 

 
 
 
 
 
The Linum cable is thin (0.9 mm diameter). It is light (3.0 grams).
 
It uses next-gen materials (Polyether Block Amide [PEBAX] Thermoplastic Elastomer).
 
It is built tough (60 Newtons of pull).
 
It comes from Denmark. It has three variants (Music, Vocal, and BaX), each with a different resistance value (1.9, 3.9, 1.4 ohms, respectively).
 
Most of all, it's just a dramatically different experience from whatever you've ever had...
 
 

Foreword

 
Chinese/HK headphone manufacturer Astrotec is known for its value-priced products (beginning with their lauded AM90), and they've stuck to their guns by pricing the AX35 (and its near identical sibling AX30) aggressively at under $80. The list price for the AX35 in Mainland China is 399 RMB (~$65 USD), while the AX30 is priced at 299 RMB (~$49 USD). Current eBay prices for the AX35 hover around $70 USD. Considering the overall quality of build and acoustic design, the lower end of Astrotec's Hybrid Series certainly promises to deliver a lot for the coin.
 
It hasn't always been this promising, however. Months ago, I purchased Astrotec's flagship hybrid model, the AX60, and was sorely disappointed. During my listening sessions, I sensed a disconcerting disconnect between its ponderous, half-a-beat-late bass and its razor sharp treble. Despite my best efforts to appreciate the strengths that the AX60 brought to the table (i.e. immense build quality), I just did not think it was a very good product and I let Astrotec know about my opinions sans self-censorship. While my feedback was somewhat scathing, I set out to let them know exactly what they could improve on, and sent the AX60 on a world tour, where the reaction from other members, like my own comments, have been mixed.
 
Astrotec couldn't have been too happy to hear that the flagship product they spent years developing and patenting wasn't quite put together, but it seemed that they were determined to make hybrid IEM technology work --- I was promised that they'd do a lot better with their subsequent models. I had my doubts, however, as not even venerable AKG could get the hybrid modality quite right, even with a $1400 earphone in the K3003. Not phased, Astrotec sent me a sample of the AX35, perhaps in an effort to redeem themselves.
 
Fortunately this time, I believe they have.
 

Packaging, Accessories, Build Quality, Ergonomics & Comfort

 

 
The AX35 came in a small, self-contained box that proved to be drama-free even for any baby mamas. Inconsistent typeface and layout quibbles aside, the earphones were packaged well. Sandwiched between the various layers of foam padding were the earphones themselves, as well as an aluminium tin that held various accessories, such as a pair of ear hooks, and several sets of ear tips.
 
I'm not an ear hook type of person, so I never bothered to try them on. They seemed just like any other set of ear hooks on the market. It's good to know that they included a set for the people that desire using them, though.
 
As for the ear tips, three sets of single flange silicone tips have been provided in various sizes. I dislike them all. They don't seal very well in my ears, and don't feel very comfortable. Acoustically, they perform well, however, so if you have no problems with their comfort, then stock tips will be no problem at all.
 
The extra set of foam tips provided are truly great. They're a tad bit softer than the Comply T-400 tips they're designed to emulate, but they feel very nice.
 
The earphones themselves were strongly reminiscent of the AX60, whose outward build quality was arguably its strong suit. The brushed metal lines running along the body of the AX35 exude a luxurious, robust quality to the product. In the right light, the AX35 looks positively beautiful. At the very least, it is a handsome earphone that is just a little confused with which typeface to use.
 
While I didn't have the AX60 on hand to compare, it seemed that the finesse of build was slightly lesser with the AX35 --- understandable considering the large price difference --- but practical differences are minor.
 

 
Personally, I'm not a fan of the multi-colored (red and green) cable strands and would have rather Astrotec used opaque black sleeving on the cables of both the AX30 and the AX35, but functionally, they do work well --- I just wished Astrotec gave more regard to aesthetic design principles. I must once again mention that Astrotec can't make up its mind regarding which typeface to use. The aluminum tin uses the space-age font that is used in the AX60 as well, but the body of the AX35 reverts to the old wide-faced Helvetica style logo, while the Y-splitter labels the model number with a narrow-faced Helvetica style typeface. Design and style inconsistencies seem to be universal problems amongst Chinese companies.
 
In the same vein, as with the AX60, the silver anodize of the 1/8" inch plug and splitter still differs from that of the housing backplates, but I care less about these inconsistencies in a budget-level product. The fact that the AX35's build quality comes nigh close to that of Astrotec's flagship product is a positive sign.
 

As with the AX60, the housings will be hit or miss with respect to fit and comfort. While the AX35 will undoubtedly accommodate a greater variety of ears because it forgoes the awkward, squarish over-ear cuff of the AX60 for a more traditional barrel design, the sheer depth of the piston-like housings may cause some fit issues with certain segments of the population.
 
I, however, did not find the fit troublesome, and for the most part the majority of people will not find the AX35 a challenging fit.
 
In my own case, my smallish ears --- usually a fit liability --- may actually be a benefit because the weighty housings have more structural support within the concha. Conversely, people with larger ears and greater diameter ear canals may actually find the hefty torque weight to be a little overbearing over time.
 
Interestingly, the cables are an irrefutable improvement over the ones on the AX60. They're softer, more pliable, less memory-prone, and less microphonic, but retains the same tangle-free predilection. These cables are therefore an incremental, but significant step-up over the cables on the AX60, and I would assume that the same improvements are being applied to the latest batches of the AX60, as well as other models in the Astrotec product portfolio. New age, thermoplastic elastomers (TPE) are coming into their own for cable sleeving, and they're definitely primed to replace traditional modalities of PVC, PTFE, and PE in the near future. The AX35's cables are a testament to TPE's potential.
 

 

Sound

 
Overall Signature
 
These days, I find it a chore to describe a sound signature in discrete terms. Informally, I'll just say that the AX35 is neutral enough to give a balanced presentation to most music, but has enough salt and pepper as not to lose the average consumer. In other words, it's mildly V-shaped. The important part is that this mild V-shape is quite pleasing to the ears.
 

Bass

 
Perhaps I should go ahead and get the negative out of the way, because it'll later be qualified as inconsequential. Yes, the bass is the weak link in the AX35.
 
Sometimes, I really don't know what to say about "bass quality" when something is priced at $70. My gut instinct is to say that it's "not good enough", but compared to what? I guess you could say that the $99 HiFiMAN RE-400 possesses superior bass speed and extension, and could loosely be categorized as a direct competitor to the AX35 in sub-$100 price category. Anything else, I either have not yet heard, or costs several orders of magnitude more than the AX35, e.g. Sony MDR-EX1000, Tralucent 1Plus2.
 
Thus, I really shouldn't complain about the bass on the AX35 --- when taken alone, it performs admirably. Coupled with any source of negligible output Z (personally, I tested it with an amplifier with <0.3 ohm, not at liberty to reveal which model), it delivers with expectorant texture and fullness, while simultaneously not impacting the skull with the consistency of a 2 x 4. The bass response is, well, responsive. It's not really a neutral response, but it hits a nice happy medium. Most people would find the bass response quite pleasing. As always, bassheads don't apply --- they're never satisfied.
 
Take, for example, a K-pop electro/hip-hop track that includes a good bass mix, Taeyang's (of BIGBANG fame) Ringa Linga:
 
 
The bass mixed into this track is actually fairly subtle, but ever present. It exists as a gentle rumble, rather than a punchy beat sign. What does the AX35 do with the bass? Well, it lifts it to a level that would be satisfying for a good two out of three listeners (the remaining third listener would either complain that there's not enough, or too much bass), without obfuscating details of the midrange. I would harbor to say that this type of bass response would give listeners a entry taste to a "hi-fi" sound --- measured bass, with good detail levels.
 
Taken in concert with the midrange, however, and my opinion drops. Strictly speaking, the lower midrange, especially in the 300-400 Hz "mud" area, is a jumbled mis-timed syncopation of the two drivers, resulting in a "fuzziness" for vocal fundamentals. The best way to explain the bass is that it's a little slow on the attack phase. Take an impulse response measurement of the AX35, and you'll likely find that the impulse is not the clean step-like ideal that many hi-fi designers strive for. In practical terms, I find that it's hard to keep an accurate metronomic count of the beat with the AX35 --- only snare hits (whose signature sonic energy exists mostly in the upper midrange) seem to come down at precisely the right moment. In audiophile speak, "PRaT" feels a little off.
 
It's conceivable that Astrotec specifically tunes its dynamic drivers this way, but my personal philosophy is that if you're designing a hybrid system, ADSR traits should be well-matched between drivers, especially if the dynamic driver is seated behind the BA driver (thus introducing inherent time alignment issues). Thus, if the balanced armature driver possesses quick attack and decay, then the dynamic driver should be so as well, as not to emphasize any time domain incoherencies. It should be noted that even the $1200 AKG K3003 possesses the same issue, so coherence is a problem across all hybrid designs, but I feel that it's especially easy to hear on the Astrotec models.
 
Thankfully, the issue is much less pronounced with the AX35 as compared to the AX60. Whereas the AX60 introduced a noticeable time delay that was further made apparent with its strong mid-bass response, the AX35 is fairly mild in its bass response, and thus there's less intermingling of mis-timed response between the dynamic driver and the BA driver.
 
It's not all bad news, though. A palpable time delay in the lowest bass registers is absolutely fine, as it is able to somewhat simulate the characteristics of speakers in a room with omnidirectional bass fanning out and bouncing off the walls. The big issue is where the group delay is introduced. Under 60 Hz is usually the "ideal", but perhaps the low pass design of the AX35 hasn't been cut low enough to be perfect. Add a resistor in series, however, and it seems like the problem becomes mitigated, as the balanced armature's lower frequency response is dropped, as well as the dynamic driver's, minimizing driver overlap between frequencies. The downside to using a resistor in series, however, is that the dynamic driver becomes underdamped, resulting in poorer texture and impact.
 
Realistically, however, I don't know if my technical grievances truly apply to a budget earphone. The AX35 sounds relatively clean and controlled, and doesn't overdo it with the bass, something that too many budget-minded models are guilty of. I also wonder if that many people would actually notice the time coherence issue. While I manage to notice, both in the AX60 and in the AX35, the effect is somewhat subtle in the AX35. In real world listening, I don't really have a problem with the AX35. If you're a stickler for absolute technical performance, then avoid the AX35, but if you're not, then I highly doubt you'd have a problem with it.
 
If you've noticed that I sound wishy-washy about this issue, it's that I really don't know how to think. Should I apply strict standards of acoustic performance even to budget-minded IEMs? If so, too many IEMs would fail miserably. Then, should I grade on a curve? If so, then the AX35 acquits itself nicely, and it finds itself near the top of the heap when it comes to the bass.
 

