The following is an excerpt from an article, it only covers the critical evaluation of the Binom-ER. If you interested in reading the complete article which covers the story of the founder, Oleh Lizohub, the company and its difficulties, and how Binom-ER came to be, you can read Camerton Audio Binom-ER: The Full Story by voja.

Chapter 5 | Critical Evaluation᠎
᠎Disclaimer: I have not purchased the Binom-ER, thus my opinions and findings are limited to my experience and spent time with the Binom-ER. I share no affiliation with Camerton Audio, nor have I been paid to compose and write this article. All opinions, beliefs, and findings are my own and are freely expressed as such. No higher person has overlooked, moderated, or altered the article in any way. The entirety of this article is an original creation solely by myself. This includes but is not limited to: written content, formatting, creative direction, research.

Unboxing Experience᠎​

If you are a sucker for eye candy, then I have to say, you might feel let down. In this market, there are two types of people: those who couldn’t care less about the packaging and are only concerned with the listening experience, and those who are in it for the whole package. Personally, I understand and respect both folks. The unboxing experience certainly completes a luxury product, but at the same time, it doesn’t necessarily define it. Neither the Japanese nor the Swiss are famous for their packaging, but rather for their craftsmanship. In the headphones market, there is Meze, which includes an aluminum case with their flagship Empyrean, there is Abyss, which includes a wooden box with their flagship AB1266 Phi TC, there is RAAL, which gives you the option to get a Pelican case with their SR1a, even Kaldas Research offers a premium variant with a display box for their RR1 Conquest. Hell, if you can afford it, you can get the $60 000 Sennheiser HE-1 with a built-in display case… You get the point. Is it nice? Absolutely! Is it a necessity? No. The Binom-ER comes in a plain black cardboard box. Once you lift the lid, you will find the headphones sitting in precision-cut black foam. However, my favorite part is the metal piece on the inner side of the lid. Here you will find the model name, serial number, production date, and Oleh Lizohub’s signature, all laser-etched in gold. Just because of this part, I want to see these headphones in a display case. They deserve it!!

Design᠎​

If online images are all you’ve seen of these headphones, then I doubt you will be able to appreciate their true form.

The Binom-ER you know today is far from the Binom-ER I first came across. I recall thinking it looked like nothing on the market—slim on-ear pads, carbon fiber back, shiny silver finish. If anything, it was closer to resembling a damn UFO than a headphone! The weird look, however, is what had me heavily drawn toward it. As a matter of fact, I was so eager to get the most recent updates that it became a daily routine for me to profusely refresh Camerton Audio’s website, Facebook page, and even 6moons’ developing coverage. And then, bam! Binom-ER went from the sleek silver headphone to a completely black headphone with thick pads. I can’t lie, the blackout colorway looks sexy, but it would be nice to see the return of that OG silver iteration.

Can I just start off by saying that the importance of headbands is largely overlooked? The headband on its own can make or break a headphone’s design. Say, the Sony MDR-Z1R—its ear-cups are futuristic and a work of art, but the headband and the headphone yoke don’t follow the same language. A lazily designed headband is all it takes to antiquate a well-designed headphone. Unfortunately, this is the case more often than not. However, one of the greatest challenges of designing a headphone with a fixed headband in particular is the dynamic proportions of the headphone. The designer must think ahead of time and visualize how the headphones will look at different levels of extension. Oleh executed this task in an impeccable manner!

Unlike other fixed headbands, which are oftentimes bland and boring, Binom-ER’s headband is particularly interesting because of its strongly defined lines. It visually segments the design into three distinct sections. Moreover, something that becomes immediately obvious once pointed out, but likely flew over your head, is that the headband is fully stitchless. This is the element that elevates the whole design from modern-looking to futuristic-looking, but in the same vein gives it a geometric appearance. However, the most brilliant design detail on this headphone is the metal piece on the ends of the headband, aka the center-piece. It’s where the headband abruptly goes from a soft, fabric surface to a solid, metal surface. The way the transition is so bold, yet so discreet, is masterful. From afar it doesn’t appear to be more than just a piece of metal, but take a closer look from below, and you’ll quickly understand why it’s my favorite part. Notice how perfectly it conforms to the headband’s figure (the edges on the outer side are sharp and strong, while the edges on the inner side are rounded and soft); or how there’s an all-around bottom bevel that gives the center-piece a three-dimensional appearance and makes it pop; or the three symmetrical screws at the bottom, which balance out the empty space—all details are connected to each other and are in harmony.

The headphone yoke beautifully extends that shift to metal, and also carries over the minimalism elements from the center-piece throughout its design. All it’s comprised of is a thin, flat metal plate that is rectangular. In order to bring some excitement to this bare design, Oleh sculpted on top of it. On the inner side, there is a faceplate with the model name, serial number, and left/right indicator, all engraved. Much like the center-piece, it also features an all-around bevel. However, to make it more fashionable, it is arched in at the bottom, and arched out at the top. I think it adds some much-needed weight to the yoke, but I also like how it goes against the grain. On the exterior, the company’s sans-serif typeface logo is flush-set, and the silver mirror finish makes it the sole contrasting detail on the headphone.

Compared to the rest of the design, the ear-cups stand out the most. From the profile, you can see that they are circular and have a little “tab” at the top. There are three layers, with the outer one having the same finish as the center-piece and its faceplate, the middle one being thicker and having a glossy coat on top of it, and the grill, which serves as the inner layer. The ring with the glossy layer has a bevel around it, making it appear as though there is a gap between itself and the outer layer. However, the side view truly unveils the design philosophy for these headphones. We get to see that the ear-cups’ shell (the outer layer) has a 5 mm flat edge with an inner bevel, and that the “tab” sharply flows into the headphone yoke. The tab makes it look like the shell was a viscous liquid that was flowing toward the yoke, but solidified not long after. There is also a ring that’s screwed into the shell with 10 screws. This ring directs the flow to the headphone driver and the ear-pads. It serves an important role in Binom-ER’s design, as it is the element responsible for its slim appearance. Just as we’ve seen on other parts of this headphone, it makes use of a bevel at the bottom, a flat edge, and another angled flat edge. By using two opposing bevels, it replicates the gap that we’ve already seen on the grill ring. All in all, there are a lot of hidden intricate details.

You wouldn’t otherwise expect an engineer to be able to make such mature design decisions. If you know, you know. The awareness of negative space, the use of corners to define shapes, the understanding of form, these are the job of a professional designer. I do not remember ever seeing a center-piece complementing the headband this well, not on a fixed headband. Geometric shapes, straight lines, flat surfaces, and sharp, crisp angles, are all hallmarks of Bauhaus architecture and its design principles.

Technology᠎​

If there is one thing Oleh Lizohub is known for, it’s being an accomplished driver engineer. Despite having no prior experience with headphones, he introduced multiple interesting concepts in the Binom-ER.

Before we get into those, let’s get some basics out of the way. Binom-ER is an open-back headphone featuring Camerton’s in-house developed Binom-E 98 mm isodynamic driver. It uses a symmetrical dual-sided magnet array, but that’s about where the basics end. While the carbon fiber driver housing is eye-catching, what lies underneath is even more exciting. Let’s talk about magnets for a second. Neodymium magnets have been a long-standing industry standard in planar-magnetic headphones. If you have ever come across N50 or N52 in the specifications or marketing material, it refers to the use of neodymium magnets (the “N” stands for neodymium, and the number specifies its maximum energy product, i.e. strength). For the sake of keeping this article at an acceptable length, forgive me for leaving out scientific details. In short, the higher the grade (the number), the stronger the magnet is. As far as headphones go, N50 and N52 are the most commonly used grades, with the latter being the strongest commercially available neodymium magnet grade—up until recently, that is. Binom-ER uses the current strongest N54-grade magnets.

To get an isodynamic driver to work, you need the previously mentioned magnets, a thin dielectric film, in this case, polyethylene terephthalate [PET], and a conductive layer. The modern method of applying the conductive layer onto the diaphragm consists of sandwiching the PET film and aluminum foil, and then etching the excess aluminum foil away, leaving conductive tracks where necessary. As you can imagine, the specifications and properties of each component dictate the driver’s performance, so it should come as no surprise that Oleh went above and beyond to get the materials that met his demands. For one, the aluminum foil used in the Binom-E is made of the A999 aluminum alloy; an aluminum alloy that is neither in the European nor American classification systems. This material is manufactured in Ukraine for the aerospace industry. By definition, A999 is an ultra-pure aluminum alloy (≥99.999%), having fewer than 0.001% impurities. It takes several fine steps of purification to obtain it, which, of course, comes at an extra expense. According to Oleh, the closest commercially available alternative is EN-AW 1199 (99.99%), the purest aluminum alloy in the European classification system. For two, there is a layer of a special silicone compound between the PET film and aluminum foil. Not only does it act as an adhesive, but also as a dampening layer. “It makes the sound much smoother than without it.”

Camerton even put its own spin on the conductive tracks. Most planar-magnetic headphone drivers use serpentine-patterned conductive tracks in horizontal orientation, but other designs, such as the circular pattern popularized by Yamaha in the early ’70s, also exist. Aside from the aforementioned, there have been some experimentations, but no breakthroughs. Oleh’s design is based on the serpentine pattern, but instead of leaving an empty space in between each line, there is an inverted square wave pattern. This area is directly exposed to the ear, i.e. offset from the magnets, hence why it’s visible when you remove the ear-pads. While conducting a thorough search for any other headphone or loudspeaker driver with a similar conductive track layout, to my surprise, came up what appeared like an identical Binom-E driver. Up until then, the Binom-E, to my knowledge, was Oleh’s original creation. I promptly reached out to him and directly asked whether the company selling the driver was Camerton’s OEM. Equally direct in his reply, Oleh called my question amusing and made it unequivocally clear that the developing and manufacturing of his drivers are done entirely by himself. You can’t fault him for taking some offense to my question—imagine how you would feel about some company taking credit for your hard work. As for the Binom-E’s copy, Oleh couldn’t have been less fazed. If anything, with all the unreturned samples he sent out in the world, he saw it coming.

Last but not least, an element that is not directly a part of the driver but is no less important role in shaping the sound—the grill. At first glance, it’s a very boring-looking part of the headphone, with a few exceptions like the Meze Empyrean, but once you understand how reliant a headphone’s sound performance is on the grill, you start to appreciate its role. While other headphones feature a simple perforated grill, Binom-ER features a unique and authentic design. I think Oleh explained it the best, “The peculiarity is that its cells, having the shape of an ellipse, have a horn section. This allows very efficient damping of the drivers.” Before receiving this answer, I found myself staring at the grill for 20 minutes on more than one occasion… It’s very easy to lose track of time by trying to comprehend its design. Consider that a warning! The grill uses a checkerboard pattern, with the hole “fields” being oddly shaped. It’s as if you took a needle and poked holes at an angle, that’s the best way I can put it. Moreover, there are only a few sections where the holes are clear (easily visible when shining a flashlight underneath). If I were to name this design, I’d call it abyss.

Build Quality᠎​

Materials are something that goes back to Camerton’s roots, so it goes without saying that there’s a serious amount of thought put behind the material choices.

When you hold the Binom-ER in your hands, you know you are holding an absolute unit of a headphone. In my opinion, one of the defining features is its buff physique—think Mike Tyson in his prime. It’s the real deal. By no means is it a large headphone, but it’s packed to the max for its size, that’s for sure. Mind you, it’s not the heaviest of headphones either, sitting in at around 429 g. The weight isn’t excessive; instead, it’s very fitting to the headphones’ form. Also, please don’t misinterpret “buff” for “bulky,” as the two have completely different meanings.

The material of choice for the headband is Alcantara. Regardless of being soft to the touch, the headband is rigid and sturdy in construction. Perhaps the 0.3 mm thickness of the material partially explains that. To ensure that headphones comfortably rest on your head, there is a padded area with a 1 mm thick foam lining. What’s noteworthy in particular is that everything from the center-piece down is made of metal. Oleh avoided the use of stainless steel at all costs, the primary reason being weight. Every metal piece on the Binom-ER is either made of aluminum or an aluminum alloy. However, that’s not all. Believe it or not, it’s the coating on the metal parts that steals the spotlight. Aside from Camerton Audio being one of the only companies in the headphone industry to be using PVD coating, it’s also the only company to be using titanium carbide (TiC) as the coating material. Physical Vapor Deposition (PVD) coating is an advanced surface treatment technology that involves applying a thin layer of material to an object's surface. During this process, the object is placed in a vacuum chamber, and a solid material, such as a metal or ceramic, is heated until it turns into vapor. The vaporized material then condenses onto the surface of the object, forming a thin and even layer. The high temperature, coupled with the pressure, creates an environment in which the atoms of the coating material interdiffuse with the atoms of the surface material, creating a permanent molecular bond between the two. As for titanium carbide, it’s fascinating for many reasons, but let’s just say that it’s extremely hard. You might be wondering why there is an absence of PVD coatings in the headphones field, and the main reason is that it’s a costly method. The coating material is typically chosen for its thermodynamic, physical, mechanical, and chemical properties, but for headphones, it’s primarily chosen based on its appearance… which may explain why some manufacturers cannot justify the increased cost.

Comfort᠎​

Thanks to the thick, soft, perforated ear-pads and the Alcantara headband, I knew that the Binom-ER met the requirements for a comfortable headphone. I’ve had multiple listening sessions that lasted over 3 hours, and let me tell you, each one was a heavenly experience. There was no fatigue from the clamping force, the weight of the headphones, or the ear-pads. However, I can see how some people may complain about the size of the ear-pads, with them leaning toward the smaller side of the spectrum. Personally, my ears fit perfectly in there, but anyone with slightly larger ears might need to stretch them out. What prevents the Binom-ER from achieving top-tier comfort is the absence of two features: horizontal and vertical rotation of the ear-cups, and increased height adjustment. The only plausible way to make a pair of headphones adjust to everyone’s head is by allowing the ear-cups to freely rotate. Imagine just how silly it would be to lose out on a customer because the headphones didn’t fit them. Fortunately, Oleh was fast to recognize this as an issue. He’s working on adding rotation to the ear-cups, while the latest version of the Binom-ER already received a height adjustment extension. In addition, there are now two extra sets of ear-pads that you purchase.

There are three areas that Camerton can work on to improve Binom-ER’s comfort:
1. Introduce horizontal & vertical rotation of the ear-cups
2. Increase the size of the ear-pads lips
3. Increase height adjustment [currently 6 steps of height adjustment]
As far as the latter goes, it’s because my ear-pads have a very short lip, which causes them to fall off rather easily. I’ve been a big advocate for making horizontal and vertical rotation of the ear-cups an industry standard, and it’s because that’s the only way to make a pair of headphones a true one-size-fits-all. Can you imagine how silly it would be to lose a customer because your headphones don’t fit them? Whenever possible, you want to increase the versatility of your product, not cut it short of it.

There’s not much to it than that. Despite being a compact headphone, the Binom-ER stays comfortable all around.

PS: Oleh hinted that he’s already onto the first two points.

Sound Performance᠎​

Lows᠎​

With every headphone that I’ve had the opportunity to listen to, percussion was something I left to be written about in the treble section. The reason is that I never found it to sound remarkable enough in the low end. Sure, there were instances where it sounded pleasant and fun, but it wasn’t quite it. Camerton’s Binom-ER, however, has the most realistic drum reproduction I’ve heard to date, making it the first headphone whose percussion I find worthy of covering here. When I say “percussion,” what likely comes to your mind are bass drums, and though they sound fantastic, possessing both heft and voluminosity, they don’t impress me nearly as much as tom drums. Just like other analog instruments, tom-toms have a certain complexity that makes up their sound. This complexity consists of far more than just some frequencies. For example, if you’ve ever listened to acoustic instruments such as drums being played live, you would know that you not only hear but also feel them. Texture is defined as the distinctive physical composition of something, especially as perceived by the sense of touch. However, I propose that sound can have texture too, as it can have a tactile aspect that our ears feel. It’s this very physical sensation perceived by the ears that I would define as sound texture. The Binom-ER perfectly captures the fine nuances, both sonic and tactile, of tom drums, so much so that you can tell apart how the drums were hit, with what type of drumsticks, at which part of the drum, and even the type of a drum being played. Beyond that, it is its stupendous ability to replicate the drum’s tension, a physical characteristic, that left me speechless.

Moving away from acoustic instruments to the more controlled electric and digital instruments, I found the Binom-ER to possess the desired qualities. Since these instruments are somewhat sterile by nature, there isn’t as much texture and nuance to be captured. However, we can still judge their quality and quantity. In techno, bass punches hard with great tactility but does so without sounding dry or lacking fullness. The interesting thing about bass quantity is that it’s more balanced and lean than it is forward and aggressive. That’s what’s nice about the open-back design, it leaves plenty of room for bass to escape and spread around, never letting it become overwhelming. After juggling between different genres, I settled on the judgment that this is a mid-bass dominant headphone. Hold up, don’t be so quick to jump to conclusions! Camerton tuned the sub-bass in a way that is subtle yet not lacking in quantity. Rumble is something we usually find accompanied with great presence, but with these headphones, it’s as though the unnecessary weight has been dropped, leaving only rumble to remain. What this essentially means is that you get the best part of rumble—the underlying physical sensation—to fill the ambience. If you’re still doubtful about the tuning of the sub-bass, let me reassure you that it’s the very reason that sets these headphones apart. Feeling the physical sensation from the low end is a regular occurrence. You’d otherwise assume that the reduction of the sub-bass quantity would mean that it’s less frequent, but it turns out it’s the very opposite. The beauty is in the subtlety.
Where was I, again? There’s something I left off without finishing it. Mid-bass, right. Having established that it has an elegant fullness, I would now like to shift the focus to its quality. To say that the Binom-ER is the most responsive headphone I’ve heard would be anything but an exaggeration. When most people talk about transient speed and say that a headphone is fast, what they really mean is that it is capable of producing short attack. The source that determines the transient speed is the audio being played, while it’s up to the headphone’s transducer (driver) to keep up and reproduce it. In a picture-perfect scenario, a headphone would match the transient speed of the audio source. While I have no objective data or measurements to back up the following statement, at least from my perception, the Binom-ER has a near-instant transient response speed. It’s capable of producing lightning-fast attack and decay, and saying this is nothing more than stating the obvious. There’s much more to it.

Whether it’s striking a drum or plucking a guitar string, both produce sound by the vibration of an instrument element. In the physical world, we can describe how this sound changes over time with what we call an envelope. An acoustic envelope is simplified into three parts: attack, sustain, and decay. The initial attack portion is the time it takes for the sound to reach its max. amplitude (SPL, in this case). Sustain is the duration of time for which the sound remains nearly constant. Decay is the time it takes sound to return to silence. It’s the decay that I would like to further expand on. After being played, the instrument element doesn’t stop vibrating but rather continues doing so until it returns to its resting position. As this action is taking place, the frequency of its vibration decreases until it eventually drops to zero. It’s this very lingering sound after the instrument element is played that the Binom-ER captures both sonically and physically. The latter is the most fascinating, especially when you consider how fine those low-frequency nuances are. We are talking about details and parts of sound that are essential for it to be perceived as natural by our ears.

Though I put such a large emphasis on it, don’t be under the impression that texture is limited to percussion. As I mentioned above, stringed instruments also have it. Acoustic instruments in general have a texture. For instance, the piano has a distinct texture when the keys are played, especially when done intensely so. This abruptness and instancy of notes is audible on the Binom-ER. On headphones that lack this ability, the energy behind the notes is absent, thus causing them to sound off.

Mids​

I’ve judged the sound of three dozen earphones and headphones, yet here I am discovering something new. It’s humbling, I admit, but it’s important to stay grounded and remember that you never stop learning! Up until this point, a recurring theme in my mid-range judgments was exploring the presence or absence of certain qualities in the mid-range. These qualities would be either positive or negative exaggerations that deviate from what would otherwise be perceived as natural-sounding. I find it necessary to remind you that our ears are so sensitive to the mid-range, that we will hear the slightest differences in this frequency range. With this in mind, the Binom-ER left me baffled after I failed to make a more prominent observation than that the mid-range sounds normal. That’s the only thing that was repeatedly going through my mind, “Yeah, it sounds very normal”. As a critic who chose to go down the path of more technical-focused reporting, my priority is to portray substance in its entirety without excessiveness. I want the reader to gain comprehension through my use of substantive details, accurate descriptions, and thorough explanations. If you’ve followed any of my rants on Head-Fi, you’ve heard me say, “If I don’t hear it, I don’t write about it.” It’s more of a journalistic approach that revolves around firmly established findings. This is why you won’t find me writing out of imagination or making stuff up for the sake of the reader’s entertainment—flowery language is the least of my concerns. How’s this rant relevant, anyway? Well, when I was presented with the difficulty of making observations, it was something I hadn’t encountered before. After a lot of thinking, I had an “A-ha!” moment, and that was when I realized that the answers I was looking for were to be found within my approach. The Binom-ER’s mid-range shares the qualities of sound in real life, so much so that my ears perceive the auditory sensation as real. This answers everything.

It can be concluded that the less there is to observe in the mid-range, the more natural it sounds. If you think about it, it’s very difficult to describe or explain why sound sounds normal to us. It just sounds normal. Since our ears are designed to hear the human voice clearly, we will detect the slightest variations made to it. So, when I say that vocals sound natural on the Binom-ER, it’s beyond a great achievement! I now also realize that normal=natural, meaning that there’s much more than the human voice that sounds natural through these headphones.

Highs​

An audiophile headphone with no treble has no place in my personal favorites, and this will come as no surprise to my regular readers. You know, after years of listening to different tunings, I am finally at peace to know that the so-called Japanese tuning fits my preference. For those unaware, audiophiles from the West often find the tuning of Japanese headphones to be too bright, which is how they came up with the term “Japanese tuning”. It’s funny, because whenever I read someone describe the tuning as such, more often than not, I end up liking it. However, with the Binom-ER, it’s more than just something I like; it’s where the second half of the magic comes from. You’ll have to excuse me for bringing up acoustic instruments again, but acoustic guitar strums are just—chef’s kiss. They let you enjoy the treble extension in its entirety. I get the same thrill when listening to percussion, which includes snares, cymbals, hi-hats, shakers, chimes, and others alike. Whichever way you look at it, this is an expertly tuned bright headphone that carries great treble energy without coming off as piercing or fatiguing. To paint a clearer picture of just how clean of an edge it has, I would compare it to an obsidian blade, having a perfectly polished edge that glides with unmatched smoothness.

Addressing the treble more formally, my assessment is as follows. In quantity, treble sits at the far end of the brightness spectrum, and in spite of this, it doesn’t cut through the mix. As for quality, treble possesses exceptional clarity, detail retrieval, and crispness. What's especially interesting is the parallel it shares with the lows; both possessing the ability to reproduce the complexity and physical sensation of sound. Just as the lows excel in this aspect, the highs mirror this sentiment, providing an immersive auditory experience that transcends the conventional headphone listening experience. To feel tactility and tickling in your ears from the treble really is a big deal, as this may very well be among the most challenging characteristics for a headphone to possess. It’s like catching nanoscale details in sound.

Soundstage and Imaging᠎​

The grill design used in the Binom-ER perfectly reflects the width of the soundstage, with it deviating from what you’d expect a pair of open-back headphones to sound like. While a good portion of people seek the widest soundstage from flagship open-backs, there is something beautiful about a manufacturer taking upon the challenge of going for something different. You’ve certainly seen discussions where a flagship headphone gets dismissed solely for not sounding “open enough,” and I find that ridiculous. Personal preference is one thing, but exempting a headphone from general consideration because it doesn’t meet one’s expectations or needs is not far from saying that nobody should eat a candy bar because it’s too sweet for one’s taste… I think you get the point I’m trying to make. To me, the Binom-ER stands out not for its soundstage per se, but rather for its ability to seamlessly blend the intimate headphone experience with the open sound that one might typically associate with loudspeakers. The center image remains dense and full-sounding, while the soundstage reaches the width of roughly 60 cm outside the ear-cups when elements are panned to the far ends of either channel. Do note that I am speaking about the soundstage width in a ‘normal’ music setting, meaning no binaural or artificially enhanced recordings (khm, khm, Yosi Horikawa “Bubbles”). It’s more important how a headphone utilizes the stage than how much stage estate it has, and you can bet that the Binom-ER makes use of every inch of it.

Regardless of not having the biggest stage out there, imaging stands as one of the strongest traits of this headphone. There is a plethora of specifications and elements in this headphone that I praise highly, but this is the one that keeps me coming back to it time and time again. The level of accuracy put together with the tactility makes it as though each note, each instrument, occupies its own distinct space within the sonic landscape. You can hear every minuscule movement, and my god, does drum panning sound H-E-A-V-E-N-L-Y.

Conclusion᠎​

Since the invention of headphones, fewer than two dozen companies have dared to venture into the summit-fi territory, with more than half of them coming from well-established and reputable industry giants. The ones for which this wasn’t the case still had great financial backing and labor power behind them. In addition to facing the challenge of being a small one-person business, Camerton’s out-of-the-blue entry into the luxury headphone market comes at a confusing time when the consumer market is ever so increasingly unwelcoming toward newcomers. There’s a certain level of expertise and experience that a manufacturer is expected to have before the community grants it a go at a top-of-the-line headphone. Oleh Lizohub, on the other hand, who quite literally had zero prior experience with headphones, was set up for failure all along. However, the tuning fork company lived up to its name.

The Binom-ER is a €5500 statement that redefines the limits of headphone listening. Music gains a completely new depth and life thanks to its unparalleled texture, naturalness, and timbre. This is not one of those headphones for which you have to bring out special tracks to force its qualities. No, instead, these qualities stay present in regular music. From the lows to the mids to the highs, the technicalities are leagues above anything I’ve come across. It’s how you can both hear and feel the contact between the drum stick and the batter head, the plucking of an acoustic guitar string, or the weight of a piano key being pressed. This headphone opens a portal to a different sound dimension, where real qualities, such as the physical movement and characteristics of the instrument’s sound-producing element, are authentically reproduced. To put it bluntly, sound has never sounded more real from a pair of headphones. Performance aside, the meticulous design choices and material selections on the Binom-ER broadcast an architect’s touch, a level of refinement not typically linked with an engineer’s realm. I find it endlessly intriguing how throughout the entirety of Oleh’s career, he has continued to build everything from A–Z by himself, whether that be headphones or loudspeakers.

What Oleh Lizohub did with the Binom-ER wasn’t an attempt, it was a milestone achievement. Such level of craftsmanship and expertise typically requires decades of combined experience, yet he did the impossible all by himself—it’s a story for the books! With a few minor tweaks, the Binom-ER has a shot at becoming one of the best-sounding headphones ever released.

Chapter 6 | The Setup᠎᠎
᠎Oleh explicitly expressed to me that one of the main reasons why he didn’t make an electrostatic headphone was because the technology isn’t portable or modern, which made it clear to me just how important these two aspects were to him. I was highly considerate when picking which source I will pair the Binom-ER with. As a gesture of respect, I searched for a portable solution. I already had a number of iBasso players and amp modules to choose from, but as soon as I plugged it into the iBasso’s flagship DX320MAX player, I knew it was the one.

I have no intention to stir up drama, but this 626 g unit of a DAP is arguably the most advanced portable digital audio player to be ever released. It’s got class-leading build quality, SoC, RAM, DAC chips, battery life, and serviceability, alongside fully isolated digital/analog circuits, a true fully balanced line/phone out, use of discrete amplifier design with desktop-grade capacitors, and even analog volume control with iBasso’s in-house developed stepped attenuator. Reading Binom-ER’s on-paper specifications reveals that it’s quite easy to drive, with an impedance of only 42 Ω and a sensitivity of 98 dB/mW. In other words, there is no need for a flagship DAP that was specifically made for driving power-demanding headphones… in theory. I tend to listen to music with volume set between 12 o’clock and 2 o’clock; if it’s too loud in this range, I lower the gain, and if it’s too quiet, I increase the gain. While following this rule of thumb o’ mine, the gain was set between 3 and 4. However, one time I decided to try maxing out the stepped attenuator (volume wheel) while decreasing the gain until I reached the “desired” listening level. With 4 gain settings and a high sensitivity headphone, it meant I had very little flexibility to fine-tune this level, mostly staying at the lowest gain setting. Although some tracks were too loud even at the lowest setting, I was able to discover a hidden treasure. You see, because the DX320MAX is using analog volume control with the use of a stepped attenuator, it meant that when the volume wheel was maxed out, there was no active resistor in the signal path, i.e. achieving an unrestricted signal path. It’s at this exact setting that I feel like I’m listening to the Binom-ER at its full potential. The lows get more defined, the transient response becomes significantly more tactile and responsive over the whole frequency spectrum, and most notably, the trebly fully opens up. I couldn’t believe how much more sparkle there was and how much clarity it possessed. iBasso’s stepped attenuator is attributed for bringing out Binom-ER’s best qualities, as well as making the most of DX320MAX’s components. If you haven't done so alredy, I strongly suggest you read my iBasso DX320MAX Ti review. I promise it's a worthy read.

One issue I discovered with the Binom-ER is that there is present ringing across the frequency spectrum. This sound likely falls outside most people’s hearing, and the only way I can describe it is an audible ultrasound frequency of varying intensity. My best guess is that it’s caused due to the lack of acoustic dampening on the headphone driver, especially with that smooth carbon fiber driver housing. As of January 2024, the Binom-ER has already received an update and now features acoustic foam on the driver housing, which is more than likely Oleh addressing the complaints. Since I didn’t want to physically alter the driver in any way, I made use of iBasso’s brilliant parametric EQ. It’s so well engineered that it can serve the function of a tool, which is the way I used it. After many hours of trying to force the “peaks”, I found them all and decreased their level to the point where they were eliminated. In doing so, I managed to find a true solution that allowed me to form my thoughts and opinions in regard to the Binom-ER’s sound performance.

The first time I heard the concept of the successor to the SR2 thrown into the conversation was almost two years ago. Without a clue how long the wait will be, I spent a lot of time daydreaming about the SR3. New silhouette? Different driver type? Another diaphragm material? Different price bracket? These are among the things that crossed my mind. When images of the SR3 started popping up a few months ago, I was very excited for it to finally see the light of day. It had a very quiet press release, so there wasn't much information that we could rely on. All we knew was that it had an impedance of 150Ω, a different cable, and that it shared the same look as the SR2. However, there was one distinct photo of the SR3 that suggested that it was an open-back version of the SR2. To address the elephant in the room, the SR2 was marketed as an open-back, but many including myself have come to agreement that it is a semi-open-back headphone due to the congested grill it has, and also due to how it sounds and behaves. It featured a double-grill design, with a thick grill on the outside and a micro-mesh beneath it. In SR3’s marketing material, there was a photo where the smaller grill appeared to be removed and revealed the rear of the driver. It turns out that it was misrendered. On one hand, I am bummed out that we didn’t get a natural progression in iBasso’s headphone lineup, but on the other, I am glad that they stuck to a proven formula. Consider the SR2 and the SR3 to be twin siblings.

---

---

When you think about must-haves in a headphone package, what comes to your mind? Speaking for myself, it’s accessories that are going to either benefit their experience or performance, or the ones that will increase their versatility—an extra set of pads, an extra cable (preferably differently terminated than the primary one), an adaptor, and a nice convenient storage case. These spring to mind. Not only do the expectations for quality rise as you climb the price ladder, but also for the accessories to be tailored for the headphones. If, let’s say, an extra pair of ear-pads is in question, a simple material change will not do. Especially when you are purchasing multi-thousand-dollar headphones, the manufacturer should be putting some serious thought behind the accessories. Anyways, both the SR2 and the SR3 share identical package contents, with the exterior box being the only difference between the two. At this price point, you would be lucky to get a good pair of headphones and a cable, yet iBasso managed to include a complete package. Here, you get a functional spacious storage case, an extra set of large perforation ear-pads, a nice balanced cable, and a 4.4mm to 6.35mm extended adaptor. What more could one ask for?

Few headphones pull off the “high-end look” in general, much less those that do so at this price point. Denon AH-5200, Final Audio Sonorus VI, and Dan Clark’s ÆON line are the only ones that I would even consider saying to hit the mark. The SR3 achieves the premium look without being over the top. It does so by making use of materials, surface finish, and texture. Many manufacturers fall victim to the mistake of being overly ambitious with their designs, without first learning the core concepts and principles of [headphone] design. Looking at the SR3, there is nothing flashy or groundbreaking in its design. Circular ear-cups, fork-style yoke, and a basic headband. The designers at iBasso have mastered the basics and possess a deep understanding of the fundamentals of headphone design, hence why they were able to push the SR2 and SR3 concepts to the next level. ShuHaRi. Take for instance the mindful use surface finishes on both of these headphones; the ear-cups are semi-matte, the grill is glossy, while the whole headband construction is satin, even extending the finish to the leather headband. Or what about the classic approach for the headband design? Stripped to the bare minimum, it’s made up of just two rods, two sliders, and two stoppers. Perhaps the team’s expertise is most on display here, on the ear-cups. I love how the grill looks like it's erupting out of the shell! It’s as if it was being pushed through the ear-cups, but the inner lip tightly squeezed it and prevented it from expanding any further. The details are hiding in plain sight. Whether it’s the bubble-shaped grill, the headphone connectors being placed at a 30˚ angle, or matching textures, it’s clear that the design team didn’t rush the process.

Remember that episode in ‘The Simpsons’ where Homer undergoes cosmetic surgery after fearing Marge will dump him? He prepares a romantic welcome for her, leaving roses all over the bed, showering her in compliments, and of course, revealing his “new body”. The scene has since been widely memeified, with one shot showing Homer looking slim from the front, and the other exposing all the excess skin tied behind his back—beneath the glamorous shell lies a sea of flaws. Unfortunately, this applies to a lot of products in the audio industry.
“Ethical behavior is doing the right thing when no one else is watching, even when doing the wrong thing is legal.”—Aldo Leopold᠎
What fascinated me in iBasso for the longest time, is the amount of care that goes into its products. Showcasing craftsmanship on the exterior is one thing, but doing it to the same extent in the corners that will never see the light of day, truly proves that excellence is more than just a buzzword for iBasso. In this case, “legal” is what one could and would get away with. The number of consumers that will peek inside the headphones is close to none. Whereas other manufacturers see this as an opportunity to cut costs and compromise quality, iBasso sees it as an opportunity to demonstrate that its attention to detail knows no bounds. Be honest with me, how many headphones can you disassemble and go around showing them off? Excuse me for generalizing, but in most cases, the manufacturer itself would be embarrassed to expose that to the public. As for myself, the only thing I wanted to do after opening up the SR3 was take pictures for the world to see. However, you be the judge for yourself:
If that doesn’t reflect the company’s dignity, I don’t know what does… Actually, there was a moment of clarity I had after seeing what the SR2 driver looks like under the covers. All credit goes to the brave @Bonddam who completely disassembled the headphones (pictures). It’s been a long-running joke within the audio community how audiophiles will spend hundreds or even thousands of dollars on cables, only to have a few cents worth of cabling and solder connecting the speaker drivers to the connectors. The irony! This is why seeing SR2’s internal cabling was a turning point for me. What’s more, it’s how iBasso didn’t even use it in their marketing, never mentioned it anywhere—it’s all in the quote. The same goes for how iBasso engineers design, develop, and have the materials made exactly to their spec for the drivers. The company invested time, effort, and money, into the parts of the headphone that no one will know about or ever see. This isn’t something exclusive to the SR2 or the SR3, because even inside their DAPs, you will find the neatest soldering, cabling, and manufacturing. One thing's for certain: the number of customers that will open up their multi-thousand-dollar players can be counted on one hand.

Reading through my SR2 review, I now realize that I didn’t quite express just how much I liked its cable. It’s my favorite stock headphone cable, and I find it perfect. It has everything I am looking for in a cable. More than that, it meets all my criteria for a great cable. It’s durable due to the high-quality metal housing and sheathing, it’s flexible and formless like water, it’s lightweight, it’s thin, it’s extremely easy to put away, and it has a gorgeous look and finish. As I’ve brought up earlier, one of the differences between the SR2 and the SR3 is the cable. Apart from being upgraded to a balanced one, it has been changed to a 2-core OF (oxygen-free) mono-crystal copper cable with a purity of 99.999%. For reference, SR2’s cable was a 4-core custom copper-silver alloy cable. I believe the change is for the better, as the new cable is even more premium. However, with this change, the cable isn’t as flexible as it was before and it has gained some weight. On the other hand, the housings remained untouched. I’m pretty sure most will be in favor of the upgraded cable, it looks a whole lot more attractive.

There are many reasons why I fancied the SR2, but above all, it was for how it sounds that it became so dear to me. The SR2 and SR3 are the only headphones I can put on my head, and from the moment of pressing play, get blown away each time. They’ve got this special something that makes them sound, for the lack of a better word, different. Sound through these two doesn’t sound like sound, it’s this hyperrealistic quality that gives sound a physical form. I know this seems like the biggest bag of bullsh*t you’ve heard, and I’m well aware of it as I’m typing, but it’s hard translating the auditory stimulus from my ears into words. I’ll tell you what, when listening to these two, I feel as though I am getting the complete headphone listening experience, which I cannot say I got from any other headphone. As a casual music listener, I love me a pair of headphones that sound like a pair of headphones, I don’t need me headphones to sound like loudspeakers. Everybody has their preferences, but I absolutely adore the intimate listening experience I get from the SR2 with the stock pads. Okay, it’s about time we get to the burning question everybody’s asking: Does it make sense to upgrade from the SR2 to the SR3? Before diving into that, we first need to address their differences.

Oh my, is there a MASSIVE difference in the bass response! It’s likely what sets their tuning apart the most. On one hand, you have the SR2, which is a heavier-sounding bass monster, and on the other, you have the SR3, which is more refined and balanced. Most heavier-sounding headphones suffer from all that bass quantity polluting the mix. The SR2, however, doesn’t let the quantity get dispersed around, but instead retains good control over it. Achieving such speed despite having a thick low end is why the SR2 never stopped fascinating me. Of course, there are physical limitations that are inevitable when moving a grand mass of bass body. As for the SR3, iBasso got rid of the majority of the weight, resulting in a cleaner and more resolving low end. To be precise, the sub-bass has been decreased by as much as 4dB! If we follow the 3dB rule, that’s more than half the SR2’s sub-bass sound energy, which I find to be pretty accurate in practice. Aside from sounding lighter, the bass benefits from being more responsive, read fast, and better defined. This makes a great impact, so much so that every single drum hit can be distinctly heard and felt, unlike the SR2, where some get lost. If we are strictly talking about the bass response, the SR3 blows the SR2 out of the water when it comes to imaging precision and accuracy. The thing is, SR2 slams harder, of course it does, but SR3 has a more tactile punch.

---

Considering how much I favored the sound of the mid-range on the SR2, the SR3 had a lot to live up to. Not only did it meet that bar, but also earned its spot as my favorite with the mids’ new sound. Speaking of which, there's a clear sense of similarity when comparing the differences in the low-end and mid-range of the two headphones. The elevated low end follows the SR2 well into the mid-range, causing a fair amount of mid-bass bleed. Other than sounding heavier and thicker, it also has a more forward presentation. In contrast, the SR3 has more airiness and a much lighter sound. Regardless of these two qualities, there isn’t an instance where I found it lacking in body. However, you’re much more likely to differentiate these two headphones by their upper mid-range. You have the SR2 which is all exciting and pronounced, and there’s the SR3, which has the edge shaved off ever so slightly. This leads it to have a softer-sounding mid-range that is easier on the ears but still retains an adequate level of detail and excitement. Due to these variations, the timbre does differ between them, but the overall character remains largely the same.

---

Without a shadow of a doubt, I can say that the SR2 has more forward and extended highs. The treble pops, there’s sparkle, it’s more open, all making it sound more exciting. Please do not misinterpret this, as it is not sibilant or piercing; think of it as a fine Japanese knife with a smooth, sharp cutting edge. The SR3, on the other hand, carries the softness from the upper mid-range, leaning towards the more relaxed side of the spectrum. This is not to say it’s dull or boring, it just doesn’t snap and push the same energy as the SR2. I have to make the SR3 10%–20% louder to get a similar level of brightness. Needless to say, due to their difference, the SR2 naturally has more detail retrieval in this region.

To answer the big question, yes… buuut it’s a little more complicated than that. If you are an SR2 owner considering upgrading, first ask yourself what you like about it, and then ask yourself what you wish it had that it doesn’t already, and what you wish it didn’t have. Once you’ve got the answers to these two questions, you can start moving forward with the decision-making. If you adore SR2’s thick and heavy bass response, then stick with it. If you would rather have a lighter and thinner bass response with a significantly faster speed and technical capability, then get the SR3. If you enjoy the more forward mid-range presentation of the SR2, stick with it. If you want a “bigger-sounding” headphone, get the SR3. It has both better separation and a wider soundstage than the SR2. If you love the crisp and more forward highs, stick with the SR2. If you found the SR2 to be too bright, and would rather the highs be softer, get the SR3. You’ll also want to take the SR3 if you listen to a lot of poorly recorded and peaky tracks. Making the call will be particularly hard for those who spent a lot of time with the SR2 and enjoy its sound performance. At the end of the day, both of these headphones are truly exceptional. iBasso gave you the choice between two flavors, it’s up to you to pick the one that suits your taste. Ideally, you’ll end up with both because they complement each other.

The grass was greener᠎​

It wasn’t always like this. When my younger self just turned the page and started a new chapter in life, I used to go to a large consumer electronics store every weekend. There wasn’t much purpose behind my visits other than to kill boredom and explore ‘what’s out there’. But actually, this very place is where all my tech geekiness originates from. One of my favorite sections in the store was the headphones aisle where I spent countless afternoons. At that time, the most popular consumer headphones were Marshall Major and Beats, while Sennheiser’s Momentum line was enthusiasts’ preferred choice. Opting for the former was seen as a waste of money due to their overpriced nature. However, the models that piqued my interest were the comfortable Bowers & Wilkins P5, the Sennheiser HD598, and the then-latest gimmick, the Skullcandy Crusher. Late 2014 and early 2015 were among the sweetest years of my audio enthusiast beginnings. This is when I was introduced to Sony’s latest offerings, which included the MDR-1A, MDR-Z7, an over-ear Extra Bass model, and an on-ear model. The only way I can put it is that it was an eye-opening experience for me. Forget sound quality and technical details, I knew nothing about that back then. The sole opportunity to hold a pair of high-end headphones was a privilege. Unlike other headphones, the Sony lineup had a whole dedicated section in the store, and it was quite fancy. I don’t think the MDR-Z7 was on display, but I remember trying the other models. The packaging was all fancy, design unlike anything else I’ve seen, and they had the softest ear-pads! If I had to guess, this is probably the moment when the audiophile in me woke up.

Mind you, my headphone inventory consisted of a pair of Sony MDR-V55’s and a pair of stock Samsung phone earphones. So, when I say it was a privilege to spend time with all those headphones, I mean it. Something that will forever live in my memory is the day I saw the Shure SE846. As usual, I was on my way out of the electronics store, but was forced to stop after sighting this oversized earphone box locked away in a clear, theft-proof case. Seeing the price tag of €999 was so bizarre to me that I assumed the store must’ve mismatched the price… Little did I know these weird-looking transparent earphones did indeed cost that much. While I could easily justify investing such a sum in a computer, the sheer thought of spending that much on a headphone was beyond my understanding. In my head, it was a waste of money. Perhaps this explains why it took me the longest time to bring myself to upgrade from the Sony’s. Before I finally made up my mind about getting a more serious pair of headphones, I spent countless hours obsessively researching the market. I only had a budget of €150, yet I wanted everything. Long story short, I pulled the trigger on the Sennheiser HD598’s after their price dropped within my budget. And that’s exactly when my audiophile journey began.

Every so often I look back on this period to put everything into perspective, to remind myself the worth of a dollar. I was looking through the lens of a consumer, a consumer with sky-high expectations and shallow pockets—the worst kind. The reason why I shared my story with you was to enlighten you about how demanding a customer like myself was. When you have an empty wallet, you are very cautious regarding unnecessary purchases. You not only learn to look through the marketing but look past it. It’s about perspective, right? It’s once you strip the product naked, that you can see its true worth. For instance, that Sony audiophile lineup was unobtanium for me, and even though it gave me an idea of what a luxury headphone is, I judged it with skepticism. It was a matter of separating real qualities from marketing tactics used to sell the product to its target audience. Nowadays, prices for the most high-end audio gear are nothing more than numbers. Hundreds of dollars are like pennies, thousands of dollars are like hundreds… Numbers are thrown around like nothing, yet there’s close to nothing to back them up.

What I am about to say is going to spark quite some controversy, and I’m here for it! Yes, I am about to use the P-word. The SR2/SR3 is perfect—there, I said it. Yeah, I know…the forbidden word. What’s the worst awaiting me? Being labeled a fanboy? In that case, allow me to get some apologies out of the way, just so the noise goes away:
I’m sorry they use full-metal construction. I’m sorry that the headband is made of quality leather. I’m sorry their headband construction is purposefully minimal to reduce weight. I’m sorry they feel sturdy. I’m sorry that the adjustable headband strap can be affixed. I’m sorry they stay comfortable for hours. I’m sorry they stay on my head even throughout the most intense headbanging sessions. I’m sorry they are versatile and compatible with aftermarket ear-pads. I’m sorry the cable is premium. I’m sorry the speaker housing is made of high-quality plastic. I’m sorry for recognizing the use of advanced design knowledge. I’m sorry I couldn’t find any manufacturing flaws. I’m sorry they sound exceptional through a laptop. I’m sorry they don’t require an audio chain three times their price to sound “right”. I’m sorry I was there to track four separate threads from the start and got to hear people’s experience of the company’s customer service. I’m sorry they are priced below $600… I’m sorry, but I find both the SR2 and the SR3 perfect for all of the reasons mentioned above.

It’s no secret that I’ve been in an ongoing love affair with the SR2 for the past three years. This is the headphone that I dreamed of back when I was innocent and all of this was so alien to me. I wish I could hand it to that younger self just to prove that those ‘unrealistic’ standards can indeed be met. In all honesty, the SR2/SR3 doesn’t feel like a hobbyist product, but rather a complete product that’s ready to take off in the consumer market. You see, when it comes down to reviewing, I do my job to the best of my professional abilities, but to endorse a product? It must tick all the boxes and beyond! If by now you’re still debating which model to get, let me put it like this. If I could go back in time to when my audiophile journey officially started, I would recommend the SR2 to my self that enjoyed the excitement of the Crusher so much, and the SR3 to the one who chased the high-fidelity sound.

As far as I’m concerned, I can comfortably leave this hobby with either one and never look back.

...forever and ever​

Design & Features​

The MAX series’ silhouette is a formula that iBasso has been brewing for three years now. Numerous upgrades and improvements are introduced with each new release, but one thing that has remained mostly the same, is the design. That very same blocky chunk of metal is here to stay. It’s not getting any wider, longer, or thicker. Whether this is something that the company will stick to in the future, only time will tell.

If you were a DAP in a barber shop and wanted to get the MAX 'cut, you’d ask for, “straight on the sides, round on the corners”. It’s an elegant look shared across all three MAX models; bevel faces on the sides, and flat top/bottom edges on the front and back. The DX320MAX doesn’t stray away from the classic silver & golden accent color scheme, just like it still makes use of texture to elevate that classic luxury look, with the horizontally brushed pattern on the flat sides of the chassis; polished bevels and edges. Let’s shift the focus to the inputs and outputs:
At the front, there are two physical outputs; 4.4mm balanced, and 3.5mm single-ended. Much like on the DX300 and DX320, they double as phone outs and line outs. The DX320MAX is missing the third output that was present on the DX300MAX, the dedicated true balanced line out. It wasn’t thrown out for any reason, as the new physical gain switch took its place. The remaining fourth member of the front section is, of course, the volume knob.
At the back, there is a DC-in, USB-C port, coaxial out, and a Micro SD card slot.
On the right-hand side, there’s a power on/off button and the media control buttons which are spaced farther down from it.

Each input and output has its label laser etched, but the new gain switch is the only one that has the label placed above. Also, it’s nice how the gain labels are in Roman numerals that are warped around the switch. Though it might not be apparent at first glance, the inputs and outputs have the most details. For example, all are placed within a golden faceplate with a circular finely brushed texture. Another touch is the recession of the outputs at the front. Among the less visible differences between the DX320MAX and the DX300MAX are how the DC-in is now recessed and its faceplate is larger in diameter, and how the USB-C and coaxial ports have also been recessed. The eagle-eyed will notice the addition of bevels on all input/output cutouts, and it’s minor details like these that prove iBasso’s pursuit of perfection. On the other hand, the more obvious difference between the two is the volume knob. It was already a nice upgrade going from the DX220MAX to the DX300MAX, but the DX320MAX improved it a step further. Instead of slashes, it now has deeper and grippier diagonal ridges, and the indicator indent has gotten longer. Other than that, both the volume knob and the gain switch have a brushed face and polished sides. Speaking of, the gain switch is attractively shaped, and the only way I could describe it is as if you took a circle and cut off its two sides. It looks beautiful, and it’s an even greater joy to use. I’m a big fan of the elegant look of the MAX series. Kudos to the whole design team!

In my eyes, what's a serviceability game changer is the removable back. Yes, ladies and gentlemen, you can now remove the back and completely open your DX320MAX thanks to the two large screws on the back. The backplate is still made of glass, but a small metal plate has been added at the bottom. Do note that if you want to remove the back, you must be cautious, as the batteries are both attached on the underside and have cables connected to the circuit boards. The last thing you want is to damage the circuit board, so please be careful! Also, if I may give you a piece of advice, try to lift off the small metal plate instead of tilting it toward/away from the glass. It's so tightly placed that you might crack the glass by accidentally pinching it. Anyway, the reason why I believe having the option of removing the back is so significant is that so many doors open to the daring enthusiasts that are interested in modding. Though it might be tempting to fiddle around the readily accessible insides, I highly advise against making any changes that will void the warranty or damage the device!