Midrange/Treble

 
As mentioned previously, the time coherence issue prevents the AX35 from being ideally transparent, but timing issues aside, the midrange is actually quite pleasing.
 
Warmth and fullness are conveyed well, measured for a happy medium. Imaging is one of the better aspects of the AX35, as the Knowles ED balanced armature driver that drives the mids and highs is highly accurate and able to convey good transient response. The AX35 therefore manages to be one of the more detailed and transparent earphones in this price range.
 
Treble presence is mostly neutral, with some canal-related resonances that may end up bother a small portion of the population, but should not be an issue for most. Extension seems to do decently well.
 
With a 64 ohm serial resistance adapter, the AX35 improves further in imaging and treble accuracy. As mentioned before, the lower midrange drops out a bit with added resistance, so vocals lose a bit of body, but overall, the sound improves for the better.
 

Sensitivity, Source Pairing & "Synergy"

 
At 8 ohms (at 1 kHz), the AX35 has likely had its drivers hooked up in parallel, which drops its total DC resistance. The AX35, therefore, is a very sensitive earphone. I barely have to turn up the volume. However, with a serial resistance adapter, its sensitivity drops significantly.
 
So what should the AX35 be paired with? Should a serial resistance adapter be added to the chain? It depends on what you want out of the sound of the AX35. Do you want more midrange body and solid impact to your AX35? Then look for a warm source with low output impedance, e.g. FiiO X3. Do you want less bass impact, more clarity, and a greater sense of imaging? Try adding some in-line resistance.
 
The AX35 seems to be polarity aligned, so adding in-line resistance will electrically underdamp both the BA driver and the dynamic driver. As mentioned in previous sections, this leads to a linear suppression of bass driver's whole response, as well as linear suppression of the lower half of the BA driver's response, resulting in a cleaner, leaner, more transparent lower midrange, at the expense of some bass texture.
 
After some trial and error, I arrived at a portable setup that consisted of an amplifier with 10 ohms of output impedance (Firestone Audio Fireye HD, which is based around the TPA6120A2), an in-line resistance adapter with 64 ohms of series resistance, from a Sony NWZ-F886. This setup really helps normalize the response of the AX35 into something that is acceptably neutral while simultaneously minimizing the time coherence issue between the two drivers.
 
However, this setup is not for everyone. It really depends on what you want out of the earphone.
 

 

Conclusion

In many ways, I find the Astrotec AX35 to be a very good product. It's very well-built --- well beyond most peoples' expectations for a $70 earphone. It has a balanced sound signature that doesn't go overboard in any one aspect --- erring on the side of neutral, allowing it to be versatile across multiple music genres. Its ergonomics are reasonable without sacrificing aesthetics.
 
It's not perfect, however.
 
Like most other Chinese companies, Astrotec has yet to figure out the significance of a consistent corporate identity across product lines. Space-age typeface here, Helvetica there, Arial elsewhere, and Proxima Nova on the box do not instill in people, especially casual customers new to Chinese products, any kind of consumer confidence.
 
Perhaps more importantly, there are inherent technical difficulties to overcome with a hybrid dynamic/BA design that require precise time-alignment and decay phase coherence. While it's arguable that the average listener would care, the head-fi community nevertheless houses a subset of very picky listeners that may very well find some aspects of the hybrid sound "off". The AX35 will not allay those peoples' concerns. Astrotec seems to be banking on the market appeal of the hybrid driver paradigm and hoping technical concerns go by the wayside.
 
Yet, while It's important for potential customers of the AX35 to recognize its limitations, it is, after all, a ~$70 earphone and Astrotec has surely had to make budget-based concessions on both dynamic driver development and the overall developmental cycle. When these factors are taken into consideration, the AX35 should be seen as a great accomplishment for Astrotec given its target price envelope.
 
Therefore, I believe that Astrotec has delivered a product that is well-worth its asking price, and I hope they continue to release products that bring a lot of value to the consumer.
 

Preface

1. This is a short review intended for concise information presentation.
2. The data presented in this review was provided by a good friend and a disinterested third party to whom I owe many thanks!
3. All data is uncompensated (except for 1/12th octave smoothing), and measured with a fully IEC-60711 (IEC60318-4) compliant ear simulator.

 

Why Review the AM70?

 
Over the past few years, audio companies in China have gotten very serious about raising the overall competency of their products. Astrotec is one of the companies leading the charge. In the past, Astrotec has released a number of budget-oriented products: the well-received AM90, the AM800, AX7, etc. They're now embarking on the higher end, with the AX60, a dual BA, single dynamic driver hybrid IEM.
 
However, for IEMs, Astrotec has long used balanced armature drivers sourced from the venerable Knowles Electronics (and been at the mercy of Knowles' pricing). Determined to integrate vertically, a number of Chinese companies, like Japanese electronics giant Sony, have begun extensive research into creating their own balanced armature drivers (with the help of support from the Chinese government). We are now seeing the results of this development, first with the Hisound BA100, and now with the Astrotec AM70. There are a number of Chinese companies that make balanced armature drivers, such as Hearonic and DTS, but only Astrotec and Hisound actually make earphones as well.
 
I was curious to see how a Chinese-developed balanced armature driver performs.

 

Ergonomics, Build Quality, Aesthetics, and Accessories

1. Included with the AM70 are what you'd expect for a ~$35 IEM: a few pairs of ear tips (three pairs of S/M/L silicone and one pair of foam) and a soft carry pouch. Nothing fancy.
2. The design of the AM70 is that of a traditional ear bud, but with a fully metal (aluminum?) body, nozzle, and screen. Insertion depth is, as expected, shallow.
3. Nozzle diameter is somewhat wide (~5mm), but that means that most dynamic driver ear tips are applicable.
4. Y-split and 3.5mm plug are plastic, but build quality is acceptable. Colors are black, however, and contrast oddly with the pink cables and brushed metal bodies.
5. The metal body construction is lightweight and does not feel hefty on the ears, but may perhaps lead to a false perception of flimsy build quality.
6. As per usual from Astrotec, cables are made from thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU), and are study/flexible, but have a tendency to unravel when curled up.
7. Also, the cable color is reddish-pink. I'm unaware of other color options at the time of writing.

 

Frequency Response & Other Electroacoustic Properties

 

1. Red and blue traces denote right and left, respectively.
2. Output Impedance (of output amplifier): ~20+ ohms.
3. Green trace shows the left side earpiece measured from an output amplifier with an output impedance of ~0.7 ohms.
4. Gold vertical line denotes high frequency bandwidth limit.
5. One side is wired to normal polarity, the other is wired to reverse polarity. This is perhaps a QC issue, and has been seen before in other products.

 

Sound Signature

 
Overall: Neutral, with warmish midrange cast
Clarity: Decent, especially for the price, but midrange can at times sound slightly distorted, leading to a slight haze-like presentation.
Soundstage: Neither small nor large, feels slightly constrained (perhaps due to limited high frequency bandwidth)
Sounds Most Like: Sony XBA-1
 

Conclusions

 
For 248 RMB (~$35 USD), the Astrotec AM70 is not a poor performer at all. It offers a relatively neutral presentation, and while it can display some midrange distortion, the overall sound signature is pleasant and offers a good degree of clarity. Bandwidth, however, is slightly lacking (forgivable for its price range) and interchannel balance, as well as overall quality control should be better.
 
I would harbor to say that the Sony XBA-1, now discounted to about $30, is a slightly better overall earphone. In a few areas, the AM70 is better: it offers better clarity and a metal body. However, the execution of that metal body is somewhat rough, compared to the level of practiced polish that you expect from a company like Sony. The comparison is a little unfair --- the XBA-1 began life as a higher-priced item (~$80, IIRC), while MSRP for the AM70 begins at ~$35. After all, even though Sony has fallen off significantly over the last few years, it is still the most recognizable consumer electronics company in the world, and Astrotec is not quite Sony (understatement).
 
Also, the merits of using a balanced armature driver for an IEM in the $30-40 price range are arguable. However, I take this more as a preview of things to come. I trust that Astrotec, as well as other Chinese companies developing their own, proprietary BA drivers (such as Hisound), will improve over time to become more competitive with their western counterparts in Knowles and Sonion. Manufacturers in the western world and in Japan should be worried about the prospect of these companies becoming so vertically-integrated into the audio market. They will be able to manage costs like few companies can. Already, we're seeing hints of this development. The yet-to-be-released (as of November 2013) AX30/35 hybrid IEMs from Astrotec are to be priced at around $70, yet offers a degree of fit and finish closer to the level of their flagship AX60.
 
Would I recommend it? It's difficult to say. My experience in sub-$40 IEMs is limited, but my inclination would be, "Why not?" At worst, I take the AM70 as more of an encouragement --- change is coming to this market.

This review was adapted and modified from my review originally written for CYMBACAVUM, based off a review sample that I promptly purchased because I was so impressed with it.

Click to expand...

 
You may have heard of Resonessence Labs — this small company in Kelowna, British Columbia rose to the top of audiophiles’ wishlists in 2011 when they released the Invicta — a meticulously engineered ES9018-based DAC that blew peoples’ hats away. They managed to pull off this feat by understanding ESS chips inside and out; Mark Mallinson, head honcho at Resonessence Labs, was a former operations director at ESSTech, and whilst forming Resonessence managed to recruit several members of his former engineering team that help design the ESS Sabre DAC architecture. In addition, Resonessence remains close to ESSTech, both literally and figuratively, as they’re located in the same area as ESSTech’s Kelowna research & development lab, while Mark’s brother, Martin Mallinson, remains at ESSTech as VP of Research & Development and Chief Scientist.
 
Obviously, then, there’s no question that Resonessence Labs has the skill and pedigree to make world-class DAC products. Not content with merely making one single, top-of-the-line model, they managed to trickle down technology from the Invicta to the more modestly priced Concero. The original Concero was greatly lauded for its performance and pleasing sound, putting many in the DAC world on notice. Resonessence dared to do better with this summer’s launch of the upgraded Concero line — the line-out Concero HD and the all-in-one DAC and amplifier, the Concero HP.
 
Because of its close ties with ESSTech, Resonessence Labs managed to design the new models around the all-new ES9018-2M chip, a low power, two-channel chip based off the venerable ES9018 (used in scores of high-end, reference level D/A converters, including their own). From technical specifications, the ES9018-2M bests (by a considerable margin) the ES9023 of the older Concero, while allowing preservation of an USB-powered form factor, selectable digital filters, and jitter reduction code — putting it on par, in terms of SNR and THD, with the ES9016 (which was actually used as the DAC section for the headphone output of the original Invicta). The switch to the new chip also gave the Concero HD and HP the ability to readily decode DSD64/128, as well as PCM up to 24-bit, 352.8 kHz (the DXD specification). In terms of format support and bitrate, Resonessence Labs has it covered to the nines.
 