Functions‎​

Whether the 4.4mm and 3.5mm outputs function as phone outs or line outs depends on which one you set it to through software. When set to PO, they are to be used with your desired headphones, earbuds, earphones, and IEMs. When set to LO, they allow the DX320MAX to serve as a source, fully bypassing the internal amplifier and letting you use an external amplifier.
The physical gain allows you to choose between 4 gain stages.
The DC-in port is where you plug in the included 12V AC/DC adapter to charge the analog battery section. The USB-C port is used for both data transfer (USB 3.1 Gen 1 Superspeed) and charging (supports QC3.0 and PD3.0 quick charging) the digital battery section. The Coaxial Out allows you to connect the DX300 MAX to a device with a Coax In and allows the DAP to act as a digital transport (24bit/384kHz, DoP DSD128).
The Micro SD card slot supports SDXC and SDHC Micro SD cards.
The display is a 1080p IPS panel.
‎

Build Quality​

The MAX series was always about the highest grade of quality, and the DX320MAX is no different. As far as my experience goes, the same can be said for the rest of iBasso’s high-end product line-up. One thing is for sure, the sheer size of the MAXs will spark the portability debate. In my DX300MAX review, I gave you my take on it. My opinion was that it can be considered portable, as it can be transported with ease, but that it cannot be considered pocketable, as it’s too heavy and big to be conveniently carried in pockets. Well, my views have changed for the DX320MAX. The main reason behind that is the significant weight reduction. Keep in mind, there were two versions of the DX300MAX, the Stainless Steel version and the Titanium version. It’s the former that I had my hands on. To the best of our knowledge, the DX320MAX only comes in one variant, titanium. Here are some numbers to put things in perspective:
iBasso DX300MAX SS: 775g (without case), 819g (with case)
iBasso DX300MAX Ti: 570g (without case), 614g (with case)
iBassoDX320MAX: 626g (without case), 688g (with case)

The measurements of the DX300MAX and the DX320MAX are directly from me [using a basic digital scale], whereas the measurement of the DX300MAX Ti comes directly from iBasso. The numbers aren’t 100% accurate, I even saw people commenting under the DX300MAX that an iBasso rep told them that the weight of the DX300MAX Ti is 590g. Regardless of which measurements we use, one thing is clear: the weight difference between stainless steel and titanium is immense. If you’ve never held the SS and Ti versions side by side, you wouldn’t understand how much lighter the latter feels. Actually, it kind of changes everything, because now I can see true enthusiasts carrying the DX320MAX in a fanny pack around their waist. That would change the narrative of the portability debate and finally allow it to be considered portable. This is a big deal, and you’ll understand why later on.

Just to make sure I don’t forget to mention it, the grade of the titanium is Grade 5 (Ti-6Al-4V), which is among the most commonly used titanium alloys for industrial applications. Aside from the obvious weight reduction benefits, it is known for its excellent corrosion resistance properties. However, among the more impressive publicly unknown details is the use of PVD coating on the knobs. Physical vapor disposition, or PVD, is a highly advanced coating method that brings a solid or liquid metal to its vapor point (gas state), after which it is ‘shot’ at a target metal, resulting in a permanent bond. This process leaves a very thin (thickness typically measured in microns or nanometers) solid-state film on the target (stainless steel knobs in this case). There is a wide variety of metals available for PVD coating, and they are most commonly chosen for their thermodynamic, physical, mechanical, and chemical properties. For audio products, however, they are frequently chosen based on their appearance.

In-House Developed Stepped Attenuator​

Somehow, iBasso keeps raising the bar with its innovations. Just when you think its pockets have been emptied, there’s more!

In my DX300MAX review, I mentioned how the analog potentiometer is one of its signature features. This time around, it is the signature feature. The custom 4-wiper analog potentiometer on the DX300MAX was enough in itself to stand out from the competition, but this... this is taking it to a whole other league. What’s the fuss about with these analog potentiometers? I’ve seen a lot of confusion in the Head-Fi thread, so let’s break it down. The reason iBasso introduced analog potentiometers in the DX220MAX and DX300MAX in the first place was that, in iBasso’s own words, it “retains the full resolution of the recording” and doesn’t suffer from “the bit rate truncation problem” that digital volume adjustment does. However, there’s a price you have to pay when going with this design: ±2dB channel imbalance at low volumes, and audible distortion that’s caused by the wear of the potentiometer’s carbon film after years of use. What if there was a more precise way of controlling volume? Introducing to you, stepped attenuators. Unlike rotary potentiometers, stepped attenuators allow for fixed & precise volume adjustment(s). Allow me to explain. Let’s focus on series-type stepped attenuators, which is what we are dealing with here on the DX320MAX. They work by using a series of discrete resistors to form a voltage divider. The output level is determined by the position of the rotary switch, which essentially specifies which resistors are included or excluded in the signal path. Each resistor has a predetermined value of resistance, i.e. attenuation level.

This is a lot of technical terminology, and even for myself, at first, it was too much. When it comes to listening to music and judging the quality of sound, I like to think that my opinion holds some credibility. However, when it comes to technical knowledge, I’m as qualified as a fish is at climbing trees. In reality, it’s not all that complicated. Think of an audio signal as a stream, and loudness as thereof flow. In an unrestricted path, this stream will have the strongest flow, and this is how your amplifier would behave if there were no volume control. To gain control over the strength [flow] of the stream, we can introduce pathways that restrain it by a specified amount. The more we want to restrain the flow, the more pathways need to be used. That’s an oversimplified principle of how series-type stepped attenuators work. Attenuation means reduction of the amplitude of a signal. Perhaps this clarifies the word stepped attenuation. In a series-type stepped attenuator, the resistors are connected together to form a chain, a series. As mentioned in the previous paragraph, there is a rotary switch that determines which series of resistors is activated. Each resistor is connected to a fixed contact point, while the rotary switch rotates a contact of its own, and when the two align, a connection is established. Let’s put all this information into practice. For example, when at position 20 (clockwise), you’d have the output level attenuated by 3 resistors. The more you turn the knob counter-clockwise, the more resistors are activated and added to the chain, resulting in more attenuation. That’s the best explanation I could give you, so I hope it was helpful.

A 24-position stepped attenuator has 23 resistors. It might appear confusing how we get 24 positions when there are only 23 resistors, but it’s rather logical. When at position 1, i.e. when the knob is fully clockwise, the output level is unattenuated (no resistor in the signal path). This is called zero attenuation. On the other end of the spectrum, when the rotary switch is at position 24, i.e. knob is fully counter-clockwise, the signal level is at 0dB. This is called infinite attenuation, or the maximum attenuation level.



Since series-type stepped attenuators use a fixed-resistor voltage divider, perceived to be the purest method of analog signal attenuation, the measured resistance always remains the same. There’s no wear, even after years of use. This is because: a) wearing parts are low resistance (switch contacts which firmly snap in place), b) the resistance value is ‘stored’ in stationary resistors, c) the resistance values are fixed (fixed predetermined voltage division ratio). There are many benefits of this design over rotary potentiometers, even the most expensive ones! All resistors are individually matched and calibrated, and this is why all the specifications are constant, reliable, and predictable. iBasso uses high-precision 0201 resistors for their stepped attenuator.
In contrast, rotary potentiometers, like the one on the DX300MAX, use a variable resistor voltage divider. A rotary potentiometer consists of a: conductive resistive track and a rotary wiper (a contact that slides along the track). The rotary wiper is a movable contact point, much like the rotary switch in stepped attenuators, while the conductive resistive track is the element that ‘stores’ the resistance value. The resistive track’s total length determines the maximum attenuation level. The output level is specified by the position of the wiper, i.e. contact point on the resistive track—you’re essentially changing the effective length of the resistive path with the wiper. This resistance value is not fixed and it becomes more inaccurate after years of use. This is because: a) wearing parts are high resistance (wiper gliding against the resistive track; mechanical wear), b) the resistive track is a wearing part; the resistance value is dependent on the resistive track. In other words, this design is fundamentally flawed. Rotary potentiometers are not reliable, suffer from channel-to-channel imbalances, and are neither accurate nor precise—especially in the long run!

Internal Hardware​

Embrace THE BEAST.
‎

SoC (system on a chip)​

Holding it all together is Qualcomm’s Snapdragon 660 SoC (system on a chip). It’s not industry-leading anymore, but it fulfills all the needs of the MAX. The official specs are: 128GB of internal storage, 6GB of LPDDR4X-3733 RAM that operates at a frequency of 1866 MHz, a 64-bit octa-core 14nm processor (four Kryo 260 Silver cores operating at 1.84 GHz + four Kryo 260 Gold cores operating at 2.2 GHz), and an Adreno 512 integrated GPU operating at 647 MHz. CPU-Z revealed that four cores operate at 633MHz – 1843MHz, while the other four operate at 1113MHz – 2208 MHz.

GeekBench 5 Benchmark Results (Picture 1: CPU Score; Picture 2: CPU Single-Core Score; Picture 3: CPU Multi-Core Score; Picture 4: Compute OpenCL Score):

DAC (Digital to Analog Converter)‎ ​

We got a taste of ROHM chips in the DX320, and to be honest, ever since it was released, I was hoping to see it in a MAX implementation. It had me so curious that I couldn’t resist asking Paul whether we would see a new model any time soon, to which he replied that there are no plans for its release any time soon. Surprise, surprise, it turns out that iBasso delivered what we dreamed of! More than that, the quad DAC is back, but this time with ROHM’s flagship BD34301EKV chips. It’s a chip from the company’s MUS-IC™ lineup, which consists of its highest audio grade—read audiophile—ICs (integrated circuits). When it comes to chips, mostly three companies have been in rotation for the past decade: Asahi Kasei (AKM), Cirrcus Logic, and ESS Tech. Though ROHM is far from a new company, its DAC chips haven’t been widely implemented in the audio industry. Strictly speaking about the DAP space, Cayin was the first to bring one on board with its N8ii, with iBasso being the next to follow up with its DX320. Since there were no details in the marketing material, we can only speculate about the implementation of these chips in the DX320MAX. This said, there is a possibility that they work in a dual-parallel configuration, like the Cirrus Logic chips on the DX300. Whatever the case may be, you are getting two chips per channel. Once Ultimate Mode is activated, all 8 channels get utilized for a true balanced output. Considering each BD3401EKV chip has 2 channel outs, only 4 channels get used while in Standard mode.

Regardless of its small presence, ROHM has gained a cult-like following and become one of the highest-regarded DAC chip manufacturers in the portable player market. There’s a reason why Japanese craftsmanship is praised around the globe!

Alright, let’s get some specs out of the way. The following are the supported audio formats:
MQA, APE, FLAC, WAV, WMA, AAC, ALAC, AIFF, OGG, MP3, DFF, DSF, DXD.
PCM: 768kHz/32-bit; Native DSD512

You can also use the DX320MAX as a USB DAC, and when doing so, it supports up to 384kHz/32-bit (PCM) and DoP DSD128.

Amplifier‎ ​

Like in the past, the analog and digital circuits are completely isolated from each other. Moreover, each is controlled independently, with the digital section being controlled through software, and the analog section exclusively by the stepped attenuator. There are also optocouplers and I2C isolators for the digital/analog hardware and signal communication, which serve the purpose of isolating each section from interference. iBasso has always been very passionate about the concept of completely separating the analog and digital sides, so it wouldn’t surprise me if this idea gets pushed even further in the future. As for the present, we can mention iBasso’s super class-A amplifier. Though such a class isn’t recognized in the official classification system, there’s reasoning behind the name. Class A is highly sought after for its sound characteristics, but the trade-off is heat generation. Combine high heat generation and small space, and you will get a rather inconvenient result, an oven. Super Class A achieves the Class A sound signature, but simultaneously reduces heat generation and eliminates the switching distortion of transistors. From my experience, the design is successful, as I don’t recall a time when my DX300MAX got hot, and the DX320MAX ran even cooler.

We still haven’t gone over one of the most important elements of an amplifier, its components. This is where things get a little crazy. The amplifier board features 8x polyester film capacitors, 4x Philips KP series polypropylene film/foil capacitors, 2x Nichicon FW series aluminum electrolytic capacitors, 2x Toshin Jovial UTJS series aluminum electrolytic capacitors, and 2x ERSE C-cap metalized polypropylene film capacitors. That’s a whopping total of 18 capacitors!!! Not just any capacitors, oh no, polyester film capacitors—recognized as some of the best-sounding by audiophiles, film/foil capacitors—many consider them to be the true pinnacle of capacitors for audio applications and find them to sound the best by far, and then there are the two ERSE capacitors—flagship film capacitors from the highly acclaimed manufacturer. When it comes to DAPs, the only other manufacturer using such desktop-grade components is SONY. Let that sink in.

As long as I’ve been in this industry, I recall iBasso using the highest-grade parts and proudly disclosing them. It never settled for basic and conventional designs because they wouldn’t satisfy customers, which is why the complex designs keep getting challenged with every new release. Perhaps you’ve noticed by now that iBasso favors discrete circuit design. Though true that it can benefit performance, whether or not it does so is entirely dependent on the quality of the discrete components and how they are implemented. As a whole, it’s a significantly more tedious and expensive process for the R&D team and the manufacturer. Give a Ferrari to someone who lacks driving skills, and they will turn it into a wreck. It's who’s behind the wheel that makes the difference.

Battery‎ ​

The patented dual power supply structure has become a staple of iBasso’s flagship-series players for a reason. Not only is it convenient, but it also aims to benefit performance. If numbers are all you are after, then you’ll be happy to hear that there’s still a total of 9800mAh powers the beast. The digital section is powered by a single 6200mAh battery pack, while the analog section uses four 900mAh batteries. What too got carried over from the DX300MAX is the optimized power supply path for the analog section, the battery pack directly loaded on the amplifier board, and a true ±8.4V battery pack for the amplifier section with no voltage boost.

If you care about battery health, then you should never allow your battery to drop below 25% and should stop charging at 80%. If you are more curious about this topic, check out this link (thanks to @Poganin for recommending it): https://batteryuniversity.com/article/bu-808-how-to-prolong-lithium-based-batteries. Other than that, I advise you to avoid Samsung’s fast chargers with all basso DAPs, and it might be smart to avoid other smartphone brand fast chargers. They are not optimized for iBasso players and create a complete mess. For one second it says it’s fast charging, the next second it says it’s charging, and then it says it’s not charging. It’s inconsistent and not healthy for the batteries. If you already want to get an aftermarket charger, look into Anker’s offerings.
Per iBasso, the marketed average playtime in standard mode is 17 hours, and in ultimate mode, 13 hours. As expected, these estimates can be impacted by several factors such as screen brightness, OS, volume, headphone and/or IEM load, single-ended or balanced, audio file format, etc. I was getting an hour or two less than the marketed times.

Bluetooth & WiFi​

The DX220 was the first DAP to support two-way Bluetooth 5.0, which provides native support for LDAC and aptx. The DX320MAX inherited this feature. As for WiFi, it's equipped with two antennas (2x2 MIMO) that allow it to support up to two streams of data. It also has the dual-band 2.4Ghz/5Ghz ability. The WiFi standard that is implemented is the 802.11b/g/n/ac. Aside from being a transmitter, the DX320MAX also acts as a Bluetooth receiver. This allows it to have the Bluetooth DAC function, which basically means that the DAP receives digital data from a source and converts it into an analog electrical signal. However, when using it as a Bluetooth DAC, you are limited to AAC and SBC codecs.

Sound Performance & DX300MAX SS Comparison‎ ​

To answer this question, I took my SR3 and made notes of any audible differences between the volume-matched DX320MAX and DX300MAX SS. After listening to a wide variety of tracks from different genres, the one difference that remained audible across all of them was bass. The DX320MAX is characterized by a snappier and more defined low end. Besides being pure ear candy, Pink Floyd’s “Dogs” is a phenomenal track to listen to for imaging and bass qualities. Oh, I’m fully aware of how insulting it is to use such a masterpiece for benchmarking purposes, and trust me when I say that I’d rather be listening to it for enjoyment purposes any other day! However, now is the time for me to put my critic coat on, and provide you with valuable assessments. For this, we can start by narrowing down the focus to the percussion, which is dynamic and moves on an XYZ-axis. More specifically, it’s the drumming segments in Dogs [3:48-4:15; 6:37-6:45; 7:23-7:30; 14:13-14:40] where a clear difference can be heard between the DX320MAX and DX300MAX SS. Not only is each and every drum hit more firmly defined in space, but the DX320MAX also has an edge over the DX300MAX SS when it comes to speed. It bites down on the attack quicker, leading to more responsive and controlled drum hits. The mids, on the other hand, remain largely the same in terms of timbre and quality. There are some tracks on the DX300MAX SS where vocals are ever so slightly more forward and have a tad bit more of a lower mid-range presence, but other than that, the two are very alike. Something interesting that I found no explanation for is how vocals sound on the DX300MAX SS. They have something special that gives them this quality of pure transparency and realism, but it’s only true for vocals. Instruments such as acoustic guitars tend to sound better on the DX320MAX. Something that pretty much all DX320MAX vs DX300MAX impressions agree upon is a blacker background, more headroom, and an expanded soundstage on the former. My findings align with this, but I would also add a major improvement in imaging precision. I concluded that both the larger perceived soundstage and better imaging precision are directly correlated to the blacker background and more headroom. It’s rather logical, you decrease the noise floor and thus give all elements in the mix more room to breathe, more room for details, and also make their placement better defined in space. Pretty much everything I just mentioned can be heard in Dogs. We can also take Sia’s “Dressed in Black” [0:54-1:40], where there’s a xylophone in the background. While it is sort of mushed into the mix on the DX300MAX SS, it’s clear and detailed on the DX320MAX, which is actually an indicator of DX320MAX’s superior separation capability. Last but not least, treble. The case here is similar to DX300MAX SS vs DX300MAX Ti, the latter having an overall brighter sound signature. Percussion has an extended edge, giving it a crisper and sharper sound, which I most certainly appreciate! Due to these factors, it’s more forward, but there are also more details and fine nuances that can be heard in percussion instruments. If you would like to give it a listen yourself, play Daft Punk’s “Get Lucky” or even better, Russian Circles’ “Philos” [4:16-5:38; 5:39-6:18]. It shouldn’t take long before you hear just how much more it pops on the DX320MAX.

To my surprise, the differences were greater than I initially anticipated.

Conclusion​

The iBasso DX320MAX Ti is the most advanced portable DAP to be ever released, there’s no way around it. I’ve been labeled an iBasso fanboy multiple times now, but if acknowledging all the accomplishments and product’s values from a neutral standpoint while taking the whole market offerings into consideration makes me one, so be it. I will say that no manufacturer continues to push the envelope as consistently and frequently as iBasso. With the DX320MAX, we got the quad DAC implementation that was introduced in the DX300, we got the flagship ROHM chips that were introduced in the DX320, we got analog volume control with the brand-new stepped attenuator, we got hardware gain control, we got Android 11, we got a capable SoC, we got the discreet amplifier design with some of the best components, we got the separated battery design… Until iBasso surprises us with another innovation, the only thing that’s left for the MAX series is to feature a modular amplifier module system. Aside from that, it’s got it all!

Sound-wise, is it worth the $1300 premium over the DX300MAX SS? It all depends on how much you value the differences and what your preferences are. What I can tell you is that the DX320MAX has, what’s in my opinion, a significant technical advantage—audibly faster and more tactile low-end response, better bass definition, blacker background, greater detail retrieval, more precise imaging, better separation, crisper treble. If I’m being asked, I’d take the DX320MAX because the previously mentioned technicalities are of great significance to me. You might also be wondering whether the DX320MAX is worth the $200 premium over the DX300MAX Ti, and while I cannot speak about sound performance, the hardware advancements alone justify the price by a long shot! Not to mention how much the longevity is extended with the replaceable battery design and the stepped attenuator volume control. When you have several community members who either own or have heard the majority of the flagship DAPs and say that the DX320MAX is the best out of all of them, what more can I tell you? It’s definitely not the most expensive DAP on the market, yet it did get praised above the almighty $8500 Sony DMP-Z1.

It’s the beginning of a new era for DAPs, and companies like iBasso, Cayin, Sony, and Lotoo are leading the way!

Design & Features​

The MAX series’ silhouette is a formula that iBasso has been brewing for three years now. Numerous upgrades and improvements are introduced with each new release, but one thing that has remained mostly the same, is the design. That very same blocky chunk of metal is here to stay. It’s not getting any wider, longer, or thicker. Whether this is something that the company will stick to in the future, only time will tell.

If you were a DAP in a barber shop and wanted to get the MAX 'cut, you’d ask for, “straight on the sides, round on the corners”. It’s an elegant look shared across all three MAX models; bevel faces on the sides, and flat top/bottom edges on the front and back. The DX320MAX doesn’t stray away from the classic silver & golden accent color scheme, just like it still makes use of texture to elevate that classic luxury look, with the horizontally brushed pattern on the flat sides of the chassis; polished bevels and edges. Let’s shift the focus to the inputs and outputs:
At the front, there are two physical outputs; 4.4mm balanced, and 3.5mm single-ended. Much like on the DX300 and DX320, they double as phone outs and line outs. The DX320MAX is missing the third output that was present on the DX300MAX, the dedicated true balanced line out. It wasn’t thrown out for any reason, as the new physical gain switch took its place. The remaining fourth member of the front section is, of course, the volume knob.
At the back, there is a DC-in, USB-C port, coaxial out, and a Micro SD card slot.
On the right-hand side, there’s a power on/off button and the media control buttons which are spaced farther down from it.

Each input and output has its label laser etched, but the new gain switch is the only one that has the label placed above. Also, it’s nice how the gain labels are in Roman numerals that are warped around the switch. Though it might not be apparent at first glance, the inputs and outputs have the most details. For example, all are placed within a golden faceplate with a circular finely brushed texture. Another touch is the recession of the outputs at the front. Among the less visible differences between the DX320MAX and the DX300MAX are how the DC-in is now recessed and its faceplate is larger in diameter, and how the USB-C and coaxial ports have also been recessed. The eagle-eyed will notice the addition of bevels on all input/output cutouts, and it’s minor details like these that prove iBasso’s pursuit of perfection. On the other hand, the more obvious difference between the two is the volume knob. It was already a nice upgrade going from the DX220MAX to the DX300MAX, but the DX320MAX improved it a step further. Instead of slashes, it now has deeper and grippier diagonal ridges, and the indicator indent has gotten longer. Other than that, both the volume knob and the gain switch have a brushed face and polished sides. Speaking of, the gain switch is attractively shaped, and the only way I could describe it is as if you took a circle and cut off its two sides. It looks beautiful, and it’s an even greater joy to use. I’m a big fan of the elegant look of the MAX series. Kudos to the whole design team!

In my eyes, what's a serviceability game changer is the removable back. Yes, ladies and gentlemen, you can now remove the back and completely open your DX320MAX thanks to the two large screws on the back. The backplate is still made of glass, but a small metal plate has been added at the bottom. Do note that if you want to remove the back, you must be cautious, as the batteries are both attached on the underside and have cables connected to the circuit boards. The last thing you want is to damage the circuit board, so please be careful! Also, if I may give you a piece of advice, try to lift off the small metal plate instead of tilting it toward/away from the glass. It's so tightly placed that you might crack the glass by accidentally pinching it. Anyway, the reason why I believe having the option of removing the back is so significant is that so many doors open to the daring enthusiasts that are interested in modding. Though it might be tempting to fiddle around the readily accessible insides, I highly advise against making any changes that will void the warranty or damage the device!

Functions‎​

Whether the 4.4mm and 3.5mm outputs function as phone outs or line outs depends on which one you set it to through software. When set to PO, they are to be used with your desired headphones, earbuds, earphones, and IEMs. When set to LO, they allow the DX320MAX to serve as a source, fully bypassing the internal amplifier and letting you use an external amplifier.
The physical gain allows you to choose between 4 gain stages.
The DC-in port is where you plug in the included 12V AC/DC adapter to charge the analog battery section. The USB-C port is used for both data transfer (USB 3.1 Gen 1 Superspeed) and charging (supports QC3.0 and PD3.0 quick charging) the digital battery section. The Coaxial Out allows you to connect the DX300 MAX to a device with a Coax In and allows the DAP to act as a digital transport (24bit/384kHz, DoP DSD128).
The Micro SD card slot supports SDXC and SDHC Micro SD cards.
The display is a 1080p IPS panel.
‎

Build Quality​

The MAX series was always about the highest grade of quality, and the DX320MAX is no different. As far as my experience goes, the same can be said for the rest of iBasso’s high-end product line-up. One thing is for sure, the sheer size of the MAXs will spark the portability debate. In my DX300MAX review, I gave you my take on it. My opinion was that it can be considered portable, as it can be transported with ease, but that it cannot be considered pocketable, as it’s too heavy and big to be conveniently carried in pockets. Well, my views have changed for the DX320MAX. The main reason behind that is the significant weight reduction. Keep in mind, there were two versions of the DX300MAX, the Stainless Steel version and the Titanium version. It’s the former that I had my hands on. To the best of our knowledge, the DX320MAX only comes in one variant, titanium. Here are some numbers to put things in perspective:
iBasso DX300MAX SS: 775g (without case), 819g (with case)
iBasso DX300MAX Ti: 570g (without case), 614g (with case)
iBassoDX320MAX: 626g (without case), 688g (with case)

The measurements of the DX300MAX and the DX320MAX are directly from me [using a basic digital scale], whereas the measurement of the DX300MAX Ti comes directly from iBasso. The numbers aren’t 100% accurate, I even saw people commenting under the DX300MAX that an iBasso rep told them that the weight of the DX300MAX Ti is 590g. Regardless of which measurements we use, one thing is clear: the weight difference between stainless steel and titanium is immense. If you’ve never held the SS and Ti versions side by side, you wouldn’t understand how much lighter the latter feels. Actually, it kind of changes everything, because now I can see true enthusiasts carrying the DX320MAX in a fanny pack around their waist. That would change the narrative of the portability debate and finally allow it to be considered portable. This is a big deal, and you’ll understand why later on.