 

Exterior/Packaging

 
Unfortunately, my very first impression (the box) of Resonessence wasn’t the most favorable. Clad in the simplest black cardboard box with two foam inserts, the Concero HP arrived to zero fanfare, pomp, or circumstance. Even the instruction manual looked plain, as though it were typeset in Microsoft Word. I had to remind myself that Resonessence Labs was all about the sound and the engineering. They let their products stand for what they are, rather than glitzy packaging.
 
Actually seeing the Concero HP for the first time instantly allayed any of my superficial, elitist fears, however. The Concero enclosure is CNC par excellence. At the back of the HP, Resonessence proudly emblazons the Canadian maple leaf to great effect. “Fabrique au Canada” is the theme, as the enclosure of the Concero HP (and the entire Resonessence product lineup for that matter) is the subcontracted work of local enclosure developers and CNC millers (Imagination Machine Works and Inspired Precision Machining) that usually reserve their services for much larger projects. In fact, other than the actual design work and final assembly, which are performed in-house, all Resonessence products harness the talents of local specialty workshops — an admirable feat both practical and patriotic.
 
The chassis of the Concero HP is a matte black, precision affair. Bruce Wayne would be a proud owner of the Concero HP (well, he’d most likely have an Invicta or Mirus, but he’d perhaps gift the HP to Dick Grayson). Stark and chiseled, all Resonessence products possess quite a bit of familial resemblance. Sans the glowing ring, the rotary knob on the HP appears to be a scaled-down version of the one on the Invicta, and shares with its bigger brother the same beveled front corners that take the predictable regularity out of a pure rectangular shape. The HP also possesses, apart from the rotary knob and 6.3mm headphone output, the same outward dimensions as the Concero and Concero HD, but the HP and HD actually have reworked innards that allow Resonessence to place the new PCB (also made and assembled locally in British Columbia by a military-grade electronics supplier) in place. Keep in mind, however, that the overall industrial design isn’t necessarily going to win any Red Dot Design Awards.
 
It is, nevertheless, one of the most solid-feeling structures I’ve come across in all of audio, and I can imagine the same exact fit and finish applied to the much pricier Invicta or Mirus. Needless to say, the Concero series does not skimp on its exterior finish. The anodized aluminum enclosure feels akin to the plates lining CT scanner rooms, stolidly monolithic. Brush your fingers over the surface of an operational Concero HP, and feel your Pacinian corpuscles underneath the skin pick up on the subtle vibrations of the overbuilt power regulators (though I wouldn’t recommend caressing the unit too much; the satin/matte finish is a bit of a skin oil blotting pad). Everything about the manufacturing is computer-controlled and tightly-regulated, and thus doesn’t come cheap. A substantial amount of the final cost of the Concero HP definitely goes into the production of this exceptionally-crafted chassis. Of all the different audio products that I’ve seen, no other unit with a similar footprint comes close to the fit and finish that Resonessence Labs demands — this thing is built to last.
 

Technical Design of the Concero HP

 
As alluded to before, the Concero HP (and HD) use the brand new ES9018-2M chip from ESSTech. While devices from other brands equipped with the chip are slated to come down the product pipeline soon (such as the GEEK), the only other device currently to use such a chip is the BBK Vivo X3. Resonessence was by far the first company to take advantage of this new chip. Theoretically, the ES9018-2M performs very similarly to the ES9016 used in the first version of the headamp stage of the Invicta (which, as of this year, has since been upgraded to the ES9018), but operates within a smaller power envelope and is packaged into a smaller 28-QFN form factor. The Concero HP, then, should in principle come quite close to the performance of the original Invicta’s much-lauded headphone output in single-ended mode, just with the core technological base of the lower-priced Concero.
 
The Concero HP and HD are not just the Concero with a new chip dropped in, however. While the three products share the same jitter reduction techniques coded into the Cypress Semiconductor USB receiver and Xilinx Spartan-6 FPGA core, several critical items were completely reworked. The power supply is different. The clock multiplexing, previously soft-implemented on the FPGA in the original Concero, is now a discrete hardware design. And since they’re such proficient software coders, I can’t imagine Resonessence making such a change unless it were for palpable improvement of jitter reduction. The FPGA is now reserved for the jitter reduction techniques, as well as the excellent IIR (infinite impulse response) and apodizing upsampling (4x, from 44.1/48 kHz sources) digital filters (see the Resonessence Labs website’s explanation for technical details).
 
As the ES9018-2M lacks the integrated line driver of the ES9023 on the original Concero, a pair of AD8397 opamps feed the output stage: one for the actual amplification, and another as a noise reference. Resonessence engineers seem to favor this opamp for its superior current delivery as well as rail-to-rail voltage swing. At full scale, the Concero HP outputs 3.5 Vrms (translates to a conventional 2.5× gain factor and nearly a 10 volt swing, peak to peak). It also transmits clean, clear power — up to 270 mW into 32 Ω and a -100 dB noise floor. While the power specs aren’t world beating, they’re very adequate for even the thirstiest full-sized dynamic headphones. IEMs aren’t even a question.
 
As Resonessence tends to employ a uniform design philosophy from the top-down, the Invicta employs a similar design process in its headphone amplifier. However, to keep within the 500 mA current draw limits of USB 2.0 specifications, however, the Resonessence engineering team couldn’t completely emulate the design of the Invicta’s headamp in the Concero HP. Even so, they retained the excellent 32-bit digital volume control of the ESS architecture.
 
Since the device is USB powered, the Concero HP is obviously intended mainly for a USB data stream. However, there’s also a coaxial output, complete with jitter reduction, that allows you to daisy-chain the Concero HP to other DACs as an USB-to-S/PDIF bridge. Interestingly, it can also be reconfigured to become a coaxial input in lieu of USB (but the USB port still has to be plugged in directly to a 5V power source, via a wall wart or USB power supply). I didn’t bother to test these features, however, as: (1) I don’t believe a small device such as this was intended to be used with coaxial input especially if there’s an USB input, and (2) I don’t have any sources/transports that accept or output S/PDIF in such a manner anymore (yes, I’ve gone completely to USB).
 
Power management is one of the remarkable things about this unit — with all but the absolute most sensitive of IEMs, the Concero HP is dead silent. Zero hiss. Even at 0 dB attenuation. There is hardly any difference between plugging it straight from the USB port of my laptop and having it filtered through the excellent iUSBPower. It’s truly an impressive feat, and remember, this unit measures in at only ~16 cubic inches!
 

Startup and the Computer Interface

 
There’s no need to tweak USB latency settings (the reference Thesycon driver allows for different safety levels and packet sizes) and the included ASIO driver was completely lag-free in Foobar, suggesting of Resonessence’s optimization of the code. All previous ASIO drivers I’ve tried, whether they be Thesycon-derived or C-Media-derived, managed to lag playback and any visualization I tried to run, and while that might be a sign that I should upgrade my laptop, the RUSB ASIO driver worked pain free from the get-go.
 
Let’s not forget that the unit is also compatible with an Apple remote control, which is a much better approach than trying to bundle a hideous off-the-shelf remote with the unit. The best aspect of the remote function, apart from being able to toggle volume up/down, is the ability to remotely cycle through the digital filters. This can also be done by pushing down on the rotary knob, but being able to do this remotely keeps my (apparently greasy) fingers off the volume knob.
 
The unfortunate aspect is that there’s no way to tell between which filter is engaged purely by sight. Engagement of both the IIR and apodizing filters is indicated by a purple Resonessence logo as opposed to the default blue colored bit perfect indication, whereas red is the indication for the state in which the Concero HP resides when no bus input, either USB or S/PDIF, is detected. It makes sense, then, that purple is the only possible result from the mixing of red and blue, but I would personally like to see at least a change in color intensity to differentiate between the two filters (perhaps add an additional white LED).
 

Sound

 
The Concero HP is simply the best-sounding USB-powered device that I’ve ever heard. There’s really no other competition.
 
Also, forget about the rumors you’ve heard that systems with ESS DACs in the chain sound analytical and dry — the Concero HP is anything but. It’s true, I’ve always been a “details-first” sort of guy, and while the Concero HP definitely impressed me on that front, the truly impressive aspects were peripheral to the rendering of details.
 
As expected, the level of resolution on the HP is immense. But the way the HP presents resolution, is one of those things where details are not “in your face”, but just plain easy to listen for. The best part about this experience is that the details do not feel distracting to the entire musical experience.
 
I felt that, for instance, the CEntrance HiFi-M8, a very capable unit in its own right, sometimes presented details in a fashion that detracted from an immersive musical experience. Conversely, the resolution rendered by the Concero HP manages to stay hand in hand with the required body of a stereo image, serving to enhance the listening experience rather than to detract from it. The details actually serve to help shape the dimensionality of voices, instruments, and harmonics, and I was discovering low-level details in familiar music that I previously never cared to examine.
 
The midrange, especially vocals, are front and center in the presentation of the Concero HP — black space surrounds vocals, isolating them from the instruments behind them. There is a slight analytical edge to the upper midrange and lower treble, perfect for how I like hearing my music, though admittedly, it might come off as slightly distracting for some. An HD800 will still show its 6k edginess.
 
Bass is perhaps the most satisfying aspect of the Concero HP‘s sound. It really brings out the best in more analytical headsets by extending as low as it gets and subsequently providing a deep and satisfying punch. The low-end texture and layering brought out by the Concero HP is truly an experience — it’s difficult to believe that something so small, and running off USB power, could output bass that is so low in distortion, tightly-wound, yet impactful — but believe it.
 
The two digital filters were also quite pleasant to use — while I ultimately preferred the more honest, non-upsampling default setting, I found myself listening to the IIR filter pretty often as well. If found that it lent more space to the soundspace, making instruments smoother, cleaner, and brighter. The apodizing filter wasn’t quite as smooth, as it doesn’t do away with pre-ringing, but it did manage to highlight individual elements in a track well, sometimes better than the IIR filter could manage. I found that different tracks and different listening moods called for different filters, and it was a fun experience cycling through the various filters to find the one that best suited the track.
 
With all this praise, what’s there to harp about then? Surely there must be something lacking? Instrumental separation.  It’s not world-beating by any means, and I’m sure a quality desktop rig can best the Concero HP in this area. Even the CEntrance HiFi-M8 managed to pull the stereo image apart a bit better. If you’re craving huge gobs of power and separation, the Concero HP won’t completely satisfy in this area. Even so, I was very satisfied with the performance of it coming from an HD800 or HD600. I never noticed anything being unreasonably small. The HP tends to be fairly honest about separation.
 
At 2.2 Ω, output impedance on the HP is not an ideal for multi-driver IEMs with wildly swinging impedance curves, but it’s certainly well within the realm of reason and not at all unforgiveable. Resonessence‘s new ultracompact Herus manages a much lower 0.2 Ω of output impedance, though, and the Invicta’s headphone amplifier likewise has an output impedance of around 1 Ω. It’s clear that Resonessence Labs understands the merits of good damping factor with a variety of headphone sources, even the most low-impedance models, but it’s too bad they couldn’t institute a lower OI for the topology they chose.
 
Overall, however, the Concero HP provides one of the most satisfying musical experiences I’ve ever had the pleasure of having. I just want to keep listening. It’s one of the few units that allows me to take off my analytical thinking cap and just bask in the cadence of the music being presented to me. If I want to put that cap back on,  I still have one of the best possible companions to dissect music with.
 

DSD

 
Direct Stream Digital has been the audiophile buzzword of 2013 — everyone’s starting to offer it as a supported feature in some way, shape, or form. Resonessence sure hasn’t missed the bus, and supports DSD on all its products, with the exception of the original Concero. So how does DSD work on the Concero HP? The Sabre DAC is a delta-sigma modulator, and thus decodes via the DoP (DSD over PCM) open protocol. Their website actually has a guide that instructs users on how to configure the computer correctly for DSD playback, but it’s a little difficult to find. Luckily, most tutorials online will give ample information on how to do it properly as well. Over Foobar, I installed the SACD decoder plugin and configured the ASIO proxy to work with the Concero HP via DoP. Everything went off without a hitch. Interestingly, all my visualizations went cold (you can’t “visualize” a 1-bit data stream).
 
Interestingly, I found audible differences between identical tracks coded in DSD and PCM. The “black space” of DSD was more apparent, and music felt livelier than its PCM equivalent. Unfortunately, I don’t quite know how to account for these differences, so I’ll just leave these simple thoughts as the are. Personally, I don’t feel the thirst for DSD — high resolution (and well-mastered Red Book) PCM sounds plenty good to me, but it’s nice to know that Resonessence has that format covered.
 

Usage Characteristics

 
If you noticed, my notes on sound characterization for the Concero HP have been qualified by the words “USB-powered”. At $850 CAD, the Concero HP is certainly the most expensive USB-powered unit I’ve ever encountered. Everything else that comes similar to it in size and intended use comes in at least a couple hundred less (examples: W4S DAC2-HD, Meridian Explorer, etc.). Then, not only is it the most expensive, it also sports one of the smallest feature sets in this category of DAC/amps, without RCA or balanced output.
 
So why the lack of utility? Other companies would’ve been crucified for this kind of glaring lack of connectivity. Even sub-$400 DAC/amp units these days include an RCA output and even throw in a 3.5mm output, in addition to standalone amp functionality. It’s certainly curious, since the Invicta is one of the most feature-packed DACs in its price range. You could surmise that the sound quality of the HP overcomes its shortcomings, but perhaps you’d only be half right. To really understand the spirit of the Concero HP, you’d have to examine where and how people listen to music.
 
At the core of the Concero product line is the philosophy of being a USB-tethered device — no power cords. Hence, a small unit like the Concero HP, while technically portable, would best be suited as a laptop companion that sits atop a desk. For true portability, the HP’s heft will bother some, but I like the weightiness of the unit. For me, the Concero HP fits perfectly into my commuter bag and allows me to haul it around with my laptop to various places. So, over the course of a working day, whether at home, at the office, or in a coffee shop, if you’re working on your computer, would you necessarily demand to hook up another amplifier to your signal chain, especially if your headphone amplifier is already so good? I know I wouldn’t. The Concero HP doesn’t have the extra connectivity simply because it shouldn’t.
 
While the tinkering audiophile may want to pair the DAC output with other flavors of headphone amplifiers, that job is more suited for Concero or Concero HD. The HP is intended to be a direct headphone portal to digital music, and that’s the way I like it. With it, I only need one unit for essentially all of my needs. It’s good enough to be a desktop companion, and small enough to take around. My portable amplifiers have been collecting dust ever since I started using the Concero HP.
 
 

Continual Improvement, Technical Service, and Promise for the Future

 
While the sound quality and features of the Resonessence Labs‘ products speak volumes about the company’s approach to audio, I’ve become a fan of Resonessence because of what they offer beyond the realm of hardware. Every company requires more than just a solid product; it also requires a product team that will continually tweak and improve on its products even after a sale has been made. Because D/A converters are intricately tied to computers, and with USB comes proficient coding of software controlling clock timing routines, the engineering team at Resonssence Labs has enabled firmware upgrades for its products that unlock new features or correct existing issues.
 
When I first fired up the Concero HP a couple months ago, it was running firmware version 2.2. After a few days of testing, I mentioned to Mark about a noise issue that cropped up during DXD playback. Within three days, he and his engineers had worked out the issue (they needed to disable S/PDIF output in DXD mode as the bit rate/depth is out of spec for S/PDIF) and uploaded the updated firmware version 2.3 on their website for downloading. I re-flashed the firmware, and voila, no more noise when playing back DXD files. I have no doubt that Resonessence Labs will continue to tinker with the code for HP and make it even better in the future.
 
With this kind of responsiveness and care, it’s clear that Resonessence Labs is very proud of the products they make — they’re a testament to their skill, but they back up that skill with a customer service effort that few others can rival. This attribute alone makes Resonessence Labs a company to believe in. When I received the Concero HP, I was at a bit of a crossroads in the world of hi-fi. I’d heard too many high-priced, hot ticket items that just didn’t seem to deliver. I was very afraid that the HP was more of the same. Luckily, it blew me away on first listen and it has continued to impress me. I was so incredibly impressed with the HP that within one day of using it, I informed Mark Mallinson of my intention to purchase the review unit.
 
There’s really not much I can say more about Resonessence Labs except to heap more praise. While there are certainly companies that have the ability to redirect consumers’ attention with a few flashes in the pan, I firmly believe that Resonessence is a company that is built for the ages. They have a very solid base for making great products, and they’re only set to expand. In the future, they’ll be able to boast a foothold in both the entry-level with the Herus, and the high-end with the Invicta/Mirus, as well as their upcoming stereo amplifier.
 
Resonessence Labs‘ company philosophy certainly isn’t a paragon of modesty: Our philosophy is simple: put together a team that includes world class audio engineers and design audio products without compromise. However, they’ve thus far delivered fully on those claims and I look forward to seeing many more great things from them in the future.

We wants it, we needs it. Must have the precious.
 
They cursed us. Murderer they called us. They cursed us, and drove us away. And we wept, Precious, we wept to be so alone. And we only wish to catch fish so juicy sweet. And we forgot the taste of bread... the sound of trees... the softness of the wind. We even forgot our own name. My Precious.
 

Looking back at this unit, it was excellent for the price. It had great connectivity (coaxial S/PDIF output, both 3.5/RCA full scale outputs, 9 Vrms headamp) despite only being USB-powered,
 
The OPA1611-based 9Vrms headphone amplifier was smooth and laid back, sometimes a little too laid back for the detail lover in me, but very pleasant to listen to. It had low and high gain, and <1 ohm output impedance, so it paired well with multiple sources, equally at home with both my IEMs and my HD598. I compared it to the DACPort, and I thought the Class A headamp in the DACPort was slightly more refined, but got pretty hot, whereas the D7 only ever got slightly warm. The D55 (Hibino iBasso Japanese only version) was more spacious sounding, but not any better as a DAC.
 
I could always carry it around with me if I wanted to, as it was super light. But the enclosure was tough too. The silkscreening and matte finished showed practically zero signs of wear despite everyday use.
 
It served me well!

A while ago, I bought some DIY cabling from Los Angeles-based plusSound Audio and loved the immediacy of their customer service. Being a native Angelino, I also wanted to support SoCal businesses as well, so I decided to check out their Exo series cable.
 
plusSound Audio specializes as a bespoke, handmade, full-service boutique cable service, and the Exo is one of six different cable series offered by plusSound, along with the Dionysian, the Apollonian, the Echo, the Poetic, and the X8 (as well as an upcoming X6 that I know little to nothing about) — each of which are available for IEM cables, headphone cables, interconnects, and more. The Exo is the “bare” cable, with no nylon sheathing, while the other cable series have varying degrees of sheathing on them, save for the X8 and X6, which are cables that use specialty braids over the usual round or flat braid (plusSound lets you choose during the ordering process), with an additional plethora of other options as well.
 
CABLE MATERIAL, ERGONOMICS, BUILD QUALITY & AESTHETICS
 
The Exo cable is a four-conductor, round (Milloit) braid 7N (well, technically 6N+, since measurement machines have trouble assessing metallurgic purity over 99.99998%) UP-OCC stranded copper cable. While I thought the strand count (10-ct) was slightly low, it didn’t seem to affect sound negatively in any way, so, whatever. Those that are concerned with the strand count can take solace in the fact that copper is not the only material offered; there are numerous other (more exotic) options. Of course, these other cable materials will come at a price, but it’s nice to see that they offer so many variants. I personally like either just pure copper or pure silver (without gold); hopefully, they’ll replace the current copper cable with one that’s higher in strand count, if only for durability and redundancy’s sake, rather than for any sonic benefits.
 
While the cable gauge is 28 AWG, the LLD-PE (linear low-density polyethylene) sleeving is quite thick — the OD feels more like a 24, 25AWG cable; I imagine that they ordered it in this thickness because the dielectric properties of LLD-PE aren’t quite as good as PTFE (polytetrafluoroethylene, a.k.a. Teflon) in the same thickness. Why not PTFE sleeving then? Well, PTFE insulation is much more microphonic than polyethylene (linear or cross-linked).
 
Despite the OD being thicker than that of a typical wire at 28AWG, it didn’t feel unwieldy at all. In fact, it was quite flexible, and had a minimal amount of memory, less than my BTG-Audio Sunrise cable. I would not hesitate to use this cable indoors or out.
 
Build quality is really quite impressive; whether it’s the termination, the Y-split, or the pins, plusSound builds the Exo cable like a tank. Everything is secured down and doesn’t seem like anything would break unless someone lets loose on it with a hammer.
 
plusSound equips IEM cable terminations with the excellent Viablue T6s (small) 3.5mm plugs by default; customers can choose between Oyaide plugs, 6.3mm plugs, balanced Kobiconn (RSA/ALO), balanced Hirose 6-pin (iBasso), and others as well.
 