Just to make sure I don’t forget to mention it, the grade of the titanium is Grade 5 (Ti-6Al-4V), which is among the most commonly used titanium alloys for industrial applications. Aside from the obvious weight reduction benefits, it is known for its excellent corrosion resistance properties. However, among the more impressive publicly unknown details is the use of PVD coating on the knobs. Physical vapor disposition, or PVD, is a highly advanced coating method that brings a solid or liquid metal to its vapor point (gas state), after which it is ‘shot’ at a target metal, resulting in a permanent bond. This process leaves a very thin (thickness typically measured in microns or nanometers) solid-state film on the target (stainless steel knobs in this case). There is a wide variety of metals available for PVD coating, and they are most commonly chosen for their thermodynamic, physical, mechanical, and chemical properties. For audio products, however, they are frequently chosen based on their appearance.

In-House Developed Stepped Attenuator​

Somehow, iBasso keeps raising the bar with its innovations. Just when you think its pockets have been emptied, there’s more!

In my DX300MAX review, I mentioned how the analog potentiometer is one of its signature features. This time around, it is the signature feature. The custom 4-wiper analog potentiometer on the DX300MAX was enough in itself to stand out from the competition, but this... this is taking it to a whole other league. What’s the fuss about with these analog potentiometers? I’ve seen a lot of confusion in the Head-Fi thread, so let’s break it down. The reason iBasso introduced analog potentiometers in the DX220MAX and DX300MAX in the first place was that, in iBasso’s own words, it “retains the full resolution of the recording” and doesn’t suffer from “the bit rate truncation problem” that digital volume adjustment does. However, there’s a price you have to pay when going with this design: ±2dB channel imbalance at low volumes, and audible distortion that’s caused by the wear of the potentiometer’s carbon film after years of use. What if there was a more precise way of controlling volume? Introducing to you, stepped attenuators. Unlike rotary potentiometers, stepped attenuators allow for fixed & precise volume adjustment(s). Allow me to explain. Let’s focus on series-type stepped attenuators, which is what we are dealing with here on the DX320MAX. They work by using a series of discrete resistors to form a voltage divider. The output level is determined by the position of the rotary switch, which essentially specifies which resistors are included or excluded in the signal path. Each resistor has a predetermined value of resistance, i.e. attenuation level.

This is a lot of technical terminology, and even for myself, at first, it was too much. When it comes to listening to music and judging the quality of sound, I like to think that my opinion holds some credibility. However, when it comes to technical knowledge, I’m as qualified as a fish is at climbing trees. In reality, it’s not all that complicated. Think of an audio signal as a stream, and loudness as thereof flow. In an unrestricted path, this stream will have the strongest flow, and this is how your amplifier would behave if there were no volume control. To gain control over the strength [flow] of the stream, we can introduce pathways that restrain it by a specified amount. The more we want to restrain the flow, the more pathways need to be used. That’s an oversimplified principle of how series-type stepped attenuators work. Attenuation means reduction of the amplitude of a signal. Perhaps this clarifies the word stepped attenuation. In a series-type stepped attenuator, the resistors are connected together to form a chain, a series. As mentioned in the previous paragraph, there is a rotary switch that determines which series of resistors is activated. Each resistor is connected to a fixed contact point, while the rotary switch rotates a contact of its own, and when the two align, a connection is established. Let’s put all this information into practice. For example, when at position 20 (clockwise), you’d have the output level attenuated by 3 resistors. The more you turn the knob counter-clockwise, the more resistors are activated and added to the chain, resulting in more attenuation. That’s the best explanation I could give you, so I hope it was helpful.

A 24-position stepped attenuator has 23 resistors. It might appear confusing how we get 24 positions when there are only 23 resistors, but it’s rather logical. When at position 1, i.e. when the knob is fully clockwise, the output level is unattenuated (no resistor in the signal path). This is called zero attenuation. On the other end of the spectrum, when the rotary switch is at position 24, i.e. knob is fully counter-clockwise, the signal level is at 0dB. This is called infinite attenuation, or the maximum attenuation level.



Since series-type stepped attenuators use a fixed-resistor voltage divider, perceived to be the purest method of analog signal attenuation, the measured resistance always remains the same. There’s no wear, even after years of use. This is because: a) wearing parts are low resistance (switch contacts which firmly snap in place), b) the resistance value is ‘stored’ in stationary resistors, c) the resistance values are fixed (fixed predetermined voltage division ratio). There are many benefits of this design over rotary potentiometers, even the most expensive ones! All resistors are individually matched and calibrated, and this is why all the specifications are constant, reliable, and predictable. iBasso uses high-precision 0201 resistors for their stepped attenuator.
In contrast, rotary potentiometers, like the one on the DX300MAX, use a variable resistor voltage divider. A rotary potentiometer consists of a: conductive resistive track and a rotary wiper (a contact that slides along the track). The rotary wiper is a movable contact point, much like the rotary switch in stepped attenuators, while the conductive resistive track is the element that ‘stores’ the resistance value. The resistive track’s total length determines the maximum attenuation level. The output level is specified by the position of the wiper, i.e. contact point on the resistive track—you’re essentially changing the effective length of the resistive path with the wiper. This resistance value is not fixed and it becomes more inaccurate after years of use. This is because: a) wearing parts are high resistance (wiper gliding against the resistive track; mechanical wear), b) the resistive track is a wearing part; the resistance value is dependent on the resistive track. In other words, this design is fundamentally flawed. Rotary potentiometers are not reliable, suffer from channel-to-channel imbalances, and are neither accurate nor precise—especially in the long run!

Internal Hardware​

Embrace THE BEAST.
‎

SoC (system on a chip)​

Holding it all together is Qualcomm’s Snapdragon 660 SoC (system on a chip). It’s not industry-leading anymore, but it fulfills all the needs of the MAX. The official specs are: 128GB of internal storage, 6GB of LPDDR4X-3733 RAM that operates at a frequency of 1866 MHz, a 64-bit octa-core 14nm processor (four Kryo 260 Silver cores operating at 1.84 GHz + four Kryo 260 Gold cores operating at 2.2 GHz), and an Adreno 512 integrated GPU operating at 647 MHz. CPU-Z revealed that four cores operate at 633MHz – 1843MHz, while the other four operate at 1113MHz – 2208 MHz.

GeekBench 5 Benchmark Results (Picture 1: CPU Score; Picture 2: CPU Single-Core Score; Picture 3: CPU Multi-Core Score; Picture 4: Compute OpenCL Score):

DAC (Digital to Analog Converter)‎ ​

We got a taste of ROHM chips in the DX320, and to be honest, ever since it was released, I was hoping to see it in a MAX implementation. It had me so curious that I couldn’t resist asking Paul whether we would see a new model any time soon, to which he replied that there are no plans for its release any time soon. Surprise, surprise, it turns out that iBasso delivered what we dreamed of! More than that, the quad DAC is back, but this time with ROHM’s flagship BD34301EKV chips. It’s a chip from the company’s MUS-IC™ lineup, which consists of its highest audio grade—read audiophile—ICs (integrated circuits). When it comes to chips, mostly three companies have been in rotation for the past decade: Asahi Kasei (AKM), Cirrcus Logic, and ESS Tech. Though ROHM is far from a new company, its DAC chips haven’t been widely implemented in the audio industry. Strictly speaking about the DAP space, Cayin was the first to bring one on board with its N8ii, with iBasso being the next to follow up with its DX320. Since there were no details in the marketing material, we can only speculate about the implementation of these chips in the DX320MAX. This said, there is a possibility that they work in a dual-parallel configuration, like the Cirrus Logic chips on the DX300. Whatever the case may be, you are getting two chips per channel. Once Ultimate Mode is activated, all 8 channels get utilized for a true balanced output. Considering each BD3401EKV chip has 2 channel outs, only 4 channels get used while in Standard mode.

Regardless of its small presence, ROHM has gained a cult-like following and become one of the highest-regarded DAC chip manufacturers in the portable player market. There’s a reason why Japanese craftsmanship is praised around the globe!

Alright, let’s get some specs out of the way. The following are the supported audio formats:
MQA, APE, FLAC, WAV, WMA, AAC, ALAC, AIFF, OGG, MP3, DFF, DSF, DXD.
PCM: 768kHz/32-bit; Native DSD512

You can also use the DX320MAX as a USB DAC, and when doing so, it supports up to 384kHz/32-bit (PCM) and DoP DSD128.

Amplifier‎ ​

Like in the past, the analog and digital circuits are completely isolated from each other. Moreover, each is controlled independently, with the digital section being controlled through software, and the analog section exclusively by the stepped attenuator. There are also optocouplers and I2C isolators for the digital/analog hardware and signal communication, which serve the purpose of isolating each section from interference. iBasso has always been very passionate about the concept of completely separating the analog and digital sides, so it wouldn’t surprise me if this idea gets pushed even further in the future. As for the present, we can mention iBasso’s super class-A amplifier. Though such a class isn’t recognized in the official classification system, there’s reasoning behind the name. Class A is highly sought after for its sound characteristics, but the trade-off is heat generation. Combine high heat generation and small space, and you will get a rather inconvenient result, an oven. Super Class A achieves the Class A sound signature, but simultaneously reduces heat generation and eliminates the switching distortion of transistors. From my experience, the design is successful, as I don’t recall a time when my DX300MAX got hot, and the DX320MAX ran even cooler.

We still haven’t gone over one of the most important elements of an amplifier, its components. This is where things get a little crazy. The amplifier board features 8x polyester film capacitors, 4x Philips KP series polypropylene film/foil capacitors, 2x Nichicon FW series aluminum electrolytic capacitors, 2x Toshin Jovial UTJS series aluminum electrolytic capacitors, and 2x ERSE C-cap metalized polypropylene film capacitors. That’s a whopping total of 18 capacitors!!! Not just any capacitors, oh no, polyester film capacitors—recognized as some of the best-sounding by audiophiles, film/foil capacitors—many consider them to be the true pinnacle of capacitors for audio applications and find them to sound the best by far, and then there are the two ERSE capacitors—flagship film capacitors from the highly acclaimed manufacturer. When it comes to DAPs, the only other manufacturer using such desktop-grade components is SONY. Let that sink in.

As long as I’ve been in this industry, I recall iBasso using the highest-grade parts and proudly disclosing them. It never settled for basic and conventional designs because they wouldn’t satisfy customers, which is why the complex designs keep getting challenged with every new release. Perhaps you’ve noticed by now that iBasso favors discrete circuit design. Though true that it can benefit performance, whether or not it does so is entirely dependent on the quality of the discrete components and how they are implemented. As a whole, it’s a significantly more tedious and expensive process for the R&D team and the manufacturer. Give a Ferrari to someone who lacks driving skills, and they will turn it into a wreck. It's who’s behind the wheel that makes the difference.

Battery‎ ​

The patented dual power supply structure has become a staple of iBasso’s flagship-series players for a reason. Not only is it convenient, but it also aims to benefit performance. If numbers are all you are after, then you’ll be happy to hear that there’s still a total of 9800mAh powers the beast. The digital section is powered by a single 6200mAh battery pack, while the analog section uses four 900mAh batteries. What too got carried over from the DX300MAX is the optimized power supply path for the analog section, the battery pack directly loaded on the amplifier board, and a true ±8.4V battery pack for the amplifier section with no voltage boost.

If you care about battery health, then you should never allow your battery to drop below 25% and should stop charging at 80%. If you are more curious about this topic, check out this link (thanks to @Poganin for recommending it): https://batteryuniversity.com/article/bu-808-how-to-prolong-lithium-based-batteries. Other than that, I advise you to avoid Samsung’s fast chargers with all basso DAPs, and it might be smart to avoid other smartphone brand fast chargers. They are not optimized for iBasso players and create a complete mess. For one second it says it’s fast charging, the next second it says it’s charging, and then it says it’s not charging. It’s inconsistent and not healthy for the batteries. If you already want to get an aftermarket charger, look into Anker’s offerings.
Per iBasso, the marketed average playtime in standard mode is 17 hours, and in ultimate mode, 13 hours. As expected, these estimates can be impacted by several factors such as screen brightness, OS, volume, headphone and/or IEM load, single-ended or balanced, audio file format, etc. I was getting an hour or two less than the marketed times.

Bluetooth & WiFi​

The DX220 was the first DAP to support two-way Bluetooth 5.0, which provides native support for LDAC and aptx. The DX320MAX inherited this feature. As for WiFi, it's equipped with two antennas (2x2 MIMO) that allow it to support up to two streams of data. It also has the dual-band 2.4Ghz/5Ghz ability. The WiFi standard that is implemented is the 802.11b/g/n/ac. Aside from being a transmitter, the DX320MAX also acts as a Bluetooth receiver. This allows it to have the Bluetooth DAC function, which basically means that the DAP receives digital data from a source and converts it into an analog electrical signal. However, when using it as a Bluetooth DAC, you are limited to AAC and SBC codecs.

Sound Performance & DX300MAX SS Comparison‎ ​

To answer this question, I took my SR3 and made notes of any audible differences between the volume-matched DX320MAX and DX300MAX SS. After listening to a wide variety of tracks from different genres, the one difference that remained audible across all of them was bass. The DX320MAX is characterized by a snappier and more defined low end. Besides being pure ear candy, Pink Floyd’s “Dogs” is a phenomenal track to listen to for imaging and bass qualities. Oh, I’m fully aware of how insulting it is to use such a masterpiece for benchmarking purposes, and trust me when I say that I’d rather be listening to it for enjoyment purposes any other day! However, now is the time for me to put my critic coat on, and provide you with valuable assessments. For this, we can start by narrowing down the focus to the percussion, which is dynamic and moves on an XYZ-axis. More specifically, it’s the drumming segments in Dogs [3:48-4:15; 6:37-6:45; 7:23-7:30; 14:13-14:40] where a clear difference can be heard between the DX320MAX and DX300MAX SS. Not only is each and every drum hit more firmly defined in space, but the DX320MAX also has an edge over the DX300MAX SS when it comes to speed. It bites down on the attack quicker, leading to more responsive and controlled drum hits. The mids, on the other hand, remain largely the same in terms of timbre and quality. There are some tracks on the DX300MAX SS where vocals are ever so slightly more forward and have a tad bit more of a lower mid-range presence, but other than that, the two are very alike. Something interesting that I found no explanation for is how vocals sound on the DX300MAX SS. They have something special that gives them this quality of pure transparency and realism, but it’s only true for vocals. Instruments such as acoustic guitars tend to sound better on the DX320MAX. Something that pretty much all DX320MAX vs DX300MAX impressions agree upon is a blacker background, more headroom, and an expanded soundstage on the former. My findings align with this, but I would also add a major improvement in imaging precision. I concluded that both the larger perceived soundstage and better imaging precision are directly correlated to the blacker background and more headroom. It’s rather logical, you decrease the noise floor and thus give all elements in the mix more room to breathe, more room for details, and also make their placement better defined in space. Pretty much everything I just mentioned can be heard in Dogs. We can also take Sia’s “Dressed in Black” [0:54-1:40], where there’s a xylophone in the background. While it is sort of mushed into the mix on the DX300MAX SS, it’s clear and detailed on the DX320MAX, which is actually an indicator of DX320MAX’s superior separation capability. Last but not least, treble. The case here is similar to DX300MAX SS vs DX300MAX Ti, the latter having an overall brighter sound signature. Percussion has an extended edge, giving it a crisper and sharper sound, which I most certainly appreciate! Due to these factors, it’s more forward, but there are also more details and fine nuances that can be heard in percussion instruments. If you would like to give it a listen yourself, play Daft Punk’s “Get Lucky” or even better, Russian Circles’ “Philos” [4:16-5:38; 5:39-6:18]. It shouldn’t take long before you hear just how much more it pops on the DX320MAX.

To my surprise, the differences were greater than I initially anticipated.

Conclusion​

The iBasso DX320MAX Ti is the most advanced portable DAP to be ever released, there’s no way around it. I’ve been labeled an iBasso fanboy multiple times now, but if acknowledging all the accomplishments and product’s values from a neutral standpoint while taking the whole market offerings into consideration makes me one, so be it. I will say that no manufacturer continues to push the envelope as consistently and frequently as iBasso. With the DX320MAX, we got the quad DAC implementation that was introduced in the DX300, we got the flagship ROHM chips that were introduced in the DX320, we got analog volume control with the brand-new stepped attenuator, we got hardware gain control, we got Android 11, we got a capable SoC, we got the discreet amplifier design with some of the best components, we got the separated battery design… Until iBasso surprises us with another innovation, the only thing that’s left for the MAX series is to feature a modular amplifier module system. Aside from that, it’s got it all!

Sound-wise, is it worth the $1300 premium over the DX300MAX SS? It all depends on how much you value the differences and what your preferences are. What I can tell you is that the DX320MAX has, what’s in my opinion, a significant technical advantage—audibly faster and more tactile low-end response, better bass definition, blacker background, greater detail retrieval, more precise imaging, better separation, crisper treble. If I’m being asked, I’d take the DX320MAX because the previously mentioned technicalities are of great significance to me. You might also be wondering whether the DX320MAX is worth the $200 premium over the DX300MAX Ti, and while I cannot speak about sound performance, the hardware advancements alone justify the price by a long shot! Not to mention how much the longevity is extended with the replaceable battery design and the stepped attenuator volume control. When you have several community members who either own or have heard the majority of the flagship DAPs and say that the DX320MAX is the best out of all of them, what more can I tell you? It’s definitely not the most expensive DAP on the market, yet it did get praised above the almighty $8500 Sony DMP-Z1.

It’s the beginning of a new era for DAPs, and companies like iBasso, Cayin, Sony, and Lotoo are leading the way!

It’s been 5 years since the original Sundara was released, yet it remains one of the most sought-after audiophile headphones on the market. In terms of popularity, I would put it right up there with Sennheiser’s HD6xx line and Beyerdynamic headphones.

Design​

The now-iconic Sundara silhouette is immediately recognizable. My favorite part is the headband. In particular, the yoke. The fork which holds the ear-cups attached is twisted at the either end, which adds character and depth to the design. But the way it transitions to the top part (that goes on your head), is genuinely done well. Most headphones with an internal height adjustment system hide it with an overly long and bulky piece. Here, despite it being long, it’s slim and perfectly integrates into the headband. It works even better with the black-silver color scheme. Moreover, if we were to exclude the silver details, the headband is fully black. Speaking of those details, the height adjustment part features HiFiMan’s letterform logo, while the two metal pieces at the ends feature the company’s name (left side) and the headphones’ name, Sundara (right side). Aside from that, the only other ‘visible’ details are hidden underneath the headband, and they are certificates (CE, RoHS, WEE Directive), all laser etched.

The ear-cups are… different. The original Sundara used metal ear-cups and were very flat in design, whereas the new Sundar Closed uses wooden ear-cups. They are still circular in shape, but not semi-spherical. They start out as a semi-sphere, but then they are smoothly “flattened” to a circle area by using one very soft and gradual bevel.

Technology

Per usual, HiFiMan’s strongest field, the technology. More specifically, planar-magnetic driver technology. Over the years, there’s no doubt that the company innovated a number of concepts in this field, many of them gaining a die-hard fanbase. The Sundara Closed is no different, with it featuring a brand-new driver, as well as some familiar technology such as the Stealth Magnet Design and Neo “supernano” Diaphragm.

Before we get into the new stuff, let’s go over what the latter two technologies are. As most are already familiar, a planar-magnetic driver consists of a dielectric film + conductive layer sandwiched between an array of magnets on either side. Stealth Magnet Design alters the magnets by having them rounded on the outside, for which HiFiMan claims to reduce reflections and diffraction, resulting in an improved sound performance. NsD (Neo supernano Diaphragm) is just the company’s branding of its own thin diaphragm, which is claimed to be 80% thinner than that in “more common headphones”.

Now, the good stuff, the new driver. When I took off the ear-pads, it was quite a remarkable sight, unlike anything I’ve seen in the past. A horizontally oriented oval driver? And that’s not even all of it!! So, the whole driver is covered in a standard dust cover, but below it we can some sort of white foam that surrounds the driver. I’m speculating it’s an acoustic dampening foam. Regardless, the driver itself is recessed further back, behind another piece of thinner foam. What’s interesting about this second layer of foam is that it has a 10 pointed star shape cutout for the driver. If anyone is familiar with Dr. Fang Bian, they will know about his obsession with shapes.

Build Quality​

It cannot go without saying that HiFiMan’s rich portfolio comes with the infamous build quality. Let’s face the truth, there’s always someone around the corner sharing their negative experience with either the build quality or the QC. I’m sorry to break it to you, but I’ve yet to encountered this. In fact, my first thought after taking the Sundara Closed out of the box was, “This isn’t as bad as everyone online makes it out to be”. I wouldn’t say I was impressed, but surprised at the very least.

There’s a bit of everything, plastic, metal, and wood. The yoke is made of thicker metal which is very sturdy. It doesn’t flex one bit, and even better, the finish is actually what I’d consider premium. It’s smooth all-around and doesn’t have any imperfections. The headband construction consists of three materials: spring steel, anodized aluminum, and plastic. The very top part, which is responsible for the clamp force, is made of spring steel. Then, there’s the height adjustment system part, which consists of two thin anodized aluminum pieces, and a long plastic piece between them. I’d suspect that this is the part which is responsible for most build quality complaints. For one, the metal pieces are glued to the plastic part. For two, there are no screws, making the repairability aspect questionable. As far as this matter goes, I cannot comment, as I am unfamiliar with HiFiMan’s customer service quality or customers’ feedback on the same.

On a brighter note, the beechwood ear-cups left a positive impression on me. They have gorgeous sheen, grain, and look premium as a whole. Might I add, the grain matches on both sides! So, yeah, the wood is pretty nice. My pair suffers from wood discoloration on the edges, where it isn’t as rich in color as the rest of the cups. The plastic driver housing makes up the second half of the ear-cups. It doesn’t look like the shiny cheap type of plastic, so at the very least, that’s a plus.

I must admit that I haven’t used the headphones long enough to be a valid judge whether they stand the test of time.

Cable

At this point, I cannot run away from being called a harsh cable critic. I will say though, there’s not much I demand from a cable, it just needs to be a good and functional cable.

Let’s dig right into Sundara Closed’s cable. It appears very similar to my Deva cable, if not the exact same. To be honest, I cannot find anything that bothers me about it. It does its job as a cable. It’s slightly chubby, but not thick, and it’s very soft. I mean very, very soft. It’s like a noodle, you can kind of stretch when you pull it. Also, it has light sheen, which gives it nice appearance. On the amp end, it has an L-shaped 3.5mm connector with an integrated strain-relief. On the headphone end, it has two 3.5mm connectors with hard rubber housings. And that brings me to the next point, which some people already mentioned, it would be appropriate to see metal housings here.

Also, I like how the cable holds its shape when you roll it up and put it away. And another thing that I like is the Y-splitter, which is low enough to not bother you when wearing the headphones… unlike the HD6XX cable, khm khm.

There will be a decent number of people craving for a balanced cable, and I can’t disagree that it would’ve been an appropriate addition.

Comfort​

I’m not going to lie to you, I panicked once I realized that the ear-cups lack of horizontal rotation. However, that concern went away as soon as the headphones were on my head. Also, they have the tiniest amount of horizontal wiggle, so it’s not as if they are completely fixed. Turns out it was just enough to get a comfortable fit.

For whatever reason, I don’t remember the Deva sharing these nice pads, but it turns out they are very similar to the ones that are on the Sundara Closed. They are hybrid pads, with the outer side made of pleather, the face made of really nice and soft mesh, and the inner lining made of perforated pleather. All in all, the mesh feels quite comfortable and soft on the skin, and it even keeps the pads cool!

As I have hair on my head, I cannot comment about the headband, since I already my hair serving as a cushion. It’s a very thin leather headband with even thinner foam lining, and the part that goes on your head is made of some sort of a synthetic fabric.

The clamp force is slightly above average, which lets the headphones cup really nicely around your ears, and you also don’t have to worry about the headphones constantly sliding around your head.

Sound Performance​

Setup:
iBasso DX320 + AMP13 (Maximized Output)
Volume: 42
Gain: Low
OS: Mango OS

Lows

The Sundara Closed doesn’t employ a heavy sound, it effectively makes use of voluminosity instead. The problem with weight is that it can work against both the headphone and the listener, at a certain point it starts to negatively affect sound quality. What I like about the sound in this headphone is that it takes the so-called weight and distributes it around a greater space, essentially hollowing out the heft in a sense. Think of it as increasing the volume [not volume as in loudness]. The end result is a very pleasing sound to the ear.

The bass response leans more towards the relaxed side, with the attack being slower, and the attack being faster. This can be heard in both MOON’s “Hydrogen” and Lee Curtiss’ “Smoking Mirrors”, but it’s more obvious in the latter track. Daft Punk’s “TRON: Legacy (End Titles)” is a perfect example of all of the above-mentioned qualities. When listening to this track, you are reminded that bass can be plentiful without having that classic thick ’n heavy sound. Even when putting it to the test with a faster-paced track like Tiësto’s “Adagio for Strings”, Sundara Closed doesn’t fall behind in terms of speed; each beat and hit doesn’t get lost due to the more laid back bass response.

Quantity-wise, I wouldn’t say that either the mid-bass nor that the sub-bass is too forward. Speaking of the sub-bass, don’t expect to hear growling or rumbling. Take for instance Hans Zimmer’s “Why So Serious?”, my reference sub-bass test track, where we can hear a very gentle yet sufficient sub-bass extension at the 3:26 minute mark. It’s deep enough to pulsate your ears, but it’s not thick enough to give you a physical sensation of rumbling. The same applies for Robbie Robertson’s “Theme for The Irishman” at the cello sections of the track. Saving the best for last, my special track of choice, “Do I Wanna Know?” by Arctic Monkeys. What I focus on is the first few seconds, aka the introduction. There’s a consistent drum kick, and that’s what we are listening for. Only a handful of headphones and IEMs pull it off, and by this I refer to the kick possessing the rumble quality. Even less common is to hear the physical sensation of rumble. While the Sundara Closed doesn’t possess either of these qualities, it does give the kick fullness and heft. Believe it or not, there are headphones where the kick sounds very flat and boring, but that’s not the case here.