The pins are nice and tight; some aftermarket pins, while not loose, don’t quite have the same tension. They seem to use the full-width 0.78mm pins, with an additional round-barreled shroud for reinforcement.
 
As rock solid as the build quality is, however, the liberal use of black heat shrink does detract from the overall aesthetics just a bit. The neck slider wasn’t a looker and was a bit loose; I’d recommend people putting in the extra $3 for a wooden bead instead. The heat shrink constituting the strain relief at the 3.5mm termination had plusSound‘s logo imprinted, but was lacking a bit of resolution compared to what I’ve seen from other companies. The pins, with their round barrel and additional heat shrink reinforcement, may possibly never break, but they look a bit obtrusive and get long in the tooth pretty quickly. In its defense, I just personally prefer less use of heat shrink in my stuff; there was absolutely nothing about the worksmanship of the cable that detracted from the aesthetics (i.e. excess glue, jagged edges, etc.).
 
SOUND
 
I don’t like to comment too much on sound, since I believe it’s a matter of personal preference; however, I will say that the “sound” of the Exo copper cable is what it “should” be, meaning that it’s a clean, honest sound that doesn’t suffer from EM interference or self-inductance. Nothing sounds muddy, and the ends are well-extended — indicators that plusSound did a great job with the braiding and soldering, to go along with a cable made from high-quality materials.
 
Is plusSound‘s OCC copper necessarily better than the Mogami OFC of my BTG Sunrise? Theory says yes, perception says “I don’t know.” If I had to make a statement, I’d say that the BTG Sunrise has more of a “solid” sound, while the plusSound Exo sounds a teeny bit more transparent, but it could also be my mind playing tricks on me. There are so many minute factors to cables, from the insulation material, to the braid consistency, and the type of solder used that may possibly alter sound in a cable. I don’t try to tease all those things apart. At $99, it doesn’t really matter, either (since a BTG Sunrise cable configured with a Viablue plug and no sleeving is at $93, making the two very similar in price).
 
CONCLUSION
 
I found the Exo copper cable from plusSound Audio to be great in terms of build quality, ergonomics, and price. I’m a bit of a stickler for aesthetics, so I did feel that the Exo had a little bit to work on in the heat shrink department, but I’m sure plusSound has been making improvements. The paramount advantage to plusSound is that it is truly a one-stop shop for anyone’s cabling needs. plusSound headquarters may be a ways off from Melrose Avenue and Rodeo Drive, but it makes them no less of a made-to-order, specialty shop when it comes to audio.
 
[Original Review is posted from: http://cymbacavum.wordpress.com/2013/02/21/plussound-audio-exo-cable-hollywood-boutique/]

At around $65 USD (but also priced just over $40 USD in Taiwan), the entry-level Malleus is an economic tour-de-force. It does come with a much sparser set of accessories than the A03, with no felt carry case, no extreme bass-sealing tips or silicone elastomer rings (according to RedGiant, both may be included in future revisions), but it doesn’t mean RedGiant skimped on the Malleus.
 
Roughly the shape of a kidney bean, the A00 is very comfortable in the ear. In fact, in many ways, it surpasses the flagship A03 Ossicle in terms of build quality. Made with an absolutely beautiful two-piece mirror-polished Zinc alloy shell, the build of the Malleus screams high quality. The cable is made of the same, thick, 5N OFC wire of the A03 and retains the same pliability and low microphonic characteristics. There’s no in-line microphone, but in some ways, that’s an improvement.
 
The one gripe that I have with the design of the A00 Malleus is that I much prefer its fit when worn over the ear, but it requires that I reverse the stereo channels. I always prefer a deeper fit over a shallow fit, and when I wear the A00 with the cables hanging down, the cables scrape against the sides of the intertragal notches of my ears, indicating that the entry angle of the cables are a bit too steep. Thus, I have to use a shallower fit with the A00, doing it no favors when it comes to isolation. When Sinocelt tried them out, he expressed the same exact sentiments. Otherwise, the Malleus is simply marvelous to wear in the ear and would be one of the most comfortable in-ears that I've ever worn. Though the housings feel weighty in the hand, they nevertheless completely disappear in the ears when the correct fit is achieved. Unlike the A03, I experienced zero long-duration wear fatigue with the A00 Malleus. The other negative is shared with the A03, however. Its fully-closed design causes significant driver flex and the need to equalize the air pressure between the ear drum and the driver diaphragm, resulting in a fiddly ordeal to get the fit just right.
When it comes to sound, the A00 has a much more typical, consumer-oriented, U-shaped frequency response. Nevertheless, the midrange is surprisingly clear and detailed. The bass is strong, but astoundingly tight and very well-textured. With Lady Gaga’s Bad Romance playing, the sound of the A00 reminded me of being in the middle of a crowded nightclub dance floor, strobe lights and all --- the powerful bass rumbles my head with distinct authority while the highs leap out easily. The problem is that the bass will sometimes distort for no reason at all, and the treble was at times prone to sibilance and spikes, leading me to believe that the frequency response was a little sloppily tuned. Other than the mysterious distortion, there was little to complain about the sound. There wasn’t much muddiness anywhere. Many other sonic elements, such as driver speed and resolution, also suggested that there was a lot of head room and potential in those 12mm dynamic drivers, so I decided to apply some EQ.
 
With some simple tweaking, I was able to find a frequency response that I believed to be a good fit with me and the music I usually listened to (Jazz, Classical, and R&B). It was only with the mid-bass EQ’ed down (I still like my sub-bass rumble, so I kept that) and certain sibilance spikes taken away that the Malleus was really able to shine like a true bass monster. With this filter in place, and distortion & sibilance eliminated, I would say that the A00 could easily be mistaken for a pair of earphones priced at $100+, as the quick speed of the drivers delivers excellent PRaT. Even then, though, the A00 showed obvious signs it wasn’t exactly a high-end product by displaying distinctively inaccurate timbre. Casual listeners, however, won’t have a problem with strong, wonky bass, and will simply believe that the Malleus sounds very clear (which in fact, it is) and has excellent sound quality.
 
At $65, though, I have minor misgivings about its sound quality, as there are many products out there that offer great bang-for-buck in the same price range without the need for external EQ (e.g. Brainwavz, etc.). However, most products, even at over $100, aren’t even nearly as well-manufactured so the overall package makes it a very good buy, and at the $40-ish dollars that it’s available at here in Taiwan, it’s basically a no-brainer.

****The following is riddled with hyperbole and flowery, long-winded writing; if you’re not interested in any of these things, please skip to the SUMMARY section, or close down your internet browser, slam your mouse down in disgust, and curse me. Also, the pictures are again taken with a sub-par camera, as my camera has been undergoing numerous maintenance changes.
 
 
What is a star at the end of its life?
 
It’s a burgeoning mass of spent gases --- a giant red fireball, simmering in the sky. Its gentle glow belies the immense power it stores, able to burst into an array of primary elements, releasing, in the form of a mesmerising planetary nebula, critical star & planet-building materials into the vastness of space.
 
Such is the fate of a red giant, and although our own sun is not due to evolve into one for another few billion years, a RedGiant is indeed upon us…
 

---

BACKSTORY

---

During my break over Chinese New Year, through some nonsensical Google queries, I happened across the fortuitous color of RedGiant. A local shop had been selling their earphones, with a particular model was advertised as ‘dual dynamic’. Although there have been numerous dual dynamic models released over the last few years, none had quite been styled quite so uniquely as the model that appeared before my eyes. I was curious, however, why there seemed to be no retailers outside of a couple of stores in Taipei. There wasn’t even an online store. Thus, I decided to contact them, and after some more digging, I found their e-mail address.
 
Rob, who was on the other side of the e-mails, was a friendly Canadian man with an interest in other-worldly pursuits. Through our e-mails, I found out that RedGiant was an extremely young audio company with its design studios based in Taipei. RedGiant had only made its first public appearance at Computex in June 2011, having been the newly convceived offspring of other branding projects. Rob was pleasantly surprised that I’d found out about their brand and hoped to sit down with me, but unfortunately, our schedules couldn’t align. Instead, he dispatched his deputy Joe to talk to me about their products. Joe headed the design team in Taipei and was available more conveniently.
 
Thus, in mid-February, Joe and Ann (in charge of RedGiant sales for Taiwan) sat down with me for over an hour, explaining their product philosophy and the ins and outs of their earphones. The coffeeshop in which we met was not really suitable for critical listening, so they decided to let me go home with their top-end A03 Ossicle and entry-level A00 Malleus to test out.
 
As the flagship offering from RedGiant, the A03 Ossicle is an earphone indeed delivered by dual dynamic drivers, with a tweeter measuring 8 mm across and a woofer at 14.3 mm. It also comes with an Apple-compatible in-line microphone. At just under $150 USD, the RedGiant promises to bring competition to dual dynamic offerings from JVC and Radius that hover around the same price point.
 

---

REVIEW: RedGiant A03 Ossicle

---

BUILD QUALITY, PACKAGING & ACCESSORIES
 
Packaging. The A03, like all other RedGiant products, comes in RoHS-certified clean paper packaging with one of the earpieces proudly displayed in a transparent plastic window on the upper left hand corner of the box. While not exactly the easiest to open, the packaging does contain clearly numbered labels that direct you in the steps required to open up the package --- no guesswork here. Still, I would’ve preferred more simplistic packaging instead of a mini-game of ‘Pull the Tabs’. Its saving grace is that the packaging is also not without its cute, quirky touches. On the side of the inner box, there is a mini-joke that pays homage to Einstein’s postulations. Not recommended for faster-than-light travel. Indeed! The instructions also show how to fold together the included carrying case (although it comes preassembled) --- another sign of attention to detail and a clue to RedGiant’s industrial and graphic design roots.
 
Build. Once the packaging is opened, we see that the A03 is fully plastic in construction, from the hard plastic of the white outer shell to the soft material of the inner shell. The extensive use of plastics on the A03 does not preclude this RedGiant from being a well-made item, however. In fact, the soft plastic of the inner shell feels remarkably similar to the high-quality interior dash trimmings of Lexus’ sedans. Its soft texture feels great to the touch, giving the user a sense of confidence when putting it against the ear. The nozzle opening is guarded by a porous metal grille that is amongst the better quality ones I’ve seen in IEMs. All in all, the fit and finish is quite polished, if not exactly luxurious in appeal. The cables are thick and well relieved in their connections, topped off with a robust-looking L-type connector. In my opinion, the overall build quality goes above and beyond the call of duty for the sub-$150 price point.
 
Accessories. The RedGiant A03 is appointed with a respectable set of accessories, including an extensive and well-meaning fit kit (if not exactly the most suitable). It contains two separate sets of tips. The first is labeled as ‘Natural Acoustic’, which is a hybrid silicone, dual-density design not unlike that of the Sony hybrids but much softer and pliable. The other is the ‘Extreme Bass-Sealing’ variety; it’s also silicone in construction but of a singular, much harder, density. As it can be deduced from the descriptive nomenclature, the former is designed to be acoustically natural, while the latter is designed to shore up bass levels. Both tip types come in four different sizes: SS, S, M, and L. In an effort to enhance the fit range of the A03, RedGiant also included two different-sized pairs of silicone elastomer rings, designed to be slipped around the stems of the included ear tips. Even then, however, I thought that perhaps RedGiant had fallen short with this fit kit. While the natural acoustic tips were very comfortable, they were simply too soft. I often had a difficult time with obtaining a seal because the tips would fold and collapse upon entry into my ear canals. It was only when I applied the elastomer rings that I got a better fit. The bass-sealing tips were easier to deal with in terms of insertion and obtaining a seal, but they did color the sound in a way I didn't appreciate. Most of the time, I wound up using a pair of double flange silicone tips similar to the ones offered from MEElectronics. Eventually, I migrated over to Comply T-400 tips, as they were simply easier for long-duration wear, even though they did suck out some of the gorgeous airiness the A03 originally had.
 
Removable ear guides are not actually included in the accessories package, but rather integrated into the design of the earphones themselves as a pair of soft and pliable silicone tubes.
 
Lastly, a modular carrying case made of felt is included to round out the package. The felt case struck me as a bit odd, as it was quite large, but not quite large enough to carry an iPod along with the earphones. However, its modular design was well thought-out, as it allows the user to package their earphones either in a highly secure manner, specialized pockets for each earpiece and all, or lets you just stuff it all inside without organization. The soft, pliable material won't provide much by way of shock and impact protection, however.
 
DESIGN, FIT & ERGONOMICS
 
Appearance. As it is in the night sky, this RedGiant is unmistakable in the looks department. The outer plastic shell is an intersection of angles, edges, and curves. It channels the futuristic, space-inspired concept quite well, and a friend of mine even mentioned that it reminded him of stormtrooper helmets.
 
More quirkiness is apparent on the inner face of the housings, as there is an HTML tag for where the <HEAD></HEAD> goes in-between. It doesn't mean, however, that the Ossicle only appeals to the geek-chic crowd; I'm sure it provides plenty of aesthetic appeal for the mainstream as well.
 
Fit. Although the housings are quite light, once anyone takes a step back and looks at the earpieces in their entirety, it's apparent that the A03 Ossicle is positively massive. This is arguably the most controversial aspect of the A03, and I’m sure much will be made of the fit and ergonomics of the Ossicle as time goes on, so I'll go ahead and say that the design of the A03 is in fact not designed to fit everyone’s ears. Much like a pair of demo customs, the A03 Ossicle is designed to be a one-size-fits-most item. Part of the reason why the A03 isn’t all-inclusive is that it fills the entire concha of the ear; people with smaller ears are simply unable to put them in their ears.
 
With smaller than average ears, I was afraid that the Ossicle would not fit in my ears; luckily it did ---- but barely. I gave the A03 to a male friend with smaller ears than me, and they couldn’t fit. The experience was basically like putting a square peg in a round hole: it just doesn’t work.
 
Interestingly enough, however, no female that I tested the fit with had problems wearing the Ossicle. In fact, MuppetFace gets a very comfortable fit with the A03.
 
For those that do get a good fit, once they’re put in properly, it does feel fairly comfortable; it is only after a couple of hours that the fatigue will set in. Although the front of the housings are tapered to allow them to fit under the tragus of the ear, I find that it is still a little too thick for my ears, and so, after continuous wear, the tragus will invariably feel sore after removal of the A03. Comply tips will help with the comfort, but won’t eliminate soreness altogether.
 
In RedGiant's defense, they didn't completely ignore comfort when designing the A03 Ossicle. They merely felt that the large housings would best be able to implement their dual dynamic system in a way that satisfied them. As mentioned before, it is an inner-shell, outer-shell design; the drivers are largely housed in the inner-shell, but port out to the outer-shell. In order to compensate for potential fit issues, they included the large fit kit. Interestingly, the A03 is actually designed with a dual-tiered nozzle system for better fit. The silicone sleeves can be fit higher or lower depending on which rung you use. RedGiant's official line is that the dual-tiered nozzle is designed to compensate for people with different length ear canals, but I don't really find much of a difference, except I usually find that silicone tips work better on the upper rung, while Comply tips work better with the lower rung.
 
Seal and Isolation. In the most comfortable configuration for wearing the A03, the housings are actually not flush against the wall of my concha and anti-helix, but rather canted at an angle outwards, in order to provide the best seal. However, this position takes away from the stabilizing aspects of the ear-hugging design and thus takes away some of the outer ear involvement that is crucial for allowing the A03 to sound as large and spacious as it can. Keep in mind, however, that fit varies from person to person, and I'm merely communicating my own experience. Isolation is also lacking for a closed earphone. At first, I believed that isolation was relatively poor because I wasn’t getting a good enough seal, but it soon became apparent that the large surface area of the plastic shells actually acts as a good sound conduction surface, and will transmit outside noise into the sound mixture inside the outer shell. I also found that the plastic outer shell colors the sound in a distinctively plastic manner, much like the difference between plastic, wood, and metal housings for other earphones. As a consequence, I've made two suggestions to RedGiant to remedy the A03's isolation and fit problems: (1) to implement an articulating nozzle like the GR07, and (2) to change the material of the outer shell to something with more acoustic neutrality, such as carbon fiber or even a different composition plastic (metal would make the shell way too heavy). The articulating nozzle would really help with the fit, as the current angle of the nozzle will definitely cause people problems, while a CF-made outer shell would improve noise isolation and give it a better aesthetic appearance. I have my doubts that the second suggestion would ever make it into production, unless they decided to do a special, limited-edition of the A03.
 
Once the A03 gets into your ears the right way, however, the real magic happens...
 
SOUND
 
In a nutshell, the A03 Ossicle sounds large, spacious, well-separated, and smooth. This description only scratches the surface, however.
 
Soundstage. When I first put the A03 on and assessed the sound, the first thought that went into my head was, “What universe have I stepped into?” The A03 possesses perhaps the largest, widest, and most separated-sounding soundstage of any universal in-ear that I’ve ever heard. It makes things just sound grand, and on certain recordings that I'd heard many times over --- recordings I thought I knew inside and out --- this pair of $149 earphones managed to present them in a completely novel, interesting manner! It might've been a combination of the natural low and high separation of the dual dynamic setup, coupled with some outer ear involvement, but certain tracks that I'd listened to hundreds of times before simply just came out differently! Wider! More separation! A better sense of instrumental onset! Stacey Kent and Melody Gardot never sounded so good! Even though it didn't exactly match the sonic proficiency of the customs that I'd heard before, something about the way detail and separation was presented on the Ossicle instantly made me draw comparisons of it to custom IEMs. To be more exact, the detail I heard out of the A03 seemed to stem more from the space imparted by the soundstage that was separating the concentric shells of music away from my ears, more than the kind of speedy driver articulation and treble boost that dominated the presentation of other high quality universals. I was so excited in my first hours of listening that I simply blurted out my enthusiasm on a post in another thread (that I later edited away, so don't bother looking for it ) even though I'd originally planned to keep news of this earphone under wraps until I'd completely finished my assessment. I spent that night slack-jawed for a good several hours before I finally came back down to Earth.
 
As I soon found out, as much as soundstage width and instrumental separation was the A03’s bread and butter, soundstage depth was perhaps its Achilles’ Heel. Test tracks like the virtual barbershop, or the Dolby Headphone Test are unconvincing. For the former, it feels as though the barber were trimming hair off a wall plastered to the back of my head. I didn’t feel much ‘curvature’, and things didn’t get much better with the Dolby Headphone Test, either. This alarming lack of depth in the soundstage was quite a letdown, especially after experiencing such a galactically grand width in soundstage.
 
Fellow member and good friend MuppetFace, put it best when she likened the Ossicle to watching a movie on a large, curved IMAX screen. The soundstage width and separation are absolutely larger than life, but everything is still on a wall in front of you. In the end, the A03's presentation just isn't all that realistic; it's surrealistic.
 
Bass. The A03 is quite bassy in its frequency response, and can even be considered U-shaped, but it doesn’t actually feel that way because of the superior separation of bass and mid/high frequencies in the dual dynamic setup. Rarely does the bass feel overpowering, but when the power is cranked up and volume levels are high, the bass will feel grand and powerful enough for any closet basshead to bob their head with. As nice as it is, however, I would say that the bass is one of the A03's two major sonic weak points, the first being soundstage depth. Why? Well, for starters, the A03 really does need more juice than the 32 ohms and 110 dB that RedGiant specifies. An iPod might be perfectly adequate for driving it to loud volumes, but control over that 14.3 mm woofer is lacking. At volumes under 50% on my iPod Touch, I find the bass of the A03 Ossicle to be uninspiring, even pathetic at times. It is only when I boost it to 60-67% that the driver begins to overcome its inertial mass and transform itself the celestial body that it is. Even then, however, the mediocre output characteristics of the iProduct line don't do the A03 any favors with respect to the kind of body and texture the Ossicle is able to output with its bass driver. Thus, I find it ironic that the A03 is coupled with the Apple-compatible in-line microphone and volume control when it could've done away with it to allow the user to have a more secure, behind-the-neck cable fit. More importantly, is that the microphone and volume controls are useless when it is plugged into an amplifier --- a near necessity if one is to experience the full capabilities of the A03 Ossicle. Then, there too are the technical limitations. With the A03 fully-amped, it does deliver top-quality bass performance, but driver speed isn't amongst the best in the dynamic driver category. It is simply fast enough, but not exceedingly fast --- slightly disappointing for a product designed for the space age. As a result, it does lose out in microdetails to earphones like the GR07 and EX1000. It does come amazingly close to this hallowed group of IEMs, however.
 