Mids

At first, the Sundara Closed sounded a bit restrained, and I must admit, muddy and lacking in clarity. However, after letting the headphones break-in for a couple of hours, their potential opened up.

There is a fair amount of warmth in the mids, making long-listening sessions easy on the ears. The Sundara Closed is the type of headphone you want to take out to have some fun. It sounds heavenly with pop. I mean, the global hits like “Get Lucky” by Daft Punk, Rihanna’s “Diamonds”, or Sia’s “Chandelier”, all sound phenomenal. The vocals are lush and don’t get in the way. There are some male vocals (e.g. Ronnie James Dio) that give off slight hints of honky quality, but others, like Pharrell in Get Lucky, sound perfectly normal. I did enjoy listening to female vocals more, and I’d say warmth is responsible for that.

As for strings, it does the job for casual listening. Acoustics strings are my preference, and it didn’t disappoint in that area. Plucks are audible and have the necessary qualities, guitars don’t sound dull, and there’s no distortion or unpleasant qualities. Pink Floyd’s “Dogs”, “Hey You”, Deep Purple’s “Soldier of Fortune”, and Yao Is Ting’s “One More Time” are among the tracks that I played and truly enjoyed listening to. However, the single performance where Sundara Closed impressed me was in Rainbow’s “Temple Of The Temple”, it captures these very fine nuances in the guitar plucks and it sounds heavenly!

Highs

Oh, don’t get me started! There are many things I like about this headphone, but treble is certainly one of my favorites. It’s exactly to my liking and fits my preference. Sundara Closed is a brighter-sounding headphone, though it might not appear as one immediately.

Percussion sounds so lively with these, it just pops. I would be lying if I told you I didn’t have a blast listening to the “Ritchie Blackmore’s Rainbow” album. The crisp percussion is such a treat to the ears that it made me euphoric. Looking back, there is no point in time where I found myself longing for sparkle. Another great example is Dire Straits’ “Money For Nothing”, where the percussion sounds exceptionally snappy and Sundara Closed doesn’t have an issue keeping up with its speed.

This top end extension is much appreciated in instruments such as guitars, saxophone, trumpet, mouth harmonica. In Russian Circles’ “When The Mountain Comes to Muhammad”, at the 4:26 minute mark, we can hear a trumpet entering the already busy mix. Even though it’s a subtle element, Sundara Closed captures the very fine nuances in the higher notes, and produces this silky smooth edge that you’ll catch if you listen closely. Later on in the track, at 7:20 minute mark, we get to hear the trumpet in a less crowded setting. I heard this exact silly smooth edge in Miles Davis’ “Portia”. The latter track is where most headphones and IEMs sound either too blunt or too sharp, but the few that perform well are the ones that manage to stay on the edge without cutting and irritating your ears, as is the case here. It’s an experience, let me tell you that.

Soundstage & Isolation

I think this is the only area where Sundara sounds just average. It’s not bad, it’s not good. It sounds like a closed-back headphone, with the soundstage reaching no wider than outside of the ear-cups. It is enough to not make them sound congested and completely in your face. As for isolation, it dampens sound, but due to the comfy pads and the ergonomics of the headphones, it doesn’t create a vacuum-like seal.

Conclusion​

Some people were expecting to see the “closed-back version” of the Sundara, but HiFiMan made something new, something fresh, something that I am a big fan of. It’s likely not what people were expecting, but you can’t fault them… It’s hard to overlook the “Sundara” in the name. If I’m being honest, the market is oversaturated with headphones that try sound “reference-grade”, but end up being a poor attempt at just that. I’d rather a headphone bring something special and unique to the table. Of course, it must possess the necessary qualities in order to pull it off and sound good. In my opinion, the Sundara Closed does that. It’s a well-made headphone that’s different. Also, it’s quite the cozy pair of headphones, your ears will thank you for being able to enjoy music for hours on end.

If you’re a fan of a more intimate listening experience with extended highs, then I strongly suggest you give the Sundara Closed a listen. What will immediately strike you is its voluminous quality and lively presentation.

SMB-01L is the newest creation coming from the Japanese boutique manufacturer, Phonon. Although it is largely unknown to the general public, it is deeply respected & praised within the artist and professional musician communities thanks to its underground roots. Beside being trusted by many sound engineers and producers, Phonon’s SMB-02 has even made it to Depeche Mode’s 2013 live studio sessions. Need I say more?

After a widely successful Kickstarter campaign, the SMB-01L concept came to reality. For some reason, many people turn the page when they hear a product came from Kickstarter, and I don’t blame them. Many companies misuse the platform and do not deliver the product they promised. The story for Phonon is different. I asked Isao Kumano why he turned to Kickstarter, to which he replied, “Kickstarter was a good place to raise funds and sell our products because I don't have the contacts as a businessman”. The whole idea was to manufacture a headphone that would function like a pair of large [studio] monitors. This goal was achieved by using Foster Electrics MT050A 50mm bio-cellulose drivers.

Disclaimer: The SMB-01L has been provided to me free of charge. I am not affiliated with Phonon, am not receiving any monetary or other compensation for writing and publishing this review. The review is strictly based on my personal experience, and is free of bias from any external force (whether it be the manufacturer, others' opinions, or online influence). All my views and opinions are freely expressed.

Click to expand...

I did a little interview with Isao Kumano and Alex Prat, which you can read here.

Design​

Phonon’s professional audio background is apparent in the design department, as the SMB-01L looks like a pair of studio monitoring headphones. I can picture them camouflaging right into the studio environment with the all-black color scheme, the simplistic design, the integrated headband, and the rotating cups.

If you look at it from afar, it doesn’t look much special, but take a closer look and you will start to notice the details. For example, notice how the design is sharp on the outer side, and soft on the inner side of the headphones. If you look at the yoke and the headband construction, you will notice that the outer plastic pieces have bold lines and distinctly defined corners, whereas the plastic pieces on the inside soft and rounded off. This design language makes the face and the sides of the yoke pop, while the inner side simply compliments the whole headphone silhouette.

The ear-cups are very interestingly due to their soft shell shape. They almost look like an anchor, where you have that wide smiley base. This design makes the driver sit in an asymmetrical enclosure. To make matters even crazier, the upper half—which is flat—has 9 vented holes. However, these vents do not lead to the driver enclosure, because, as mentioned, the top half of it is missing. Instead, they lead to the inner side of the ear-cups, i.e. the area that the ear-pads cover. Of course, the main feature of the headphones is the switchable plate that lets you choose between a closed and a semi-open design. Once you take it off, you will find a felt-like pad with 7 holes, of which 3 are larger and 4 are smaller in size. If you decide to further explore the area and remove the pad, you will find yet another interesting feature, an internal grid.

Build Quality​

At $800, this headphone fits right under the premium consumer headphones branch. It’s not expensive enough to be appealing to only enthusiasts, and it’s not affordable enough to be considered by the masses. With more and more premium-built headphones coming to the market at increasingly affordable costs, the expectations from the more expensive headphones keep rising, as does the pressure of them meeting the adequate standards.

If there’s one area that can be improved on these headphones, it’s build quality. Even Isao himself acknowledged this, “We wanted to create headphones that would function like large monitors. We feel that we have achieved this in terms of sound quality, but we are still improving the durability of the product”. Some may see plastic as a negative indicator when quality is in question, but I’d argue against that. It all comes down to what plastic is being used. Many know about my admiration of the Sennheiser HD598, and one of the things I praise those headphones for is build quality. So much so that it’s my golden standard for plastic quality. The plastic used in them is top-notch. They are the reason why I am such a harsh critic when it comes to plastic. It’s hard to be tolerant of manufacturers who overlook their product’s build quality, especially if you acknowledge companies like iBasso and Aumkar Chandan’s Kaldas Research and Altiat, bothl of which challenged the whole industry by releasing ±$500 headphones with exceptional build quality.

Excluding the headband height adjustment and the backplates, the SMB-01L is fully made of plastic. What’s throwing it off is not the build quality per se, it’s rather finish of the plastic. When the surface of plastic is smooth, as it is on many headphones, it looks the best when it’s in matte or satin-like finish. Glossy and polished finishes are a topic of their own, but when the finish of a smooth plastic surface is shimmery (glittery), it gives it a cheap appearance, as is the case here.

And then there’s the pleather headband… It reminds me of HiFiMan, which is not a compliment!

I think that the pressure is extra high on Phonon due to its Japanese roots and because the SMB-01L came from a wildly successful Kickstarter campaign, but also because “Made in Japan” is a stamp of the highest quality standards. It is something that is praised around the world equally as much as it’s recognized as a symbol of pride in the Japanese culture. Quality-wise, I just wish that Phonon was more mindful of the material choice and the production side of things for its flagship model.

Cable​

On the brighter side of things, Phonon got it right with the cable. Back to basics, should I say. Everybody has their preferences, but I am at a point where I can confidently say that I am a rubber guy. I am not a big fan of fabric cables, and perhaps that’s because I haven’t yet come across a high-quality one yet. Over the years, I have been very vocal of my opinion on rubber cables, of which my favorite is the stock cable that comes with the Sennheiser HD598 headphones.

For a cable to be considered good by me, it needs to possess the following qualities [in no order]:

1. Durability
2. Flexibility
3. Lightweight
4. Thin
[Bonus]
5. Easy to put away
6. Nice finish

Durability is hard to determine without long-term use, but you can get a general idea by feeling out the cable.
Flexibility is a very important factor for me, because the last thing I want is to be fighting the cable. I like the cable to be formless, like water. Rubber braided cables do this the best.
The lighter the cable, the better. I do not want to feel the weight or the presence of the cable; it should be invisible.
Thickness is somewhat related to point 3. The cable should be invisible. I do not want to feel its presence, and there’s nothing worse than a bulky cable.
When I roll up the cable around my hand to put it away, it must hold its form and not tangle up or ‘explode’.
If the cable has nice sheathing, it can be appealing in appearance and pleasant to the touch. For example, standard (non-braided) rubber cables with a matte sheathing are considered premium by me (e.g. HD598’s cable).

I’m sure audiophiles and cable lovers want to choke me dead, and I am fine with that. The points above are the criteria that a cable has to meet in order to be considered good or great by me, and yes, it’s not about ‘sound performance’.

With all of this out of the way, SMB-01L’s cable checks all but point 5. It’s a well-made cable, and while not the prettiest, it certainly is a good rubber cable. The sheathing is a bit shinier than I prefer, and it’s not perfectly smooth (it’s wrinkly). However, it’s the premium housings that make it stand out as a great cable. On the headphone end, there is a slim TRRS 3.5mm connector, which has a slim metal housing with two textured grip rings, and Phonon’s logo in a golden finish. On the amp end, there is a bulkier housing that’s also made of metal. Unlike the headphone end housing, which is black, the housing here is in a stunning silver mirror-like finish. I’m usually against mirror finishes due to them being fingerprint magnets, but that’s not the case here. The housing manages to retain the mirror-like look by being very shiny. Although fingerprints are visible, they are immediately noticeable and can only seen up-close.

Comfort & fit​

Another field the SMB-01L got right is comfort. It’s hard to screw up comfort with velour or suede, but it requires a lot of effort to achieve comfort with leather. For this reason, I am happy to report that the sheepskin leather pads are quite comfy. There’s nothing really to complain about, as Phonon followed all the necessary steps to make a comfortable set of headphones. The headphones don’t even get too hot after long listening sessions, which is a common issue with leather pads. I can only assume that this is due to the vents on the ear-cups, but also due to the vented ear-pads. Allow me to clarify. The ear-pads themselves don’t use a perforated design, but they do feature large holes on the bottom, and this can be felt if you run your finger on the inner-lip of the pads. Thanks to the firm clamp force, you don’t have to worry about the headphones falling off your head during your intimate head-banging sessions. In addition, the ear-cups have 90˚ of swivel and pivot rotation, allowing them to adjust to anybody’s head. It’s got it all!

While I can agree that the materials of the headband and the ear-pads are nothing extraordinary, the versatility of the circular ear-cups makes up for it. I am talking about the compatibility with after-market ear-pads. So far, I only had a chance to test iBasso’s SR2 pads and Dekoni’s Elite Hybrid (for Fostex TH and Denon AH series). My review is based on the performance with the stock pads, although Dekoni’s pads are the ones I’m privately enjoying the most due to their comfort. I couldn’t resist the coziness! The best part of all is that I can switch the pads in less than half a minute.

Sound Performance​

Lows​

After listening to electronic music classic albums such as Justice’s “Cross”, Giorgio Moroder’s “From Here To Eternity… And Back”, Burial’s “Untrue”, I realized that this is Phonon’s territory. Considering the company’s electronic music background, it would be quite awkward if the SMB-01L didn’t perform well in this field. What stands out above rest in the lows region is how controlled they are. Making a headphone with boomy bass isn’t that challenging. What is, is creating a headphone that has elevated bass, but retains full control of it. In fact, the first thing that caught my attention when first listening to these headphones, was the transient speed of the lows. In some headphones, the transient speed can be almost analytical, with the lows always sounding very punchy and articulate, on the SMB-01L, it only sounds like that when needed. I found this to be beneficial, because maybe you don’t always want the bass to be aggressive and “defined in your face”.

Let’s talk about the performance with my two standard test tracks, “Hydrogen” by MOON, and “Smoking Mirrors” by Lee Curtiss. In the first track, we can hear the previously-mentioned transient speed, whereas in the latter track, there is a greater volume and thud to the kick. Regarding the mid-bass, something that I heard in various other tracks is how the bass is impressively voluminous and deep. When you combine all these characteristics, you get a very clean and thick bass response, which is something that’s desirable in a lot of different fields and genres of music.

Sub-bass though, is something else. I see it as the headphone’s strongest trait. It absolutely smashes the performance in Hans Zimmer’s “Why So Serious?” (3:26 minute mark), with the sub-bass having great presence whilst remaining clean and under control. It pulsates in your ear, and it hits the sweet spot at the deepest lows. The same can be heard in Robbie Robertson’s “Theme for The Irishman”, where the SMB-01L perfectly keeps up with the depth of the cello and the drums. It doesn’t growl or shake your head, but it fills your ears with this bold mass of bass volume. This same volume can be heard in the introduction of Arctic Monkey’s “Do I Wanna Know?”.

Mids​

Generally speaking, the mid-range is safely tuned. If you are listening to any modern music, I doubt you’ll come across a track that will sound bothersome with these. However, it should be said that the great deep low end extends into the mids, often giving vocals that oomph. This is especially audible in “audiophile” tracks, which usually have intense and forward vocals. Yao Si Ting’s “Speak Softly, Love” can be taken as an example. On one hand, it makes instruments sound great and gives them depth, but on the other, it hurts vocals. The good news is that it’s not extreme to the point where vocals sound bloated.

Even though this is a V-shaped headphone, the mid-range is pretty decent. There’s no funny business going on. It doesn’t sound too thin, it doesn’t sound too thick, there’s no odd tonality, it just sounds decent. Just like there are no negative qualities, there are no miracles either. Usually, the only time when things got problematic was in poorly recorded tracks. Whereas the mid-range is mostly tame with no particular part of it sticking out, in essy tracks and vinyl rips, peaks considerably stick out in the mix. This quality is audible in Joan Baez’s “Babe I’m Gonna Leave You”, Sia’s “Elastic Heart (Piano Version)”, Yao Is Ting’s “Speak Softly, Love”, and tracks alike. When I mention vinyl rips, I am referring to the crackling that’s ‘usually’ audible. That’s about the only time when you will hear this headphone sounding hot in the mids. Other than that, the mid-range is safely tuned.

On a more positive note, strings sound very nice. This is one area where that bottom-end extension comes in very handy. Each string pluck has weight and can be felt, and that’s a quality I am always after when it comes to strings. I particularly love listening to acoustic stringed instruments, and when the bottom-end is missing, the timbre is a complete miss. Without the weight, instruments tend to sound digital and electronic to my ears. In other words, they lack the very acoustic qualities that set them apart from digital instruments. Fortunately, my ears were quite happy listening to Deep Purple’s “Soldier of Fortune”, Pink Floyd’s “Hey You”, and Yao Is Ting’s “One More Time”, where the fine nuance of the acoustic strings is captured spot-on by the SMB-01L.

Highs​

Finally, we’ve made it to my favorite part of this headphone—treble.

I’m usually the type of pal that likes the top-end to be sharp and clean, and am a big sparkle junkie. As long as it’s done well, it’s something I can appreciate in any headphone. It’s sharp enough when my ears tingle from it, that’s my my rule of thumb for treble.

Much like the mids, there is a “safe” roll-off, meaning that you won’t have to worry about any sharp peaks piercing your ears. In fact, I went through just about every track I would otherwise use to test whether a headphone has a great treble extension, and in none of these tracks did I hear any sign of brightness or sharpness. Among those tracks are: Miles Davis’ “Portia”, Sia’s “Chandelier (Piano Version” (chorus), “Elastic Heart (Piano Version)” (2nd verse, 2nd & 3rd chorus, outro), Travis Scott’s “Stop Trying to Be God” (Stevie Wonder’s mouth harmonica 4:43 - 5:43), and of course, Jeff Healey’s cover “Blue Jean Blues” (electric guitar 4:13 - 5:06). At most, SMB-01L reaches “shine” level of treble (sibilance>sparkle>shine>sheen>warm), and it takes quite a lot to push it to that measure.

If there’s no sparkle, how come this is my favorite part? It all comes down to the unique tuning present at the upper-end. The edge and the energy are in percussion, which might be the first time I’ve come across such tuning. Not only did I appreciate it, I full-on enjoy it! The conclusion I drew from this experience is that I’m after sparkle, no matter where it is—a true sparkle junkie.

When I say “percussion”, think cymbals, hi-hats, triangles, etc.. Whether it’s Russian Circles, Daft Punk, or Led Zeppelin, no matter the genre or the quality of the tracks, the treble in the percussion department never disappoints. It’s always crispy and it pops. The very first time the SMB-01L surprised me with its treble is in one of my standard bass test tracks, MOON’s “Hydrogen”. After the introduction settles in, around the 00:46 minute mark, I never heard the clicking so distinctly. It was as if I was listening to the song for the first time in my life. It’s odd, but it’s quite a joy exploring music with the percussion in the foreground.

Closed-back vs Semi-open​

Why limit yourself to one when you can have both?

The first thing you will notice when switching between the two is sound isolation. As soon as you go with the semi-open plates, you will be back to reality. The closed-back plates don’t give you vacuum-like isolation, and that doesn’t come off as surprising considering how well-vented these are.

While sound does get affected, it’s not to the extent that some may have expected. Consider it more as fine-tuning than completely switching things up. What the two backplates allow you to do is tweak the tuning, rather than altering the whole character of the headphones. If you want a more immersive sound experience, you can pop the closed-back plates. If you want to lay back and relax, you can go with the semi-open plates. The latter tone down the lows, make the mids more voluminous, and expand the soundstage. What’s most awarding when switching back between these plates are technical details. I already mentioned how the soundstage opens up, but separation and detail retrieval are two other areas where the semi-open plates have the upper edge on.

Conclusion​

​

The SMB-01L is a headphone with tons of potential. If you’re a crafty person who loves DIY modding, I think it’s the dream for just that. One of the easiest and most accessible mods are the ear-pads. The circular shape of the ear-cups allows it to be compatible with the majority of the aftermarket pads, as long as you get the sizing right! The backplate is the second step. You can experiment with an endless number of materials, thicknesses, and hole shapes. The same can be done with dampening materials and the space below the plate. You can go to the extremes, if you wish. This would include removing the internal metal grid and completely playing around with all the empty space in the housing. The potential is definitely there, but whether you are willing to dedicate your time to utilize it is entirely up to you. The possibilities and combinations of what you can do to this headphone are infinite, it’s just a matter of how passionate you are about it.

It’s an exceptional fun-sounding headphone even in its stock form. The detail retrieval is on another level! I used the iBasso DX300 MAX for the critical listening. Considered to be a “reference” DAP, it does not color or correct imperfections, but instead emphasizes them. I found the iBasso DX320 + AMP11Mk1 to be the only combination that toned down the ‘popping’ peaks, making it the warmest option. Options, you have a lot of those with these headphones. My favorite part of the SMB-01L comes down to how you get to experience familiar tracks for the first time all over again. This is a headphone that is meant for jamming to music!

Saving the best for last...​

After much effort and back-and-forth, I was able to convince Phonon to do something special for you. First of all, I want to say that I am very thankful to the whole Phonon team for granting my wish! Exclusive to my Head-Fi readers, you can now get the SMB-01L for ¥52500* (25% off Japan retail price, ¥70000). That's over 50% off global retail price! To apply the discount, email the code "voja" to info@phonon-inc.com.

*Excluding VAT, customs fees, and shipping costs.
Please note that the discount is not applicable for orders from the European or US warehouses. All orders will be shipped exclusively from Japan, with worldwide shipping available.

Update (13.6.23): The discount has ended.

The headphone industry has been pretty still for the past few years, and while I cannot deny that there have been a number of exciting releases, the companies have mostly stayed the same. The big bunch (e.g. Sennheiser, Sony, Audeze, Focal) have been and continue to dominate the market. It’s true, we have seen new companies come to the market. However, we have yet to see one step up and operate at a greater scale. Meze Audio is an exception, having grown from a small boutique manufacturer to a prominent high-end headphones manufacturer.

Aumkar Chandan is an exception, but for different reasons. He has been challenging the industry by delivering high-performance headphones at a reasonable price, unlike other companies. Once you experience his creations, the word “value” gets a whole different meaning. Pricing is not the only rule-breaking speciality, as both his business ventures offer bespoke customization options! If you like his creations, but want to get that personalized touch, that option is on the table. It’s far from speccing a car. After all, Aumkar draws inspiration from Horacio Pagani and Christian von Koenigsegg.

Disclaimer​

The CAL.1H has been provided to me free of charge. I am neither gaining any financial benefit from Altiat, Aumkar, or Kaldas Research, nor am I affiliated with any of them. The review is strictly based on my personal experience, and is free of bias from an external force (whether it be the manufacturer, others' opinions, or online influence). All my views and opinions are freely expressed in the review.
All photography is original, by me.

Note: The CAL.1H you see in the photography is a review sample. It is a faulty Orange Stone finish, hence why it appears dirty orange and brown-ish. Orange Stone is a bright orange finish.

Click to expand...

Design

When Aumkar first shared the CAL.1H with me, I felt butterflies in my stomach, and I’m beginning to realize that he is very good at causing those.

Usually the new kid on the block stays within the lines, Kaldas Research and Altiat, however, shatter all norms with their chin high up. They’re in their own lane, if you will. If the former’s headphone looks like it came straight from Alien, then Altiat’s gets away being the Pagani Huayra or the Koenigsegg CCX. Speaking of cars, over the last two years or so, I have been dreaming of a headphone heavily drawing inspiration from the automotive world. Among the many aspects that can be appreciated in sports cars and hypercars is the design aspect. Everything flows. It’s one of the few instances where you have a team of designers being able to execute their jobs at the most advanced level. The luxury automotive industry in particular is where this idea of customization and personalization is present in its most extreme form. I’ve been waiting for speccing to be offered in the headphone industry for years. Aumkar finally brought this idea to life with the “Kaldas Bespoke” program.

There are three distinct parts of the CAL.1H: headband, yoke, ear-cups

The diamond-shaped headband is made up of two independent metal strips that are screwed right into the yoke. The height adjustment system works with the help of two plastic parts that hold the leather strap. These plastic pieces can slide up and down a rod that is directly screwed into the center of the yoke. An interesting feature of this system is that it allows the leather strap to be rotated inwards and outwards, giving you the option to choose between having a forward or backward grip on your head.

Most headphones feature a fork-style yoke, but if there is one recognizable design choice in Aumkar’s two headphones it is the single yoke attached to the back of the ear-cups. Whether or not a functionally beneficial choice, it is something that is unique. In the case of the CAL.1H, it wouldn’t be the same headphone without it. I also found it interesting how the yoke was designed to be round and soft everywhere but the ending point, which has semi-aggressive corners. They almost bite!

As for the ear-cups, no words will do them justice. These babies right here are the star of the show. Many authors tend to use poetry to describe sound, but that’s something I never allowed in my work because it provides no value other than entertainment. However, if there is one time where I’ll make an exception, it’s here, talking about the design. It would go something along the lines of:

Their graceful curves, a seductive invitation, begging us to come and be enveloped in their warm embrace. Their sleek contours, a tantalizing tease, like a sheer fabric flowing over their divine body. The smooth lines, a symphony in motion, beckon us to touch and explore every inch of their being. Forbidden to the touch, like a work of art, to be admired only from afar. A mesmerizing sight, dunes, they are.


Build Quality

Anodized unibody aluminum ear-cups at $400?! You could only ever see that coming from Aumkar. I also believe that this is the main selling point of these headphones. The current trend in the industry is to price the headphones higher, and higher, and then there’s Altiat and Kaldas Research, going completely against the grain.

The ear-cups are SOLID. It’s hard to imagine 6000 series aluminum to be anything other than well-built. The edges are clean, the surface is smooth, the curves are smooth for the most part, there are no weak points. The only complaint I have is that close to the yoke there are these “cuts” where the heavy curvature is. Other than that, the manufacturing is spotless! The precision on the construction is quite something. It would be far from a stretch to say that no manufacturer offers a headphone under $1k that can match Altiat’s build quality. I think the closest you will get is Spirit Torino’s headphones, and for your information, the cheapest one starts at €1600.