Midrange. As hinted beforehand, the A03 could be construed as having a slightly U-shaped sound, but applying a stereotyped impression of what an U-shaped frequency response does to the midrange would do the A03 a huge disfavor. No, it is not veiled. It is not lacking in detail. In fact, it ranks amongst the clearest of the earphones that I've heard with a similar frequency response. As powerful as the bass is, I often find myself ignoring that part of the spectrum and instead noticing the beautifully airy female vocals that the Ossicle seems to output. It's warm and sweet, but retains brilliant clarity and delicacy that I simply can't find in other U-shaped IEMs, except perhaps for the FX700. Most of all, it's smooth and coherent --- perhaps not exactly the most technically revealing of midranges, but as mentioned before, the sheer width of the soundstage and the celestial separation help cover for it. As a result, it's quite forgiving to poorly recorded and mastered recordings, which is a nice quality to have when just listening to music for fun. I personally prefer my earphones to be brutally unforgiving (that is why I prefer IEMs like the DBA-02 and FI-BA-SS), but the A03 certainly helps out badly recorded music, especially modern-day recordings, in a very good way.
 
Treble. The highs of the A03 continue the pleasantness of the midrange. It is airy and sparkly, but isn't aggressive in any way. Like the extremes of the bass response, treble extension is excellent. In fact, it's just plain excellent! I really don't have much to criticize. It's quite smooth to about 9 kHz, where it does finally show just the tiniest bit of shakiness, but it really does shine as brightly as the bass in every technical category anyone can think of. In fact, most people I had audition the Ossicle commented about the beauty of the A03's mids and highs, rather than about the bass power.
 
So, no. It doesn't sound accurate at all. Everything on the A03 is somehow tuned to constantly be epic --- sometimes to the detriment of sound. But what it is, is pure fun. I can almost guarantee that anyone who can get a good fit with this earphone will just have an awesome, toe-tapping, head-bobbing, star-trekking heck of a time with the A03 Ossicle.
 
SUMMARY
 
In conclusion, I can only say that the A03 Ossicle from RedGiant is one of the most unique in-ears I’ve come across in recent years. It has a fashion-forward, futuristic design, and customs-like instrumental separation, but is tuned for fun, extraterrestrial listening. For such a young company, RedGiant has certainly gotten off to a great and interesting start.
 
I had initially been kind of iffy about them at first because they were indeed a bit hard to deal with in terms of fit, but after climbing the learning curve and getting used to the presentation, the A03 simply blew me away. It is a grand-sounding earphone that throws out a soundstage wider than any in-ear I’ve ever heard, and is simply exceedingly fun --- no ifs, ands, or buts about it.
 
Yes, the front-back imaging of the soundstage still needs some work, the bass can be a little billowy at times and ever so slightly lacking in texture; they over-engineered the included tips (to their detriment, unfortunately), the isolation is lacking for a closed system, the otherwise excellent timbre sometimes has a plastic resonance, and certain microdetails are tuned away (not all, certain ones are surprisingly kept), but my goodness! The kind of proficiency I've heard from them is just out-of-this-world astounding --- and from a fledgling company no less! And here I thought they were just simply going to be slightly better than the Beats by Dre line!
 
The RedGiant A03 Ossicle has all of the grandeur of a massive celestial sphere in the vast expanse of space --- a quality I’m sure RedGiant was going for when they designed this flagship product --- at $149, it makes for an affordable and enjoyable secondary plaything for music and sound aficionados everywhere. People who demand accuracy when listening to music will undoubtedly also require a more grounded, primary/daily IEM, but for casual listeners that can get along with the fit, the A03 Ossicle is near unparalleled in its ability to launch you into the heart of the music.
 
Pros

1. Class-Leading Soundstage Width and Separation
2. Airy Vocals, Accompanied By Smooth, Pleasant Highs
3. Dual Dynamic Coils Bring the Bass When It is Warranted
4. Cool, Futuristic Design

 
Cons

1. Fit is Literally Not for Everyone; Requires a Sizable Learning Curve to Fit
2. Soundstage Depth is Lacking
3. Sub-Par Isolation for a Closed System
4. Requires Higher Volumes and/or an Amplifier to Come Alive

 
 

---

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

---

I’d like to show my appreciation for the folks over at RedGiant --- Rob, Joe, and Ann, for being so open and accessible. Joe and Ann actually sat down with me for over an hour and a half going through their company philosophy and detailing their earphone designs. I've had a blast corresponding with all three of them, and they certainly showed me they weren't merely space cadets! I’d also like to thank Jason Lai at JM-Plus Electronics for providing Comply tips to me for no good reason at all! Thanks for being a swell guy, Jason!
 

---

MINI-COMPARISON: A03 Ossicle VS Beats by Dre Tour

---

I almost didn’t do this comparison, because, on initial listen of the A03, I knew it would far outstrip the Beats Tour in every aspect of the sound. However, as I had lunch with a friend right next door to the official Monster store, I just had to do the comparison.
 
There’s no surprise here; the A03 Ossicle is light years ahead of the Beats by Dre Tour in every possible metric except perhaps comfort and driving ease. In terms of build quality, while the Tour isn’t exactly horrible, next to the A03, the metal mesh grille looked cheap and sloppy. The stock ear tips are superior, and the smaller form factor allows for a much easier fit, but the quality of the plastic isn’t any better, and the styling looks bland when juxtaposed against the futuristic-looking Ossicle.
 
Things, as expected, looked even bleaker for the Beats Tour when I put them on. Using my Heir Audio 4.A as a ‘palate cleanser’, I first tested the two phones for sheer enjoyment of music. I know Beats products are much maligned on Head-fi, sometimes with unfounded hatred for the brand, but the Tour didn’t do much to acquit itself. The very first tracks I put on were some, er… beats by Dre (yes, ha. ha.), and the very first things I noticed were the bloated mid-bass, recessed mids, and peaky highs. As an overall package, it didn’t sound too terrible, but at the same time, iBuds as a package aren’t too horrible either! Without even needing to listen to the A03, I knew the Beats Tour just didn’t belong in the $149 category. In fact, I'd say the ~$65 A00 Malleus might even be a better choice!
 
Nevertheless, I put on the Ossicle, and it was simply better in every dimension. The midrange did not feel veiled, and despite not exactly being the most forward, was in fact quite clear and well centered. With two clicks above 50% in volume, the A03 simply filled up its shells with punchy, detailed, and textured bass. In this regard, the Ossicle shared much more in common with the venerable Future Sonics Atrio m5 (with MG7 driver) than to the Beats. It still had more mid-bass than the 4.A, but it didn’t feel intrusive at all. The sub-bass rumbled deep in the background, giving the music a dynamic presence, and most of all, the soundstage and separation was simply grand. In typical RedGiant fashion, it makes your typical, throwaway popular music from the likes of Eminem, Usher, and LMAO sound epic. Mind you, I’m using Comply tips with the A03, which takes away a little bit of the sparkle and air. As I switched to other genres, the A03 distanced itself even further. Some genres such as Vocal Jazz simply weren’t very listenable with the Beats Tour, but were still very enjoyable with the Ossicle. Needless to say, without needing to get technical in the analysis at all, the A03 trounced the Tour in every category imaginable.
 
The sad part was that this was very much an apples to apples comparison. The A03 Ossicle and Beats by Dre Tour hold the same MSRP of $149, target the same demographic with their hip, modern designs, and cater specifically toward the Apple-fi crowd with an in-line microphone integrated into their cables. There is simply no reason for anyone to choose a product like the Beats by Dre Tour over the RedGiant unless that person simply could not get a good fit with the A03, or specifically wanted to be associated with the Beats brand.

[size=8.0pt]For those into photography, all my photos are taken with an ancient (by digital camera standards) c. 2006 Canon PowerShot S3 IS. It only has a 1/2.4” CCD sensor and has an 36-432mm (35mm equivalent) lens, so dynamic range isn’t great and high contrast edges are very prone to color fringing, but it does have a 0 cm Super Macro mode, so that’s why I shoot with it. Unfortunately, I do not have a macro lens for my 40D, nor do I have any desire to purchase one.[/size]
 
BACK TO BLACK
It seems like every manufacturer wants a piece of the headphone market these days. Blame the iPod perhaps, for putting a digital music player in the hands of every man, woman, and child. Then blame Dr. Dre, whose Monster (well, no longer) marketing machine altered the status of the premium headphone --- from audiophile plaything to trendy status symbol. No longer are in-ear monitors merely analytical tools for recording engineers; they’re now tuned with every type of ear in mind, and originate from more manufacturers than you can shake your DAP at. Whatever the culprit, there’s no denying that headphones and earphones these days come in every color imaginable – grapity purple, wildberry blue, orangey orange, lemony yellow, and even raspberry red. (Let me know if you got that reference)
 
However, I want to concentrate on only one color: BLACK. It is the most definite of all colors --- an opaque consolidation of all the others. It pulls absolutely no punches, and this is the color TDK chose to go with when introducing its newest line of high-end portable audio products. While TDK isn’t exactly new to the in-ear world, it really isn’t a big player either. Rather, it is well-known as a major manufacturer of recording media, with no real business meddling in the world of headphones. Last summer, with nary the splash of a swan dive, TDK jumped head first into the pool of high-end in-ears by launching the BA200.
 
Whereas previous offerings from the physical recording media company were met with ho-hum reviews, their new flagship, the BA200, would show that it was a serious contender in the business by winning a bronze medal in the 10000-20000 yen earphone category for VGP 2012. (Take these results with a grain of salt, however, as Visual Grand Prix tends to be a more consumer-oriented review board, as the Bose IE2 won the same category with the Sony XBA-2SL trailing in silver). The BA200 was also completely tuned in-house by TDK's audio research lab to achieve a flat response, artificial dummy ears and all. With these promising results, TDK believed it was poised to take on the global market with their new products. Of course, however, good sound cannot simply be certified without being passed through the gauntlet that is Head-Fi!
 
So let's get right to it and see how the BA200 fare...
 
Accessories & Packaging
The BA200 comes in a fairly spartan, but durable package. Once you get around some very small bits of over-engineered precautions, you'll find that two double flange silicone tips (of different sizes) and Ts-100 and Tx-100 Comply^® foam tips are included. Replacement filters are also included, along with a cleaning tool, 6.3mm adapter, and a soft pouch. They're certainly not luxurious appointments, but fairly standard-fare for the price range and in keeping with the professional theme of the BA200.
 
Design, Build, Ergonomics
I will go ahead and say right off the bat that the shape of the BA200 is one of the best conceived for over-the-ear style in-ear monitors around. With respect to styling cues, the BA200 obviously takes after the Westone consumer line, but has far superior ergonomics. I always liked Westone housings and believe them to be very comfortable --- you could say the TDK BA200 has advanced to the next stage of evolution for those housings. With Ts-100 tips, I can insert the BA200 quite deeply and still feel as though I’m not wearing anything at all. Overall, with a deep fit, it is even more comfortable than my previous comfort king, the GR07, because of its well-rounded edges. With a shallower fit, it is just as comfortable as the GR07. Basically, if you don’t mind the over-ear fit, the BA200 are about as comfortable as they can possibly get.
 