Moving on to the headphone yoke, there are no complaints. It’s also made of anodized aluminum and is hard as a rock. I’m happy to report that there are no weak points or flexing. And then there are the spring steel headband strips… These two, I’m telling you, these two and I don’t get along. I can’t figure out exactly what it is, but they don’t provide stability, causing the ear-cups to be very floppy. Perhaps this is because of how shallow the connecting point is?

I would like to put the accent on how insane it is to have solid aluminum ear-cups at only $399. It’s not impressive, it’s mind-boggling. If we only take the ear-cups into consideration, I could easily see them in a pair of headphones that cost two, even three times the CAL.1H’s MSRP. Personally, I know that the profit margins on these headphones are very low, and I know that because I know how Aumkar views his supporters—he makes sure you get your money’s worth down to the last penny!

There’s no need for me to directly name the headphones at this price range, you know them. I’m going to shamelessly repeat this numerous times throughout this article, the word “value” gains a whole different meaning after you touch anything from Kaldas Research or Altiat. It’s one thing to be making headphones out of passion, but it’s entirely another to be sacrificing potential profit for the sake of making it affordable to more people. He is using his inherited family business, a manufacturing factory, to his detriment, but for the benefit of his customers.


Comfort

In all honesty, discovering comfort with these headphones was a journey.

When I first put the headphones on my head, I sighed in disappointment—they didn’t fit me. The ear-pads didn’t seal behind my ears. It was clear that this was directly resulted by the lack of swivel. In my opinion, this is a flaw in design, but that’s a topic in itself. Usually, this would be a problem that I would overcome by bending the yoke, but in this case, the yoke consisted of two independent metal strips. I completely demolished those strips due to the number of times I bent them. I didn’t break them, but the paint cracked off and the whole headband structure was deformed. Out of the box, the clamp force was fairly relaxed, which was quite bothersome. Whenever I leaned slightly forward, the headphone would slide off. I’m after perfection, so I couldn’t start the critical judgement process until I got the fit right. In this case, it meant that I didn’t stop fiddling with it for a month. Whenever I though it was perfect, I laid it off to the side, only to find myself picking it up after a few days, putting it on and thinking to myself, “This isn’t it, it can be better.”.

You cannot imagine the relief I felt after finally, finally getting it right! After going through this journey, I realized something. I am the problem. The majority of people have fat around their neck and on their face, and therefore won’t face my problems. Although Aumkar reassured me that he received no negative feedback about comfort from the couple hundred customers, the only way the CAL.1H could truly be a “one-size-fits-all” headphone would by allowing the ear-cups to rotate horizontally. That way the clamp force would be evenly distributed and the ear-cups would sit at the right angle for everyone.

Anyhow, after tailoring the headband to my head, everything was in place. Now my ears comfortably sit within the ear-pads, the Alcantara feels pleasant on the skin, and the seal is perfect. What’s more to say about the material choice for the pads than “Alcantara”? Considering what you are getting at this price point from Altiat, it’s silly, but I have to say that the ear-pads did appear to be more boutique-like. The inner stitching on the pads started ripping on my pair, so perhaps higher quality materials could be used. But, once again, it’s silly to ask for this. However, I think it’s an important piece of critical feedback that’s essential to the manufacturer! When I covered the Kaldas Research RR1 Conquest, I suggested for the leather headband to be reinforced because it was way too thin and took no effort for it to rip. Later on, more people started sharing the same experience. To no surprise, Aumkar took the feedback seriously and made the headband on this headphone more reliable by making the faux leather slightly thicker, but also by including foam lining.

Although it was tedious process early on, self-tailoring paid off in a major way for me. I truly feel like I utilized the CAL.1H to its full potential, especially after tightening the clamp force and ensuring that the cups seal evenly all-around. Keep in mind that this could be the very reason why your listening experience differs from mine!


Cable

To keep it straightforward, there’s no nicer way to put that I find the cable horrendous. I’d rather there be no cable, that’s how I honestly feel about it. This is where I get nitpicky, and I ask you to forgive me for just that.

Back when I covered the RR1 Conquest from Kaldas Research, I was happy that Aumkar actually came through with a high-quality rubber cable. Actually, I was more than happy. That cable was perfection. Also, remember that I am not a guy who judges cables by ‘sound performance’. When it comes to cables affecting sound, I am neither a denier nor a believer. My expectation from a cable can vary depending on what type of a headphone is in question. In this case, we have this absolutely stunning and slim CAL.1H, and then there’s the cable… I know one thing, if a cable makes me not want to pick up a pair of headphones, I know for a fact it’s not my cup of tea. More than that—if my opinion holds any value—I don’t think the cable is CAL.1H’s cup of tea either.

If the cable doesn’t compliment a pair of headphones, the least it should do is not get in their way. What’s all this yadi, yadi, yada for? In my eyes, the CAL.1H is a very progressive (ahead of time), while the cable is taking it back to the stone age.

First of all, Mini XLR… Really? I’d have a different stance if a big headphone was in question, something that’s intended for stationary use, but that’s not the case here. At most, I see 2.5mm connectors being used. To think of any custom connector solutions would be too much to ask for. With or without a locking mechanism, 2.5mm connectors would be a much more suitable solution for the CAL.1H.

Back to the stock cable. More specifically, I want to talk about the wire part of it. The sheathing appears to be braided nylon, and I don’t like it whatsoever. It’s stiff, it’s coarse, and it’s kinda bulky. A reoccurring problem I noticed in Mini XLR headphone cables is their directionality is overlooked. How so? In order to connect Mini XLR connectors, you must align the notch on the male end with the female end. What manufacturers don’t do is make the cable connectors align with the headphone connectors. This would otherwise not be a problem, but when you have a stiff cable, it creates tension and makes the cable twist in an odd angle. The other problem is flexibility. It’s not a cable that likes to be twisted. If you put two and two together, it's not hard to imagine what happens when you have to twist the connectors to align them—disaster!

Oh, you thought it couldn’t get any worse? The Y-splitter… Roll the Naked Gun epic facepalm clip.
At this point, this is a crime. Imagine me in tears, because I don’t understand what this massive chunk is doing on the cable! It’s H-U-G-E.

It hurts to write this wall of negativity. It truly does, because the CAL.1H deserves better. I am just fulfilling my role as a critic, that’s what I have to do. I believe I know Aumkar well enough to know that he appreciates this sort of honesty, as he takes in all the feedback and moves forward. It’s 2023, and it’s time for big bulky headphone cable to go away! We need more modern solutions like Estron’s T2 premium miniature connectors. Small & reliable, that’s the way to go.

Sound Performance​

Aumkar was transparent, “CAL.1H is not trying to break new grounds. It's an honest take on Electrodynamic transmission”. It is not claiming to be the next game changer, instead, it’s just aims to be good-sounding headphone. Nothing more, nothing less. Aumkar must've started out with the concept of the CAL.1H, and then it was just a matter of making it sound good. If I’m not mistaken, the concept were the aluminum ear-cups and their design. Sennhesier’s HD650 has been mentioned in comparison, and I’ll try to make the comparison between the CAL.1H and the HD6XX, which is the closest headphone I have to the HD650. Since most are already familiar with the differences between the HD6XX and the HD650, it shouldn’t be hard to draw some conclusions. As you are about to find out why, I find the CAL.1H and the 6XX to be two different flavors.

Lows​

As was apparent in my standard test tracks [“Hydrogen” by MOON, “Smoking Mirrors by Lee Curtiss”, “Do I Wanna Know?” by Arctic Monkeys], the two headphones are worlds apart.

This is just one of the headphones that sounds so natural to the ears that you may as well melt into your chair. It’s so mellow! And there’s no other word that better describes it than “mellow”. It’s not flat, it’s not overwhelming, it’s just the right amount. The transitional speed is not overly tight nor overly loose, it’s just right. It heavily reminds me of my beloved iBasso SR2, especially the mid-bass. CAL.1H has more weight in the mid-bass, likely due to more lower mid-bass presence, giving it more thud and heft.

Whereas CAL.1H can be considered as “wet”, the HD6XX is the polar opposite, “dry”. It’s flat and hollow in comparison. The latter doesn’t have full-body bass, but that doesn’t mean that you lose out on all the nuance in the low end. Because of its sound signature, lows stick out, but in the most delicate and subtle way. On the other hand, the CAL.1H, like its build, is heavy in sound. Thanks to its open-back design, the volume has where to escape and give it some room to breathe.

Sub-bass is also soft (in quality, not quantity) like the mid-bass. It is surprisingly full and deep for an open-back headphone, Especially to the extent that the CAL.1H is open. No, it doesn’t growl, but it certainly fills your ears with heavy presence of sub-bass tones. For example, the physical sensation of rumble is something I experienced on the SR2, a semi-open headphone. I wouldn’t expect to hear it in an open-back. In Hans Zimmer’s “Why so Serious?”, at 3:26, you can hear the sub-bass tones pulsate with a fair amount of volume. The same quality can be heard in Robbie Robertson’s “Theme for The Irishman”, more specifically, the cello and the drums. The HD6XX shares similar qualities, but sub-bass has significantly less definition and presence.

Mids​

For whatever reason, the first album that I found myself listening to was Russian Circles’ “Geneva”. Although the band is a recent discovery of mine, I immediately fell in love with it. It’s an experience, it’s not music. It takes you to another place, another planet. Instead of dissecting each element in their highly complex mixes, I will focus on the overall ‘image’.

Fathom, the first track in the album, was where I immediately noticed how smooth-sounding the CAL.1H is. Regardless of how intense the track gets, it retains control at all times. For example, right at the 2:30 minute mark, ‘chaos’ erupts in the track. CAL.1H keeps it tame, warm—no signs of protruding edge. The HD6XX, on the other hand…


If you are a masochist, you’ll prefer the HD6XX.

Still focusing on “Geneva”, the HD6XX is forward [in the negative sense of the word], while the CAL.1H is laid-back. Hard on the ears, grungy, grainy, harsh, are all words I find fitting to describe what my ears are hearing through the HD6XX. It made me feel uneasy, causing fatigue in my ears and even giving me a headache. That’s the theme of the album, but do you really want to physically torture yourself?

You know how it is with me and acoustic stringed instruments, if a headphone doesn’t reproduce them right, I can’t bond with it. In this regard, the CAL.1H doesn’t disappoint one bit. In fact, it sounds excellent! It benefits from the low mid-range extension, allowing it to capture each pluck accurately. You feel each pluck. It’s challenging for headphones to truthfully capture this nuance of plucks, and some do it more accurately than others. The HD6XX doesn’t have the same magic, but it has the upper mid-range extension. When you compare the two, plucks sound concerningly flat and lifeless on the HD6XX, regardless of the sparkle it, in theory, benefits from. This is audible in both the introduction of Deep Purple’s “Soldier of Fortune” and Pink Floyd’s “Hey You”. I was awestruck when I heard Yao Si Ting’s “Speak Softly, Love”, where the CAL.1H captured the most delicate nuances in the plucks, with each pluck gently tickling my ear. This is the stuff that I’m after!

However, it's not all sunshine and rainbows as I might’ve portrayed. At first, I was listening to the CAL.1H and found it to sound very pleasing and refined with vocals… Then I took out the HD6XX, and boy, was I stunned! The HD6XX sounds much more neutral and transparent with vocals, they sound more accurate. Piano notes also sound more pleasing on the HD6XX, but again, that’s thanks to that upper mid-range extension. The CAL.1H gives piano notes the bottom depth, while it keeps the upper end smooth and soft. When listening to Sia’s “Chandelier (Piano Version)” and “Elastic Heart (Piano Version)”, the vocals on the CAL.1H sounded muddy-ish. Personally, I believe this could be fixed if you play around with the dampening materials below the ear-pads, because the one that’s pre-installed is kind of chubby. This would explain where that muddiness comes from. If you take the ear-pads off of the HD6XX, you will see that it only has a thin acoustic foam-like cover.

It should be noted that the CAL.1H sounds muddier only when compared to the HD6XX. On its own, it doesn’t scream “muddy”. I might say that the vocals don’t sound the most resolving, but I would never call them muddy. The mid-range is tuned to be easy to listen to. What I like about this tuning is that it pulls it off without sounding lifeless. While poppy sounds are soft, more intense vocals retain the edge without coming off as sharp.

Highs​

They stay warm most of the time.

Like the mid-range, they don’t lose life and most certainly don’t sound boring. Both of these characteristics are very common with warm sound signatures, and it’s one of the reasons why I dislike warm headphones. I am looking for that energy up top, and that’s because it’s one of the most attractive elements in music to me. Openly being a sparkle junkie, I will say that I can appreciate the smooth top end of the CAL.1H.

Peaks retain their edge and there’s still a little bit of a buzz from them, which I appreciate very much. Some tracks that showcase this quality are: Miles Davis’ “Portia”, Stevie Wonder’s mouth harmonica in Travis Scott’s “Stop Trying to Be God” (4:43 - 5:43), Ronnie James Dio’s “Dream On”. The last track in particular is a great example of these headphones’ mean side. I love it because it isn’t tame and boring like other warm headphones I listened to. It has a wilder side which it doesn’t show often, but when it does, it’s great! On the other hand, lower treble features a greater roll-off.
Percussion [e.g. snare drums] doesn’t pop or shimmer. For example, Alphaville’s “Summer In Berlin” and “Sounds Like A Melody” are tracks where I’m used to hearing bright snares that pop, but with the CAL.1H they are not as forward. Similarly, percussion is relaxed as opposed to snappy.

As a whole, the upper end is laid-back, but peaks still have a tasteful amount of shimmer which makes sure the treble never gets dull.

Soundstage

Considering that the rear end of the headphone driver is fully exposed, CAL.1H's soundstage width doesn't come off as surprising. However, what's more interesting is how intimate it sounds. It's not airy as you would imagine it would be, instead it it has an intimate central presentation. So, the middle position is forward in a way, while elements panned to the outside go far out. "Hey You" by Pink Floyd features guitar strums that are audibly seperated from vocals. The vocals sit in the middle, while the guitar strums sit on the outside. It is not as though they are panned extreme far apart, instead, they are panned in a way that gives the mix a 3D-like presentation. Another great track is Rare Bird's "As Your Mind Flies". The farthest point I caught was 20-30cm outside of the ear-cups, which is exceptionally wide. Even in King Crimson's "Epitapth (including “March for No Reason” and “Tomorrow and Tomorrow”)” you can hear the elements varying in how far out they sit in the mix.

Conclusion​

Kaldas Research made an impressive entrance in the headphones market with its RR1 Conquest, but who would’ve thought that Aumkar would open a second company and do it all over again? This time Aumkar came out with a ‘humble’ dynamic driver headphone. As has already been said by himself, it’s an honest take on a dynamic headphone. However, Altiat is breaking new grounds with the level of customization it is offering.

CAL.1H is a sculpture of its own, there’s no other way about it. Whatever design language Aumkar speaks, it isn’t from this Earth. Sonically, it’s a mellow-sounding headphone that will [physically] last you a lifetime. You can listen to it for hours upon hours without ever having to worry about fatigue. There isn't more of a fitting profile than that of someone who is looking for a warm headphone that still retains life in music. If you’re a gamer too, then I’ve got good news for you. These are the only third pair of headphones that I found to be listenable and suitable for gaming. Besides the Sennheiser HD598 and the Dekoni Audio Blue, I found all my other audiophile headphones to make the gunshots sound unbearably harsh.

Mind you, I’ve been unfair to the CAL.1H from the start. I put it to the test as a $1000 headphone instead of a $450 headphone that it is. I was confident it could withstand it, hence why there was not one bit of criticism that I spared it from. At the base price of only $399—a bargain—you have enough room to play around with the headphones to make them suit your taste.

Aumkar Chandan is on the path to become the most promising upcoming figure in the industry. Technically, he has only been in the industry for 3 years, yet he proves that the sky is the limit as he continues to break all norms. This is what happens when you have a progressive mind that does something out of pure passion. Also, let’s not forget that Aumkar’s primary source of income is from contract manufacturing and R&D. If he were to shift 100% of his focus to his audio business(es) and were to have greater financial resources at his disposal, I firmly believe he would go on to be among the biggest names in the industry. There’s still a lifetime ahead of him, so it’s not out of question for it to come true. This said, I hope he continues to push the boundaries and chase perfection!

iBasso continues the DX1×× series with the DX170. But is it worth $50 over the DX160?



Design & Build Quality

In 2018, iBasso released the DX150. This $499 DAP will most likely be remembered for the insane set of features it offered for its price, but I remember it for its design. It was designed like a tank, very industrial-like. This changed with the DX160, which went in the opposite design direction — smooth and sleek. The DX170 appears to have the same design of the DX160. It followed the DX320 design language with the volume wheel being silver, as opposed to gold. The accent color of the rings around the audio outputs remained gold. Other than that, the backplate follows the same design accents of the DX300 MAX and the DX320 —satin-like finish (with no gradient) and glossy text. It also doesn’t feature iBasso’s logo on the back, just the “DX170” model name. The back panel is curved, much like it was on the DX300 and the DX320. As a whole, it’s a very smooth design with no sharp edges. My favorite design element is the design of the chassis around the volume wheel. Speaking of which, the volume wheel is phenomenal. The design, the functionality, it’s spot-on. I also really like the round volume buttons, and they are also very functional and have a nice soft click. The soft click of the media control buttons becomes almost indistinguishable with the TPU case on.

Size? Don’t get me started. I LOVE IT. If I’m being asked, it’s the perfect size. The boring official dimension specs are: 124.5mm*70mm*15mm (4.9in*2.76in*0.59in).

It comes in three color options: black, grey, and blue. The unit I have on hand is the black version.

Build-wise, it’s quite premium. The chassis is made of CNC-machined aluminum, and on the back there is a glass panel. There is no part that feels flimsy. The buttons don’t rattle either, so, as said, quite premium. At just 165g, it’s very lightweight, which is always a plus. However, since this is aluminum we are talking about, it’s highly recommended to use the included TPU case to avoid any scratches or damage to the chassis.

Disclaimer​

The DX170 was provided to me free of charge. I am neither paid nor am I gaining any financial benefit from iBasso for writing this review. The review is based on my personal experience, it is completely free of any bias from an external force (whether that's online influence, other people's opinion, or the manufacturer itself).

Click to expand...

Features & Functions

On the bottom, there is a 3.5mm single-ended output and a 4.4mm balanced output. Unlike the DX300/DX320, where all the outputs (3.5mm, 2.5mm, 4.4mm on the stock amp module) double as phone/line outs, the DX170’s 3.5mm output triples as a phone out, line out, and a S/PDIF coaxial out (PCM 24bit/384kHz, DoP DSD128), while the 4.4mm only serves as a phone out. Its function can be selected through software.
On the top, there is a USB-C port. It supports QC3.0, PD2.0, and MTK PE Plus quick charging. The USB-C port is also used for data transfer and the USB DAC function.
On the left side, there is a single Micro SD card slot which supports SDHX/SDCX up to 2TB of storage.
On the right side, are located the media control buttons. There is a volume wheel and three round buttons (Next, Previous, and Play/Stop).

Display

The DX170 comes with a 5” 1080p IPS display. Per iBasso, it has: 16.7 million colors, 445ppi retina display, 480cd/m2 screen brightness, 2.5D Corning glass panel, 95% light transmission and sRGB color gamut.

It’s actually a very nice display. It’s more saturated than DX300’s display, but has a greater dynamic range than DX320’s display. The whites are also brighter than on the DX320. I think it’s closer in quality to the DX300 than to the DX320, and the DX300 has a jaw-dropping display.

SoC

This time around, iBasso opted for the. When iBasso said it exceeds the Qualcomm 430/425, which is commonly used by players of the same price range, it clearly was referring to Shanling’s M6 2021 ($569) and M6 Pro ($799), which use Snapdragon’s 430 SoC, and HiBy’s R5 Gen 2 ($449), which uses the Snapdragon 425 SoC.

While 32GB of internal storage is acceptable amount, 2GB of LPDDR4 will likely leave the majority craving for more. Sure thing, if your primary use will consist of light web browsing and listening to music, it’s enough. However, I cannot say it’s not noticeable that the whole Android experience is not as smooth as the big boys. With that, I am referring to iBasso’s higher end models.

In my opinion, the SoC is what’s holding back this DAP from its full potential. If something more capable was used, I think the appeal would be greater due to the endless possibilities (e.g. playing games, streaming films, watching high quality YouTube videos, etc.).

DAC
The DX300 stood its ground with 4x Cirrus CS43198, and now we have the DX170 with 2x CS43131 chips. Hey, half is better than nothing, right? Both the CS43198 and the CS43131 are Cirrus Logic’s flagship DAC chips, and both share just about the same specs and features. However, the main difference between the two is that the CS43198 is a DAC only chip, while the CS43131 has the addition of a built-in amplifier. iBasso decided to implement an “exclusive OPAMP+BUF amplification after the CS43131”.

That's not where the feature set stops. iBasso also implemented a FPGA (Field Programmable Gate Array) in Master mode. The FPGA works between the Soc and the DAC. It basically requests data from the SoC and then sends that data to the DAC. The FPGA works in Master mode using two fs NDK oscillators as the clocks while synchronizing all audio clocks. This way any jitter is reduced and minimized in order to achieve the cleanest audio processing. @MoonAudio explained it much clearer than me:
"The DX170 utilizes the FPGA-Master technology developed by iBasso. The FPGA-Master, as the audio system controller, directly requests audio data from the SoC, and plays a major role in signal reproduction and maintaining signal integrity. It synchronizes and generates all audio clocks at the same time utilizing two NDK femtosecond oscillators to achieve a fully synchronized single clock source. The FPGA and NDK oscillators also reduce jitter to an extremely low level, building a clean digital audio signal."

The following are the supported audio formats: MQA 8x, APE, FLAC,WAV, WMA,
AAC, ALAC, AIFF, OGG, MP3, DFF, DSF and DXD.
PCM: 32bit / 384kHz, Native DSD: up to DSD256 (11.2 MHz / 1-Bit)

When used as a USB DAC, it supports up to 32bit/384kHz PCM, and DSD DoP up to
128x.

And here is where it gets juicy, the numbers for the phone/line out. For the 4.4mm balanced Phone Out, the maximum output level is 6.4Vrms, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) is 130db! For the 3.5mm single-ended Phone Out, the maximum output level is 3.2Vrms, and the signal-to-noise ratio is 125dB.
For the 3.5mm single-ended Line Out, the maximum output level is 3.2Vrms, and the signal-to-noise ratio is 125dB.

That’s quite something, don’t you think?

Software & Interface​

Android 11

The first time I read iBasso’s statement about Android 11 being debuted in the mid-range DAP market with the DX170 featuring it, I was skeptical. I thought there had to be another player that comes with Android 11. While I was proven wrong, iBasso proved that it doesn’t make false claims.

Android 11 is great, don’t get me wrong, but I strongly believe that it’s a bit too much for the RK3566. I’m no software expert, but there is something that’s not allowing the OS to run smoothly. This isn’t noticeable when using the Mango App, but it is as soon as you start doing some more demanding tasks like watching videos. A DAP is a music-focused device, but everyone appreciates a smooth-running device. For example, when using any of the DX3×× DAPs, the experience was as smooth as on a flagship smartphone. With this comparison, be aware that you could almost purchase three DX170 for the price of one DX300 ($1250).

After a long press anywhere on the home screen, a pop up appears and there are three options: Home settings, Widgets, and Wallpapers. Under “Home settings”, DX320 offers three options: Notification dots, Enable feed integration, and The main screen. The first gives you some options to fine-tune notifications. Feed integration is an extra audio-focused desktop which can be accessed once you swipe left on the homepage. It features a mini Mango Player & audio settings (Gapless, Gain, Digital Filter, Play Mode, USB DAC). The main screen is a setting that gives you the choice to display all the apps on a separate home screen. If turned off, you will be able to use the standard app drawer which can be accessed by swiping up.

Wallpapers and Widgets remained the same. The only difference related to wallpapers is tied to the new Android 11 OS, and that’s that your wallpaper will be automatically cropped. Whenever you swipe up, pull down the notification bar, or go to recent apps, the wallpaper will zoom out.

The most important audio settings are located in the notification bar. They are: Output, Digital Filter, and Gain.

Output: Phone Out, Line Out

Cirrus Logic’s CS43131 chip has five selectable digital filters:
D1: Fast Roll-Off
D2: Short Delay, Slow Roll-Off
D3: Short Delay, Fast Roll-Off
D4: Slow Roll-Off
D5: NOS (non-oversampling)

Gain: Low, High

Mango App (v3.2.1)

The interface of this app is quite simple and minimalist, making it easy to navigate through. On the top-left corner, you can go to a menu in which you can search through your music, or browse your internal/external storage for music. In the top-right corner are located all the audio settings: Gapless, Gain, Play mode, Equalizer (graphic with visual representation, parametric), L/R balance, Digital Filter, Media Scan, and Advanced. In Advanced you can choose: Unplug Pause, USB DAC, Bluetooth DAC, Display settings, Sleep Timer, System Info.

In level with the above-mentioned settings, if playing an album, the track number will be displayed (e.g. “4/10”). The main screen consists of: album cover art, file format, track’s timeline, track info, playback options. In the bottom right corner of the album cover, there is a small grey circle with 3 dots. Once you press it, you will see the “Now Playing” pop up menu. This allows you to easily skip through tracks.