The BA200 cord design is of the flat cable persuasion; it works fine and has less microphonics than other cords, but does feel a little thin from time to time, is prone to some warping, and has a tendency to feel rubbery. Personally, I felt that the flat cords worked well in looping around the ear without the need for ear guides, but thought they were unnecessary below the Y-split. However, the flat cable motif was extended all the way, presumably for design consistency. The Y-split is of particular interest, as it is one of the largest I've ever encountered in any audio product to date. According to the folks at Phileweb in Japan, it houses some patent-pending circuits that help stabilize impedance across different sources (more on this later in the Sound section).
 
As for overall design, the TDK is not exactly flashy, but classically handsome with its laquered piano black plastic finish and and gold trimmings. No one should have any real issues with its design, as it is almost intentionally made to minimize controversy, but still provides a touch of class with proprietary, non-generic housings.
 
Aside from the slightly weak-looking cable, the BA200 is solidly built, but not without minor concerns. First, the lightweight plastic shells don't quite have the solidity of metal housings from the offerings of competitors. The same problem is evident with some Westone products as well. The second problem, and this might just be splitting hairs, is that I was not impressed with the quality of the logo and text on the housings and the plugs. The TDK tape spool symbol and the words 'Life on Record' were clearly lacking resolution. The strain reliefs at the housings are also not as robust as those found in similar products from Westone, but seem to be sufficient for the job.
 
 
Sound & Frequency Response
All portable sound assessment is performed unamped, with a 2nd generation Apple iPod Touch, while all desktop sound assessment is performed with a DA&T U2 USB DAC/Amplifier (Tenor TE7022 USB receiver, Cirrus CS8416 receiver, Cirrus CS4398 D/A converter, class A-biasing, AB analog stage) (http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/trueharmonix3/1.html)
 
Honestly, I wasn't all that impressed the first time put on the BA200. I was standing in the middle of a huge, raucous computer mall and only had my iPod as a DAP. Coming from IEMs that almost have a dip in the mid-bass, I noticed a much rounder presence to each note and a very smooth tuning, but other than that, I didn't think it behaved beyond that of a decent, but not world-beating dual-BA IEM. However, the BA200 is an earphone seems to shine with increased scrutiny. I can now say that the BA200 has one of the most pleasant presentations I've ever encountered in an IEM. I have others that possess more clarity and detail, but none are able to present music quite as well.
 
So how would I describe the overall signature of the BA200 with respect to other IEMs? Well, think of it as the UM3x's and W4's little brother from another mother (the SM3v2, perhaps?). Starting with the midrange, it is very much like the UM3x in its ability to 'isolate' voices, with an uncanny way of 'lifting' them away from the mix, thus keeping center focus very well. In this sense, the BA200 isn't really tuned to be a mid-centric IEM by design, but is tuned akin to a stage monitor that enables the listener/musician to hear vocals more clearly. Ultimately, the effect is not as exaggerated as that of the UM3x's and feels quite a bit more realistic, mitigating that artificial feel the UM3x tends to have. The SM3v2 I recently auditioned also had the same type of property. While the midrange isn't as lush as those from its triple-driver counterparts, vocals still possess the proper weight and give the perception of better clarity. The reason for this is that the crossover point from the low to the high driver is found in the midrange, and the crisper edges of the high driver help give vocals better definition. At the end of the day, the three-way, triple-driver stalwarts still possess their own, special qualities, but the BA200 holds its own, despite only having dual drivers.
 
At the low end, the BA200 contains plentiful bass that extends ruler flat down to the deepest of depths (I can hear stuff going on starting at ~25 Hz), but doesn’t seem to move the air well and thus lacks a bit of impact. Personally, I am okay with this type of feel, but stay away if you require that hard hitting, slammy bass that other products might offer. Even without that slam, the bass is nonetheless well-textured, and mid-bass presence is always well-controlled and never intrusive. At the same time, it is this very mid-bass that gives the BA200 the sense of dynamic fullness not found in more analytical IEMs like the DBA-02 or GR07. It enhances the feel of modern-day pop music recordings, but doesn't become a hinderance in 'audiophile' tracks either. In fact, the mid-bass contributes to the sense of soundstage (more in the Soundstage & Presentation section) and is one of the best strengths of the BA200.
 
The highs of the BA200 are relaxed and laid back, but never lacking and never veiled; roll-off doesn’t come at the detriment of musical enjoyment like it can in other earphones. I would even argue that, in fact, the treble roll-off helps the three-dimensional presentation of the sound to a certain extent. So, by 'laid back', I mostly mean that the treble is tuned further in sound space than both the midrange and the bass, an effect most apparent when using Comply foam tips and Shure flex tips. It is most apparent when A/Bing between the treble-forward DBA-02. The Fischers make the BA200's highs sound distant and muted in comparison. The GR07’s treble is also more forward, but sounds less refined under scrutiny. The treble 'problem' can be mitigated, however, by changing out the tips to the included double flanges. To my ears, the tips help bring the BA200 to the most perceivably neutral state it can be in. Yet, I’m not inclined to dogmatically defend the treble, so if you’re a self-processed treble lover, the BA200’s highs may not be for you; they are certainly laid back and will not shove the highs in your face, unlike other treble-happy earphones.
 
Detail, Soundstage & Presentation
 
Whether it is in the highs, mids, or lows, the BA200 is wonderfully smooth. I could not detect any frequency spikes over the entire range of my hearing. Yet, the smoothness of the BA200 should not be mistaken for a lack of detail. While Comply foam tips can certainly gloss over some details, when the BA200 is paired with the accompanying biflange silicone tips, it is most certainly more resolving than an SE535, and about on par with the UM3x.
 
The BA200 is noticeably less hard edged than the DBA-02 and less prone to sibilance than the GR07. In fact, sibilance is virtually nonexistent, especially when the Comply foam tips are used. It’s also by far the most forgiving IEM in my collection. I never minded the unforgiving nature of my IEMs, but it certainly is pleasant to listen to a more forgiving, but still highly resolving IEM. It is also not very hiss-prone. My desktop amplifier is fairly high-powered and, with most IEMs, will produce a fair amount of hiss through its high damping factor output. Both my DBA-02 and GR07 pick up the hiss with high fidelity. The BA200 manages to reduce that hiss into a low level slushing sound that isn't bothersome at all. One of the factors that might go into lowered pickup of hiss is the 'impedance stabilizer' incorporated into that huge Y-split mentioned before. According to TDK, it is design such that the BA200 will sound similar regardless of source, be it from an iPod or a $2000 amplifier. I have reason to believe that the effects of the 'stabilizer' are still limited, however, as the sound does change when I switch the BA200 to the low damping factor output of my amplifier.
 
For many IEMs, soundstage depth is one of the most lacking features when it comes to soundstage representation, and the lack of depth can even cause left-to-right stereo transitions to sound unconvincing. Luckily, the BA200 has been tuned to have an incredibly deep soundstage, possessing perhaps the most three-dimensional sound I’ve ever had the pleasure to own. This marked dimensionality was what drew me to the UM3x when it first came out, and in this aspect the BA200 is every bit its equal. If we imagine the sound space a typical IEM creates to be an ellipsoid of high eccentricity, the BA200 then possesses a space approximately that of an ellipsoid of low eccentricity --- not quite completely spheroid, but very round indeed.
 
I tested my BA200 against the DBA-02 with a Dolby Headphone Demo track. While the DBA-02 was no slouch at recreating the binaural recording of a man shaking a box of matches around a dummy head, the BA200 was just that much more convincing, particularly in its ability to convey the difference between near and far. I could also hear top-down transitions much better. Never had I felt more spine tingling sensations listening to a binaural track. Without question, the BA200 possess top-tier level soundstage realism. It's almost as though the entire frequency response was tuned to help the BA200 impart a world-class soundstage. When comparing to other IEMs, to my ears, while an SM3v2 possesses superior instrumental separation, the BA200 matches or betters it with respect to imaging.
 
The BA200s also excel as a low-volume monitor. Most IEMs that I've encountered thus far tend to lose their soundstage definition once the listening volume drops below a certain extent. Even at low volumes I can still hear critical elements of the stereo mix 'curve' around my head. Spatially, it loses a little bit of the ability to throw sonic cues quite where they should go, but it's still a pleasant listen.
 
 
 
Conclusion
 
Simply put, the TDK BA200 is an absolutely excellent earphone that performs on par with products from some of the best regarded brands in the market. Considering that it is the first effort from TDK in the high-fidelity segment, the BA200 is a remarkably mature product that caters well to both professionals and audiophiles alike, while not completely ignoring the average consumer. It possesses monitor-like qualities with its superb dimensionality of soundstage and forward but gentle vocals, and still manages to present things enjoyably. It is both comfortable and attractive, with a well-selected set of eartips to choose from. Ultimately, I believe the UM3x --- its closest counterpart --- will still last longer in the ears of a stage musician or sound engineer without strain, as it is softer and even more rounded in its edges. However, to a music listener, the BA200 is arguably the better choice.
 
Before ending, I want to make sure that the BA200 does not get labeled as 'the poor man's UM3x/SM3'. Giving it such a label would be selling it short in so many ways. Yes, it shares many of the same sonic properties as the two aforementioned IEMs, but it is so much more than a mere facsimile of them. It's slightly thinner presentation gives it a better feel of midrange clarity, and gives it an edgier response that is ultimately just as enjoyable to listen to in its own right.
 
Unfortunately, TDK seems to be unable to distribute this product effectively outside of Asia. The only places that I can see with readily available supplies of the BA200 are in Japan, Hong Kong, Singapore, Taiwan, and South Korea. TDK's inability to mobilize its distribution chain will undoubtedly hurt the success of the BA200, and perhaps discourage the company from venturing further upmarket into the world of in-ears. It is my hope that the BA200 reaches American and European shores in the near future. However, if you do live in one of the aforementioned countries (or one that does retail the BA200) please do NOT ignore this IEM. It is simply too good to be overlooked.
 
PROS
- Monitor-esque sound, but with enough dynamism to get you off your feet
- Deep, enveloping, and three-dimensional soundstage
- Smooth, relaxing presentation
- Very comfortable in the ears
 
CONS
- Slightly laid back treble may not be suitable for some
- YMMV with flat cables and cord extension
- The best sounding ear tips (biflange) are also the most uncomfortable
- Availability (or lack thereof)
 

---

---

---