I’d like to mention that both the parametric equalizer and the graphic equalizer are very advanced and accurate. With the graphic equalizer, you can adjust 10 frequency bands — 33Hz, 63Hz, 100Hz, 330Hz, 630Hz, 1kHz, 3.3kHz, 6.3kHz, 10kHz, 16kHz — with 24 stops (+12, -12) of which each stop alters +/- 0.5dB. On the other hand, the parametric equalizer is much more capable and allows you to adjust make incredibly precise adjustments. Besides being able to play around with the visual graphic, you can put number values to pinpoint the adjustments. There are a total of 6 filters, each can be turned on/off individually, or all can be turned on at the same time. Each filter comes with 4 options:

Filter Type (8 total): low pass, high pass, band pass, notch, all pass, peaking, low shelf, high shelf
Fc: any value (no decimals) between 33Hz - 16kHz
Gain: +/- 20dB (no decimals)
Q Factor: any value between 0.3 - 20 (infinite amount of decimals supported)

I know that there are a lot of technical terms mentioned here, but they are not rocket science. Visit this link to gain a basic level of understanding of common types of equalizers and filter types: https://iconcollective.edu/types-of-eq/
Or read iBasso's own DX170 manual where its explained how each filter affects the frequency spectrum: https://www.moon-audio.com/files/ibasso/ibasso-dx170-user-manual.pdf#page=45

Bluetooth & WiFi

The support of WiFi 6 (IEEE 802.11ax) is something that’s new and interesting on the DX170. The list of all supported WiFi protocols: 802.11 b/g/ac/ax

Bluetooth is version 5.0.

Battery

11 hours from a 3200mAh (3.8V, Li-Polymer) battery is pretty good news for everyone! I haven’t been doing any heavy tasks, but whenever I was using it for music listening, it did not appear as though the battery life was ever a concern. It lasts and it holds.

Sound Performance​

You have to remember that the DX170 and the DX300 share the 'same' DAC chip, what separates them is that one has two of them, and the other has four. Why do I mention this? When you have the same DAC chip, you can expect the sound characteristics to share some similarities. Perhaps more than just “some” similarities.

Tonality-wise, the two sound very similar. Where they separate apart is in technical abilities. Not so much in speed, but rather in headroom, separation, and detail retrieval abilities. Of course, all three of these are immeasurable, so I fully understand if anyone is skeptical. After all, such technical qualities are the most subjective. The difference in detail retrieval is the most audible in the treble range. When it comes to percussion, on the DX170, it’s noticeably less detailed, and it’s audible that the decay is shorter. The DX300 (w/ AMP11Mk1) sounds more open, there is more room for each element to breathe. This is the same room that allows each element to have more details, hence the technical ability difference between the two.

However, there are some differences that some may prefer. For example, the bass is much punchier and more fun on the DX170. The attack is very fast, but so is the decay. Not only this, but the bass has depth. Those who like more intimate vocals will enjoy DX170’s mid-range.

What everyone has to keep in mind is that I am comparing a $450 DAP to a $1200 DAP.

Conclusion​

DX170 is a very capable DAP. More than anything, it’s impressive for its size and weight. I can picture anyone carrying it as a daily driver, as though it fits just about everywhere.

Is it 3x worse than the DX300? Absolutely not! It’s at least half as good. I consider the DX170 a tease. It’s got the iBasso house sound, but it doesn’t benefit from the features that higher end iBasso players have. You get a taste of iBasso’s way of doing things, but not the full package.

There have already been a couple of people who jumped from the DX170 straight to the DX300/DX320, and it really doesn’t surprise me at all. If music listening is your priority and you don't plan on using your DAP to watch movies and play demanding games, then I can easily recommend the DX170. It's made for music listening, and that's its selling point — sound performance.

It falls short in the software department, but it makes up for it with sound performance.

Oh yes! Venture Electronics has finally set foot in the headphone field. It took some time, but the wait is over.



Design & Build Quality

The Supernova is a fairly boring-looking headphone and most definitely not built like a tank. It features a metal headband, plastic ear-cups, and plastic pieces that hold the headband strap. The design is not loud, with the only place where the company’s logo is featured being the faceplate of the ear-cups. The logo is done in a shimmery silver finish, which makes it look very nice. The exposed plastic parts on the headphone are additionally treated to give a smooth matte-like finish.

Although the headphone is fairly boring, it’s incredibly light. It’s so light that you literally forget you are wearing it.



Cable

You get two cables instead of one, which is always highly appreciated! Both cables are of high quality. The brownish orange cable is 1.8 meters long, while the black coiled cable is 1.2 meters when it's not extended, and can read the length of 2.8 meters when extended. Both cables' termination is 3.5mm, and both connectors are threaded to accept the included 6.3mm adaptor. I used the orange cable, which is also very easy to put away as though it holds its shape when rolled up. The housings for both cables are rubberized. Venture Electronics clearly didn't spare the accessories department and was thoughtful when deciding what to include in this wallet-friendly package.

Comfort

The lightweight nature of this headphone is one of the traits that makes it extremely comfortable.

On the other hand, the trait that makes it uncomfortable are the shallow ear-pads. They are made the breathable fabric type, which actually are comfortable on my skin. What makes the shallow on-ear fit uncomfortable is the fabric that covers the drivers. This fabric sewn into the ear-pads, and it is extremely irritating to my skin. It feels like some sort of synthetic fabric.

Performance​

In order to respect the original product, I will be testing the Supernova without any sort of mods. I want to report to you how these sound out of the box, and that’s exactly what I did.

Lows

Though Supernova is marketed to have a “layered low frequency”, I generally found it to be very delicate in the lower end of the spectrum. I actually only discovered this after listening to tracks that have other elements present. For example, I found the Supernova to possess decent quantity and quality of lows in my reference tracks (“Smoking Mirrors by Lee Curtiss, “Hydrogen” by MOON), but when I put on something like Robbie Roberts’ “Theme for The Irishman”, or Arctic Monkey’s “Do I Wanna Know?”, or even Daft Punk’s “Get Lucky”, it was quite apparent that there is an accent on the mids and highs, while lows are kind of recessed.

However, this is likely a quality that is sought after in the professional field, especially if you are monitoring vocals.

Mids

Wow! I don’t think there are better words to describe the mid-range performance than “clear” and “accurate”. I am truthfully blown away.

The Supernova really does something special here, because it doesn’t make sense to my ears how such a cheap headphone can have such a natural-sounding mid-range. I am especially referring to vocals. Instruments don’t sound as spot on as vocals. For example, acoustic guitar (e.g. Deep Purple’s “Soldier of Fortune”, Pink Floyd’s “Hey You”) sounds thin. But vocals… I can’t get enough! Even though there is distortion present in peaks, like in Sia’s “Chandelier (Piano Version)”, there hasn’t been a time where Supernova sounded piercing or fatiguing.

If you listen to a lot of poorly recorded tracks, be aware that things can get hot in the upper mid-range region. For example, Joan Baez's "Babe I'm Gonna Leave You" ha shot peeks (vocal peeks, and essy peeks). Of course, this is only with the headphones as they come (stock form). If you want to fiddle around, you can dampen it and see how it sounds with different ear-pads.

Highs

Supernova isn’t a pair of headphones that will make you pull your hair, but it’s also not boring. Usually, safely tuned headphones don’t have a lot of energy when it comes to treble, but that’s not the case with Supernova. It's definitely in the shine range (sibilance>sparkle>shine>sheen>warm), though when it comes to peeks, it's got a roll-off. The peeks won't poke your ears, so you don't have to worry about fatigue. I will say though,

Conclusion​

The first product from Venture Electronics’ professional division did not disappoint. I know many will treat it as an audiophile product, and that’s just wrong. When VE Pro designed these headphones, they didn’t have an audiophile listener in mind. Instead, they designed these to be used as a tool, as a monitoring headphone to be used professionally.

I—not a professional by any means—judged the Supernova as an audiophile headphone. I cannot pretend to be a professional when I am not. I tested it with music, not “on the field”. However, I can definitely see these being used professionally, because they have the desired qualities. That is, at least to my audiophile ears. Due to the non-existent isolation, I think they would be put to use in a quiet environment where audio needs to be monitored.


If you are a modder or someone who likes to experiment with different ear-pads, it does appear that there are some options out there. I cannot directly say which ear-pads are compatible, but your best bet is asking on VE’s private Facebook group or Telegram channel. The good news is that there are options. So, if you are an audiophile, there is hope to tailor it to your needs!

As for me, these have instantly became my daily driver. Supernova for the win =)

Same Same, But Different​

We’ve already seen iBasso make a statement with the DX300 back in 2020, but can the DX320 do the same two years later?

iBasso walked through fire for the past year or so, having faced multiple challenges created by the worldwide chip shortage. As I’m sure this resulted in financial losses and other complications, the company accepted the situation as it was and focused on the future.

Since DX320 shares the same DNA as the DX300, you will find me comparing them head-to-head more often than not.

“Let’s go way back to 2006, the year iBasso was founded. It started out as a manufacturer of headphone amplifiers, portable amplifiers, and DACs. In the same year, it released “Series D” of amplifiers & DACs, “Series P” of amplifiers, and “Series T” of slim headphone amplifiers. Fast forward to 2011, the company released its first DAP — DX100 (HDP-R10). It was the company’s greatest success and greatest accomplishment. It was the world’s first digital audio player that could play DSD while utilizing Android OS. It was the world’s first true high-resolution (24bit/192kHz) digital audio player. It was many things.

However, the main reason why the DX100 was so important was that iBasso successfully bypassed the ALSA driver on Android. This would go on to be an industry-changing achievement.

iBasso entered the Head-Fi industry in 2016. This is the year that it released its first pair of IEMs: IT03 — a competitively priced 1DD + 2BA IEM. Then the company released its then-flagship IEM: IT04. To top it all off, iBasso also released its first headphones: SR1 — the world’s first high-definition headphones to use silicone suspension drivers. All three releases were a great success, with the SR1 being a limited edition that sold out.

In the coming years, iBasso would go on to release several DAPs: DX50 (2013), DX80 (2014), DX90 (2014), DX200 (2017), DX120 (2018), DX150 (2018), DX160 (2019), DX220 (2020), DX220 MAX (2020), DX300 (2020), portable AMP/DACs, IEMs, and headphones.

In general, iBasso always moves two steps ahead of everyone else. The consistency of their industry-leading products is nothing to be overlooked.”

Disclaimer​

The DX320 was provided to me free of charge. I am neither paid nor am I gaining any financial benefit from iBasso for writing this review. The review is based on my personal experience, it is completely free of any bias from an external force (whether that's online influence, other people's opinion, or the manufacturer itself). iBasso refunded me the money used to pay customs fees, and for that I thank Mr. Paul and iBasso!​

Click to expand...

Design & Build Quality

The DX320 shares the same body as the DX300 with some minor design alterations. The most prominent design change, which was also the most anticipated one, is the volume knob. DX300’s volume knob has been criticized from the day the pictures of it have been released. People were either “ok” with it or hated it. The company took notes of the feedback and re-designed it on the DX320. The new wheel is smoother (physically) and more classy. Instead of the ridged edge, it has shallow diagonal indents. Also, the center of the knob has been smoothed out. In comparison, the old knob was like a shirt button (raised edge all around), while the new one is like Smarties (the US tablet candy; not to be mistaken for the UK candy by the same name). However, with these changes also came flaws. While the new design feels much better to the touch and looks significantly better, it isn’t as responsive and precise as the old one. DX300’s volume knob was much smoother and easier to turn. You could rotate it by turning the from the top or from the side, either way, it would turn consistently. Some even found it to be too loose. On the other hand, DX320’s is quite stiff and inconsistent. I find that turning it from the side makes it less problematic, but there are still times when my finger would just glide over the smooth edge and not turn the volume knob at all. This I can live with. What I am petty about is the tactile feedback when you push it. The old design was perfect, it was a firm click that required a moderate amount of force to be pressed. The new one is quite a mess. Not only does it require too much force to press, but it also gives very subtle and mushy tactile feedback, which makes it hard to know whether you actually pressed it or not. It’s a more shallow and less clicky feel, and there is this weird semi-click that acts like a fake click. When it happens, you think you fully pushed the knob, but in reality, you didn’t. This is why I consider the revision to be functionally inferior.

Update: Paul confirmed that the volume wheel issues are not normal, thus confirming that my unit had a faulty volume wheel.

The second change is the backplate. If you read my original DX300 review, you know that the backplate was my favorite design feature. Unfortunately, the backplate design has not been inherited. I knew it looked a little familiar, but I couldn’t figure out where from. Then I pulled my DX300 MAX out and found my answer. It's the same finish. The bigger change on the back is the little see-through area to showcase AMP13’s NuTubes.

To be blunt, I’m in favor of the original backplate design. In fact, I find it superior in just about every way: it looks more premium, more appealing, and it’s authentic. On another note, iBasso, for the love of god, please bring back your logo! We want the pretty logo on the back. Without it, it looks empty and incomplete. In the same way, the glass-like lettering doesn’t look as good as the silver lettering used on the DX300. The original backplate design had life, texture, and depth. I strongly recommend iBasso to further perfect it and bring it back.

There is one picture from iBasso that showcases the DX320 with the old backplate… but that’s about it. It clearly didn't make it to the final release.

Inputs and outputs remained identical:
On the top side of the device, you have the coaxial output and the USB-C port, both of which have laser-etched labels below them. The latter is used for charging (supports QC3.0 and PD3.0 quick charging), data transfer (USB 3.1) and can also be used as a USB sound card. On the bottom-side are located the SE (single-ended) 3.5mm and BAL (balanced) 4.4mm and 2.5mm outputs. While there are only three physical outputs, they double as PHONE Out (aka headphone out) and LINE Out. It should be noted that the mentioned outputs are the ones that come with the stock AMP11Mk2s card. iBasso’s DAP line-up stands out on the market for its replaceable and exchangeable amp card feature, which in my opinion is one of the most significant features that a DAP can have. Most people are okay with keeping the overall device the same, but they like to play with sound. What’s the only way to achieve that? To change the amplifier. In iBasso’s case, all you need to do is change the amp card. Since iBasso chose to change its amp card design with the DX300, we are yet to see what will be offered in the future.

Display

Though both the DX300 and the DX320 share the exact same 6.5” display with the same 1080x2340 resolution, there are visible differences between the two. This leads me to believe that these differences are caused by software.

Side by side, DX300’s display has a greater dynamic range, more accurate colors, and looks more natural as a whole. On the other hand, DX320’s display has more saturated colors, less dynamic range, and a more artificial look to it.

If you are a committed fella, you can likely calibrate the display to your liking with the help of an app or some even more advanced methods.

Internal Hardware​

SoC

Nothing changed here. It’s still the Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 SoC (system on a chip) that makes this machine run smoothly. 128GB of internal storage, 6GB of LPDDR4X-3733 RAM that operates at a frequency of 1866 MHz, an octa-core processor (four Kryo 260 Silver cores operating at 1.84 GHz and four Kryo 260 Gold cores operating at 2.2 GHz), and an Adreno 512 integrated GPU. When the DX300 was released, there was no other DAP on the market that could match its SoC. The story is slightly different in 2022, as though now there are several DAPs with the Snapdragon 660. The market caught up to iBasso’s 2021 release =) In fact, the only DAP that has a newer SoC is Shanling’s $2699 M9, which has 8GB of RAM, the Snapdragon 660, and 256GB of internal storage. You would think that the Snapdragon 665 is a definite winner over the Snapdragon 660, but that’s not the case at all. Let's break down their differences. Snapdragon 660 comes with the Adreno 512, while the Snapdragon 665 comes with the Adreno 610. Per NanoReview, Snapdragon 665 has the advantage of having a smaller size transistor (11nm), performs 26% better in floating-point computations, and supports 7% higher memory bandwidth. On the other hand, Snapdragon 660 has the advantage of operating at both a ~42% higher GPU frequency and a 10% higher CPU clock speed, and also has a 6% higher AnTuTu 9 score. While these differences are visible on paper, I doubt the average audiophile and DAP user will ever be in a situation where these differences are noticeable.

GeekBench 5 Benchmark Results (Picture 1: CPU Score; Picture 2: CPU Single-Core Score; Picture 3: CPU Multi-Core Score; Picture 4: Compute OpenCL Score):


DAC


Surprise, surprise, iBasso is at the top of its game yet again. If there is something new and innovative around the corner, you best believe iBasso's got it. Last time the team came out with the first quad DAC implementation in a digital audio player, this time it’s one of only two DAPs on the market adopting ROHM’s flagship DAC chips. Cayin N8ii, priced at $3500, is the elephant in the room. If I am not mistaken, Cayin was the first to use a ROHM DAC chip in a DAP.

ROHM is a Japanese company that designs and manufactures integrated circuits (ICs), semiconductors, and other electronic components. With more than half a century of experience up its sleeve, it’s not hard to understand why iBasso selected its DAC chips. The first time audiophiles got a taste of ROHM’s DAC chips is in May 2018, when the company debuted a DAC prototype chip at the International Hi-Fi Audio (Munich High End) show. To my knowledge, the first company to implement a DAC chip from ROHM was Luxman with its $17,000 D-10X player (2020).

DX320 features two flagship BD34301EKV chips which are part of the MUS-IC™—ROHM’s highest grade of audio ICs (integrated circuits)—lineup. Each one has 2 DAC channels, adding up to a total of 4 DAC channels. Just like its predecessor, DX320 has a fully balanced output. In comparison, DX300 featured four Cirrus Logic CS43198 DAC chips (double-parallel implementation) which had 8 DAC channels in total.

The following are the supported audio formats:
MQA (16x), APE, FLAC, WAV, WMA, ACC, ALAC, AIFF, OGG, MP3, DFF, DSF, DXD, and DST
PCM: 768 kHz / 32-bit, Native DSD512

This makes it superior to the DX300 when it comes to decoding capabilities. DX320 supports MQA 16x, as opposed to DX300’s MQA 8x; DX320 supports up to Native DSD512, as opposed to DX300’s up to DSD256. If you are a consumer of either of these formats, this is great news for you.

What remained the same is the FPGA. Reminder: Unsatisfied with how the average DAPs don’t prioritize audio playback and instead let the SoC and the OS process multiple tasks at the same time, iBasso implemented a FPGA (Field Programmable Gate Array) in Master mode. The FPGA works between the Soc and the DAC. It basically requests data from the SoC and then sends that data to the DAC. The FPGA works in Master mode using two Accusilicone Fentosecond oscillators as the clocks while synchronizing all audio clocks. This way any jitter is reduced and minimized in order to achieve the cleanest audio processing.



AMP

AMP11Mk2s is the fourth addition to the DX3×× amp module line-up, and it’s also the stock amp module equipped with the DX320. There are quite a few exciting things about this little guy. It’s based on the much-beloved AMP8’s discrete circuit, it features film capacitors, and it also features iBasso’s very own custom “Premium Al” foil audio capacitor. To be fair, AMP11 as a whole is based on AMP8’s discrete circuit, and this includes the two previous versions (AMP11Mk1, and AMP11Mk2). However, at least from a technical point of view, AMP11Mk2s should be the closest to AMP8.

---

iBasso DX3×× lineup comparison​

◈◈◈​

---

Software & Interface​

Last time I said that the DX300 series was the start of a new era, and I was right. We are seeing more and more DAPs with more up-to-date Android OS. It’s safe to say that the gap between smartphones and digital audio players is closing, but you have to give credit to iBasso who played a significant role in pushing the market to make this change.



Android 11

Much like other iBasso’s DAPs, DX320 features a custom ROM. The Android OS is very similar to a stock ROM, but the most noticeable differences are in settings. Of course, there is the addition of some exclusive settings, but there are also some settings that are missing — as was the case in the DX300. The whole experience is as smooth as butter. There wasn’t a time when the DAP showed any signs of having a hard time. However, I should point out that I didn’t do any demanding tasks like playing video games.

The home screen still benefits from flexible features, but it’s missing some that were present on the DX300. After a long press anywhere on the home screen, a pop-up appears and there are three options: Home settings, Widgets, and Wallpapers. Under “Home settings”, DX320 offers three options: Notification dots, Enable feed integration, and The main screen. The first gives you some options to fine-tune notifications. Feed integration is an extra audio-focused desktop that can be accessed once you swipe left on the homepage. It features a mini Mango Player & audio settings (Gapless, Gain, Digital Filter, Play Mode, USB DAC). The main screen is a setting that gives you the choice to display all the apps on a separate home screen. If turned off, you will be able to use the standard app drawer which can be accessed by swiping up. DX300 had one extra option under “Home settings”, and that was “Change icon shape”, which just allowed you to further personalize app icons.

Wallpapers and Widgets remained the same. The only difference related to wallpapers is tied to the new Android 11 OS, and that’s that your wallpaper will be automatically cropped. Whenever you swipe up, pull down the notification bar, or go to recent apps, the wallpaper will zoom out.

The most important audio settings are located in the notification bar. They are: Output, Digital Filter, and Gain.

Output: PO (Phone Out), LO (Line Out)

ROHM’s BD3401EKV chip has two selectable digital FIR (finite impulse response) filters:
D1: Sharp Roll-Off
D2: Slow Roll-Off

Gain: Low, Medium, High

Mango App (Version 3.2.2)

The interface of this app is quite simple and minimalist, making it easy to navigate through. On the top-left corner, you can go to a menu in which you can search through your music, or browse your internal/external storage for music. In the top-right corner are located all the audio settings: Gapless, Gain, Play mode, Equalizer (graphic with visual representation, parametric), L/R balance, Digital Filter, Media Scan, and Advanced. In Advanced you can choose: DSD Filter, DSD Volume Compensation, Unplug Pause, Indicator, USB DAC, Bluetooth DAC, Display settings, Sleep Timer, and System Info. “DSD Filter” allows you to set the cut-off frequency (Low, Medium, High), and “DSD Volume Compensation” increases DSD files’ volume by 6dB. The addition of these two settings will certainly be greatly appreciated by users who listen to a lot of DSD tracks.

In level with the above-mentioned settings, if playing an album, the track number will be displayed (e.g. “4/10”). Everything below looks exactly the same as in the Mango OS. There is a large track/album cover art, file format, track’s timeline, track info, and playback options.

Or, in short:ㅤㅤㅤ


I’d like to mention that both the parametric equalizer and the graphic equalizer are quite refined. With the graphic equalizer, you can adjust 10 frequency bands — 33Hz, 63Hz, 100Hz, 330Hz, 630Hz, 1kHz, 3.3kHz, 6.3kHz, 10kHz, 16kHz — with 24 stops (+12, -12) of which each stop alters +/- 0.5dB. On the other hand, the parametric equalizer is much more capable and allows you to adjust make incredibly precise adjustments. Besides being able to play around with the visual graphic, you can put number values to pinpoint the adjustments. There are a total of 6 filters, each can be turned on/off individually, or all can be turned on at the same time. Each filter comes with 4 options:

Filter Type (8 total): low pass, high pass, band pass, notch, all pass, peaking, low shelf, high shelf
Fc: any value (no decimals) between 33Hz - 16kHz
Gain: +/- 20dB (no decimals)
Q Factor: any value between 0.3 - 20 (infinite amount of decimals supported)

I know that there are a lot of technical terms mentioned here, but they are not rocket science. Visit this link to gain a basic level of understanding of common types of equalizers and filter types: https://iconcollective.edu/types-of-eq/
Or read iBasso's own DX320 manual where it's explained how each filter affects the frequency spectrum:
https://www.ibasso.com/uploadfiles/download/DX320usermanual.pdf#page=46

Mango OS (V 2.03.855)

iBasso continues the implementation of its custom operating system — first introduced in 2014, on their DX80 DAP. Mango OS is a very raw operating system, there are no fancy visual effects (that are present on Android), it’s a very stripped-down operating system whose focus is on audio. If you are wondering what I’m talking about, I’m talking about things such as transition animations. These animations contribute to the smooth experience on the Android OS, though you can technically turn them off in Android’s “Developer Options”. Either way, Mango OS is much more than an OS with transition animations turned off!

You will notice that the whole OS is visually quite similar to the Mango App, hence why they share the same “Mango” name.

In total, MangoOS boasts only two menus: “My Music” and “Settings”. The first one is accessed by clicking on the menu icon in the top-left corner. Through this menu, you can access everything related to music media (now playing, all music, directory, album, artist, genre, and playlist). All music, as the name suggests, displays all scanned music. You are given 4 options for sorting all of your music: title, album, artist, and added. Besides “My Music”, “Album” gives you an option to sort all your albums in either a list or an icon layout.

“Settings” are accessed by clicking on the settings icon in the top-right corner. Once you’re in the settings menu, you have the option to change the following: gapless, gain, play mode, L/R balance, equalizer, digital filter, advanced, and the option to switch to the Android OS. In “Advanced”, there is a second set of settings: Once you go into Advanced, there are the following options: DAC, Media Scan, Languages, Display, Power Management, System Info, DSD Volume Compensation, DSD Filter, and MTP (media transfer protocol). For those unfamiliar with MTP, it is used when you want to transfer media between the DAP and a computer.

The OS is quite simple. At the very top (where the notification bar would usually be), the volume and two battery percentages are displayed on the right side. Right below, on the left side, there is a “My Music” menu, in which you can browse, well…. your music. You can see what’s currently playing, and all your music files, you can browse the DX300’s directory, browse by albums, artists, genre, or by playlists. On the right side, you have the settings menu, in which you will find all the audio settings: Gapless, Gain, Output, Play mode, L/R balance, Equalizer (graphic without visual representation), Digital Filter, Advanced, and also the option to switch back to Android. Once you go into Advanced, there are the following options: DAC, Media Scan, Languages, Display, Power Management, System Info, MTP (media transfer protocol). Then you have the large song/album cover art, and below it, you have the file format information. Finally, right below there is the track’s timeline and underneath it, you have the track name, artist, and album. In level, on the left side, there is an icon of sound waves. Once you press it, all the track info (artist, album, duration, path, delete) is shown, and you also have the option to add that track to a playlist. Last but not least, on the right side, you can change the playback options.

Menus aside, MangoOS has a homepage/main screen with a bunch of important info. First of all, on the very top (where the notification bar is usually), aligned to the right, you can see the DAC volume percentage and the percentages of the digital and analog battery sections. The majority of the screen space is taken by the track/album cover art. Below the cover art, you can see the file format information (audio coding format, bitrate, sample rate, audio bitrate size).

For the most part, everything below the cover art and file format info is pretty familiar: track timeline, track name/artist/album centered & displayed one below the other, play/pause & previous/next buttons. In line with the artist/album: on the left side, is a sound wave icon that reveals thorough information about the current track (track name, file format information, artist, album, duration, path, and an option to delete it); on the right side, play mode icon (Order, Loop, Shuffle, Repeat).

And that’s the whole Mango OS for you.

Bluetooth & WiFi

The DX220 was the first DAP to support two-way Bluetooth 5.0, which provides native support for LDAC and aptx. The DX320 inherited this feature. When it comes to WiFi, it's is equipped with two antennas (2x2 MIMO), which allows it to support up to two streams of data. It also has the dual-band 2.4Ghz/5Ghz ability. The WiFi standard that is implemented is the 802.11b/g/n/ac. On the other side of things, the fairly up-to-date Bluetooth 5.0 is used.

Besides being a transmitter, the DX320 also acts as a Bluetooth receiver. This allows it to have the Bluetooth DAC function, which basically means that the DAP receives digital data from a source and converts it into an analog electrical signal. However, when using it as a Bluetooth DAC, you are limited to AAC and SBC codecs.

Battery

Unlike other differences, this is a major one. We’ve all seen the truly fascinating battery life of the DX300, but I’m sorry to say that you cannot expect the same from the DX320. Someone has already speculated that the shorter battery life is most likely caused by iBasso’s decision to use a desktop DAC chip, and this is the most believable explanation. DX320’s marketed battery life (with AMP11Mk2s) is 10 hours, which is 5 hours less than the DX300.

You may jump to the conclusion that the battery is of a smaller capacity, but the truth is that there were no changes made to the battery section(s). The same patented dual power supply structure used in the DX300 is used in the DX320. The digital section still has a 4000mAh battery, and the analog section still has a 2000mAh battery.

After 8 hours of constant playback through the MangoOS, my DX320 went down to 38% (analog section) and 2% (digital section). This was with the AMP11Mk2s amp module using the 4.4mm BAL PO, volume set at 44, and gain set at "High". With the AMP13, after roughly 6 hours of playback (low noise tube PO), the digital section went down to 25%, while the analog section went down to 35%. The volume was also set at 44%, and gain was also set at "High". With the AMP13, I didn't let my DX320 go below 20%. This is so the battery gets preserved. If you want to make sure that your battery gets to live a healthy life, make sure not to let it drop below 20%, but also not to charge it over 80%.

Sound Performance​

As an author, I had to find an approach to compare the DX300 and the DX320 in a way that makes sense. To make up for the $310 price difference, I compared the DX300 equipped with the AMP12 ($230) against DX320 equipped with the stock AMP11Mk2s. Here are my findings:

Mango OS
Low Gain
Internal Storage
DX300 volume: 64
DX320 volume: 44
Headphones: iBasso SR2

The biggest difference, by far, is the mid-range. The mids sound godly on the DX320. Pure ear candy! Straight out of the box, I was blown away by how clean and realistic they are. For a second, I thought I was listening to the DX300 MAX, and I wish I was joking or blowing things out of proportion. The mid-range is that good. In “Do I Wanna Know?” by Arctic Monkeys, on the DX300+AMP12, it’s audible that there is mid-bass bleed in the male vocals. This gives vocals a thick and heavy characteristic. I came to the same conclusion when listening to Deep Purple’s “Soldier of Fortune”; vocals come off as more forward on the DX300+AMP12. On the other hand, vocal presentation is incredibly realistic on the DX320, and the tonality is both more accurate and natural. I didn’t hear any significant difference when it came to the soundstage, but on some tracks, the DX320 sounds ever so slightly wider.

The second most audible difference between the two is the treble. While DX300+AMP12 is crisp and clear, DX320 leans more towards the warmer side of the spectrum. It’s not as though one sounds superior in quality to the other, it’s all a matter of preference. Not just preference, but also what you are pairing it with. Do you want more pronounced peaks? Or do you want to tame them and have them under control? If it’s the latter, DX320 with the stock amp module is what you are looking for.

To my ears, lows were the least affected and sounded just about the same, both in quality and quantity.



Then I compared the DX320 against the DX300 MAX and got surprised. Here are my findings from that comparison:

Mango OS
Low Gain
Internal Storage
DX300 MAX volume: 11 o’clock
Digital Volume: 90
Ultimate Mode: On
DX320 volume: 44
Headphones: iBasso SR2

It’s no secret that the DX320 sounds great on its own, but the craziest part is that it sounds closer to the DX300 MAX than it does to the DX300+AMP12. This is not to say the two are the same, they actually differ quite a bit. Going back to the same tracks, such as “Soldier of Fortune”, I noticed that the overall vocal presentation is more forward. Not only is it more forward, but it’s significantly more forward. The mid-range presence is more in your face on the DX320. On the other hand, DX300 MAX is laid back when compared to the DX320. I should point out that DX300 MAX is not, in any shape or form, laid back. It is when you compare it to the DX320. Otherwise, DX300 MAX is a fairly reference and neutral DAP. Strictly talking about the mid-range, when comparing the DX320 against the DX300 MAX, it sounds like how DX300+AMP12 sounded when compared against the DX320. Aside from more presence, the vocals are thicker and heavier. While I’d consider DX320 as warm and laid back in terms of the upper end, the DX300 MAX is more crisp, bright (in a good way!), and clean.

Something my friend pointed out is that DX320 is more focused on attack, thus making it sound tighter. On the other hand, he found the DX300 MAX to be focused on decay. I came to the same conclusion. Some may interpret this as though the DX300 MAX is slow—nothing could be further from the truth. DX300 MAX is a very responsive and tactile DAP, but the way it handles the decay gives off a different feeling.

Funnily enough, the upper end is also similar to the conclusion I came to when comparing the DX300+AMP12 against the DX320. I found the DX300 MAX to be warmer, but not in the same way I found the DX320 warmer. I know this comes off as contradictory considering I literally said that the DX300 MAX is brighter than the DX320, but allow me to explain. When it comes to percussion, DX300 MAX is crisper, sharper, and more tactile. There’s even more detail in the percussion. However, when it comes to peaks, especially aggressive peaks, DX300 MAX retains full control, whereas the DX320 doesn’t. I believe this is the first time where I felt the term “digital glare” match what I’m hearing. My friend suggested that this so-called digital glare will wear off once the break-in period passes, and while I won’t agree or disagree, I am definitely open to that idea. After all, my DX300 MAX went through a proper break-in method. The reason why I tested the DX320 in its virgin state is because I don’t remember breaking-in my DX300 or AMP12, so I thought it would be unfair to do so for the DX320. Perhaps the very track where I solidified my opinion was Sia’s “Chandelier (Piano Version)”, where it was quite apparent that the upper mid-range was more forward and that the peaks were poking through on the DX320.

Even though the DX320 puts up a tough fight against the DX300 MAX, it doesn’t dethrone the king… which I’m sure comes as no surprise. However,—and this is a big “however”—it’s scary how good the DX320 sounds. The DX300 MAX separates itself with an insanely open sound, the amount of headroom it has compared to the DX320 is not something I can put into words. When I think about it, my friend put it the best, “MAX is more analog”.

Conclusion​

Even though the DX300 and the DX320 share a lot in common, the two are different enough to stand on their own.

iBasso made a very, very bold statement with the DX300. In my eyes, the DX320 is equally as impressive as the DX300 was back at its release. It’s still got an industry-leading 6.5” IPS display. It’s still got a modular amplifier system. Moreover, you have the flexibility to choose from a total of 5 amp modules. If you don’t count in the AMP11Mk1 and AMP11Mk2, then you can say there is a total of 3 amp modules. Even with those 3 amp modules, you have the freedom to get them modded by @Whitigir, Steve, or someone else. Many owners of modded amp modules state that the mods take the sound performance to another level. With this in mind, I would not hesitate to call the amp module system a platform. So far, all amp modules have been priced below $300. I know a number of people who don’t want to purchase a dedicated amplifier but would much rather spend their money on a more expensive amp module. Essentially, this allows you to purchase the finest components on the market and get them implemented into the amp module system by modders.

Even if you look past the amp module system, the DX320 still has: 6GB of RAM, Qualcomm’s Snapdragon 660, Android 10, Android SRC bypass (allowing system-wide bit-perfect playback), custom audio dedicates Mango OS, patented dual-battery design, and of course, the ROHM Japanese DAC chips. With the latest addition of AMP13, a Korg Nutube-based amp module, iBasso further strengthened DX300/DX320’s unique position in the market. Why do I mention all these goodies? Because one may suspect that compromises have been made, which I assure you isn’t the case here.

If I look at everything as a whole, the DX320 sits right between the DX300+AMP12 and the DX300 MAX. What most will question is whether the DX320 is a worthy purchase or upgrade over the DX300. The short answer is yes. Although I think the DX300 is more attractive physically and it doesn't share the same volume wheel problem as the DX320, I cannot see these differences playing a significant role in one's purchase. If you already own the DX300, then the answer gets more complicated. For example, it remains a question whether a modded AMP12 paired with the DX300 sounds as good as the DX320 with the stock AMP11Mk2s.

If you know Lee, you know Venture Electronics, and vice versa (if you know Venture Electronics, you know Lee). Everything about the company and the way it does may seem odd if you aren’t in the private Facebook group. From the way Lee talks and freely expresses himself, to the price-to-performance ratio of VE’s products. It is very easy to misunderstand Lee, he appears to be quite a character if you don’t know him personally. I think many will get the wrong idea when they hear that the private group is called VE Clan and that Lee refers to his customers as “clansman”. Or, perhaps I got it wrong, and a clansman is only someone who is a part of this small close-knit community. Either way, the Facebook group is where Lee is constantly active, giving people a look behind the scenes, product announcements, progress updates, and much, much more.

In my eyes, Venture Electronics is bold, brave, and certainly has no merci
… and Lee, I would describe him in two words: “no filter” and “passionate”.

Unboxing Experience

At 50 bucks, I don’t blame Venture Electronics for not including any sort of special packaging. Lee gave me the word that while it’s in plan, it’s not a priority.

With the Megatron, you receive a USB-C to USB-C (short) cable along with a USB-C to USB-A adaptor.

Design & Build Quality

From a design point of view Megatron won’t knock your socks off. It looks like a refined chunk of metal, but I guarantee you it’s much more than that.

What’s important to me is that it’s built well and that it feels good in hand, and Megatron is just that.

It has slightly curvature on the sides, making it comfortable to hold in hand. It’s made of metal, making it long-lasting. And even the lettering is laser etched. It’s very clean and there is no glow around the edges, indicating quality. The cutouts for the ports are also clean with no indication of cut corners.

On the front, Megatron has the following outputs: 3.5mm, 2.5mm (TRRS), 4.4mm (TRRRS), and a 3.5mm. On the back, Megatron has a USB-C port for PD bridge charging, a USB-C port for connecting the Megatron to your device, and a 3.5mm AUX Line Out.

Features

While you have dongles with all sorts of features, Megatron is fairly straightforward. It doesn’t benefit from a built-in battery, it doesn’t benefit from Bluetooth, it doesn’t benefit from hardware volume control. All of these features are commonly found in both dongles and portable amp/dacs.

However, I strongly believe that Megatron is a prime example of “less is more”. Lee didn’t waste money on such features, which allowed him to focus on circuitry and performance.

For single-ended use (3.5mm), Megatron outputs 170mW @32Ω, and 10mW @300Ω (Single Ended), and has a maximum output voltage of 2.4V. For balanced use (2.5mm, 4.4mm), Megatron outputs 300mW @32Ω, and 40mW @300Ω, and has a maximum output voltage of whopping 4.9V!

Performance​

I will aim to keep it short and sweet.

As outlined by Lee, Megatron is NOT designed for high sensitivity stuff. It is specifically designed for hard to drive IEMs and headphones. For this reason, I used the Dekoni Audio Blue for the testing. I used the Dekoni Blue on the PC setup, while I used the Sivga P-II on the Mac setup.

Megatron provides a very clean and transparent performance. No distortions, weird tonalities, or any funky stuff of that nature happening.

There isn’t a whole lot of coloration going on, with the main differences in sound being related to separation, soundstage, and the overall feel.

I had the Megatron connected to my MacBook Pro (Early 2015), which I also used for comparing the sound performance. The comparison was a bit unfair since I made the decision to compare Megatron’s 4.4mm balanced output to my MacBook’s 3.5mm audio jack. Aside from the differences I mentioned above, Megatron’s sound performance is audibly more refined. In comparison, my MacBook’s SE output is peaky and very harsh. Not only that, but the whole sound presentation sounds suffocating compared to the Megatron.

The difference wasn’t that significant when I was doing the A/B test on my MacBook, but it was when I was doing an A/B comparison between Megatron + PC w/foobar2000 vs MacBook Pro 3.5mm audio jack w/VLC. It was a night and day difference. Mac sounded much harsher and less refined than the Megatron.

Technical qualities and things like that don’t really get affected, at least not to my ears and not with the headphones I used. What Megatron did do is provided a cleaner sound with no distortion, no harsh peaks, no crowded presentation — just an overall more refined sound performance. If you listen to music at louder listening levels, the difference is likely going to be even greater. I myself listen to music at the lower end of moderate listening levels.

Conclusion​

Megatron fills a space in the market that no other product (to my knowledge) in this price range does. It can have many uses, but the most obvious is for people who want something minimalist on their desk, perhaps to use for gaming purposes. It has a stupid amount of power!

Of course, the main audience who will want to get the Megatron are those who are looking to drive power hungry IEMs and headphones but not hurt their wallets. It’s a perfect match for anyone who travels a lot and is looking for a lot of power at a low price. To add to that, if your preference is a warmer sound signature, then the Megatron hits the bullseye.

At $50, with the specs and the performance it provides, it’s impossible not to recommend!

Fiio doesn’t need an introduction, but deserves one.

A veteran when it comes to amplifiers and digital audio players, Fiio is the least known for its IEMs. Though it can be said that Fiio officially entered the portable headphone field in 2015 with their EX1 earphones, it was in 2017 when Fiio entered the IEM market. F1 was Fiio’s first in-ear monitor. It featured an over-ear cable, which is pretty much a trademark of IEMs nowadays. However, when it got serious-serious for Fiio, was in 2018 when the famous FH5 was released. The rest is history.
Don’t be fooled by the short amount of time Fiio has been in the IEM market, because in this short time, it achieved more than some established companies have in their lifetime.

I don’t think there is any other company in the portable head-fi market that has the size, reputation, and recognition of Fiio.

Fiio pretty much is THE face of portable HiFi.




Build Quality & Design

To all the other manufacturers: take notes. This is how you build a premium IEM!

I am not the most loyal IEM follower by any means, but I know the market enough to say that it’s not every day that you see a sub $1k IEM that’s built of titanium—Aa-Aa—not like this. In fact, the majority of IEMs above the $1k price point are still built from materials such as aluminum and stainless steel. When I think of titanium, the first IEM that comes to mind is the Metal Magic Research's Thummim, which is priced at $4500. However, it’s not as though the build quality is exceptional just because pure titanium was used, it’s the finish that sells this material choice.

I can tell you one thing: I am happy I received the titanium version. I thought that the black version would have the same finish as the titanium one, however, that’s not the case. Instead, it features a glossy finish. Besides being a fingerprint magnet, I think that the combination of a high gloss coat and gold grills results in an overall cheap-looking finish. On the other hand, the titanium version not only feels very mature, but is also much more premium-looking.

The FH9 is equally as impressive when it comes to its design. If there is a single part of this IEM that makes it stand out, it’s the design. It appears as though the Fiio team took inspiration from the automotive world because the faceplate of the FH9 looks like something straight off of a sports car. From the smooth curvature to the sleek shape, it's very complete. The only pet peeve I have is the visible seam. I’m sure it was unavoidable, but if there was a way to make the seam less visible and apparent, the design would be perfect.

The shells boast a plectrum shape and features a single vent on the inner side.

The replaceable nozzle system is one of the key features of this IEM. Sure, the concept isn’t anything new–in fact, it’s over half a decade old–but it is still a highly sought after and a well appreciated feature. RHA was one of the manufacturers who played an important role in putting the IEM scene on the commercial consumer level. It was also one of the early adopters of the changeable nozzle filter system with its T20i IEM model.

As a whole, the build quality is 10/10. The design would’ve also been a 10/10 if it weren’t for the seam, so it gets a 9.8/10 from me.



Cable

At one point in time, it was insane to pay 50 bucks for a cable, let alone hundreds of dollars. Nowadays, not only do we have multiple hundred dollar cables, we have multiple thousand dollar cables. The higher priced cables usually are priced at such a price point due to the purity of materials, filters, and things of that nature.

What I am really excited about and am pushing as much as possible are modular cables. I haven’t heard whether they affect sound quality negatively or positively, but I like the convenience they provide. They are a game changer, that’s for sure.

Technically-wise, it’s a litz braided 8-core high-purity monocrystalline silver modular cable. Each core is made up of 28 wires, adding up to a total of 224 wires. I’m usually not a big fan of MMCX cables, but here the implementation is done exceptionally well. The connection is very secure, and you also get the metal tool to help you detach the connectors.

Something I found really cool is how the dark sheathing gives the whole cable a platinum look.



Comfort

Something Fiio’s IEMs have been known for is comfort.

I can speak from experience, though that experience is limited to their entry-level resin models (Fiio FD1 and Jade Audio EA3). These models were very lightweight, and thus made them a perfect fit for daily drivers.

FH9 is a little bit of a different story. Excluding the cable, the weight of each ear-piece is 12.8g. That makes it considerably heavier than the resin models I had experience with. In fact, it’s .1g short of being three times the weight of the FD1! For this very reason, comfort can be an issue. You see, when you have an IEM as heavy as the FH9, it’s the ear-guide that should be partially carrying that weight… but that’s not the case here either. Due to the cables flexibility, it literally goes over the ear instead of resting on the ear. This problem could usually be solved with a simple pre-formed silicone ear hook. However, due to FH9 cable’s thickness, you would really have to search hard to find an ear hook that can hold such a thick cable.

Interestingly enough, the stock ear-tips were not a match for me. What’s more, they further contributed to the problem mentioned before. Initially, I experienced no discomfort or fatigue, but both of these kick within 60 minutes. For whatever reason, the SpinFit CP100 (M) ear-tips fixed the weight fatigue issue for me, I experienced no discomfort or fatigue even in long listening sessions. With these tips I can also get a great fit and seal, so there’s no compromises.

Sound Performance​

Out of the box, I didn’t get what I was looking for from the FH9. For this reason, I let it break-in for roughly 12 hours (with only two breaks). After that period, I went on to play a couple of albums and listen to them myself. I wasn’t focusing on the sound performance, it was just casual listening. However, that casual listening lasted for 3 hours or so, which adds up to 15 hours of break-in runtime. After this period, I feel that the FH9 really opened up. Take this with a grain of salt, but I feel that the lows became more responsive and tighter, the mids gained a more refined tonality, and the highs opened up. Either way, I want to say that the 12 hours of initial break-in were not done in my ears, just to make sure there is no “psychological burn-in”.

At first I preferred pairing it with the iBasso DX300 + AMP12 as opposed to DX300 MAX, but after the break-in period it was the other way around — I preferred pairing it with the DX300 MAX.

Not to stretch this segment any further, I’ll just say that the DX300 MAX offers a more refined sound performance (more quality, less quantity). The two most apparent qualities being the tonality and speed.



Lows

No matter how much quantity you throw at the FH9, it never fails to retain control of it!

I wasn’t impressed with the bass performance of the FH9 straight out of the box. It seemed just “ok”. However, after the break-in period, it’s safe to say that I feel completely different about it. It has what I’m looking for, both in terms of quantity and quality.

I’ll start off with two of my reference tracks: “Hydrogen” by MOON, and “Smoking Mirrors” by Lee Curtiss. In the first track, the bass isn’t overly aggressive. It doesn’t have a hard slam, which is normal, but FH9 does manage to keep up with fast attack & decay. The latter track shows off FH9’s capabilities more so than the first. The bass here is significantly more aggressive, which makes it the more demanding of the two. The bass is extremely responsive, snappy, and tactile, and all of these qualities are the result of FH9’s speed. The bass is also full-bodied and voluminous. What usually happens in “Smoking Mirrors” is that the sub-bass is overwhelming the mid-bass, sacrificing the overall definition of the bass. Luckily, that’s not the case here.

Speaking of sub-bass, Fiio hit the sweet spot. Hans Zimmer’s “Why So Serious?” (3:26) is usually either just present enough or rumbling. Just present enough is the case with the balanced sound signature, and then you only get the tingly feeling in your ears, i.e. the sub-tones are more present physically than audibly. The other scenario is similar in a sense because rumbling usually comes along with the physical sensation of rumble. FH9 manages to stay in the sweet spot by having ever so slight rumble, while also managing to maintain that laid back nature of a balanced sound signature.

A very special reference track of mine is Arctic Monkey’s “Do I Wanna Know?”. What’s unique about this track is its introduction. In particular, the drum hits in the introduction. There are only a handful of IEMs and headphones that managed to pull this track off, and all off them were able to do so due to their ability to have sub-bass rumble present in the drum hits. While the FH9 doesn’t produce the physical sensation of rumble, it does something very special. It manages to give the drum hits enough presence and depth that they don’t sound flat, but it doesn’t do it to the extent where you can feel the physical sensation of rumble.

The low end performance is something fresh, something different. It’s not overwhelming, it’s not underwhelming, it’s just right.



Mids

Although the green (treble) filters are my preferred filters of choice, they make the mid-range intolerable. They give an amazing extension that sounds very good with instruments, but they make a terrible match for vocals. That’s bad news for anyone who specifically enjoys highly energetic and emotional vocals.

Sia is one of my favorite female vocalists, and listening to “Dressed In Black”, “Chandelier (Piano Version)”, and “Chandelier (Piano Version) with the green filters was repugnant. It was at that moment that I made the decision to switch to the black (balanced) filters. With this said, keep in mind that the “Mids” section is being judged based on FH9’s performance with the black filters. It was hard making this decision considering how well appreciated the upper mid-range extension is with the green filters.

Despite taming down the upper-mids, the black filters still offer a very energetic mid-range. Sustained for sure, but to the point that the peaks still tingle your ears. It’s like hugging the inside of a turn on a motorcycle. If you push over the limits, make a mistake, the next thing you know both you and your bike are hitting big air. I’m no racing expert, but I’d compare the black filters to a bike that is aggressively hugging the corner and at no point does it go off track or crashes. It’s playing it dangerously but it’s got everything under control. The green filters, on the other hand, would be a bike that went too aggressively into a turn and ended up highsiding. The turn being a metaphor for peaks.
That’s my crappy take on it.

A great example of what I wrote above are Sia’s three tracks I mentioned earlier.

Intense vocals and acoustic stringed instruments, that’s my thing. FH9 manages to be a tease. It has beautiful tonality, it has the upper mid-range extension, but it only has the tiniest amount of the lower end that’s needed to have a correct string timbre. That’s why I call it a tease. It’s not fully there, but it’s still there. The tracks used:

The Alan Parsons Project— Some Other Time
Led Zeppelin – Babe I’m Gonna Leave You
Dire Straits – Private Investigations
Fleetwood Mac – Oh Daddy
Joan Baez – Diamonds and Rust
Joan Baez – Song of Bangladesh
Deep Purple – Soldier of Fortune



Highs

To my surprise, going back to green filters didn’t result in an overly aggressive treble response.

I was certain that the FH9 would cross the shine levels of treble and enter into the sparkle range. However, as it turns out, I was wrong. Not only does the FH9 (with the green filters) not cross the shine levels, but it also rarely crosses into the shine levels. Most often, it stays within the sheen range.

In case the terminology is confusing, this is how I sort treble by quantity:
Sibilance > Sparkle > Shine > Sheen > Warm

Sibilance being treble in such quantity that it becomes too much to tolerate (present in analytical sound signatures; common in studio tuning), sparkle being the fine line between sibilance and shine, shine being treble with edge but not to the point where the edge tingles your ears (a quality present in sparkle), sheen being treble with a soft edge, and warm being treble with no edge.

Miles Davis’ “Portia” and Stevie Wonder’s harmonica (4:43 – 5:38) in Travis Scott’s “Stop Trying to Be God” have been my reference tracks for sibilance for quite a while now. I was expecting the peaks in both of these tracks to cross into the sparkle range, but that wasn’t the case. In “Portia”, even at the peaks the treble barely was in the shine range, while in “Stop Trying to Be God” stayed mostly in the shine range.

What pleasantly stands out with the green filters is percussion. It’s exceptionally crisp, fast, and snappy. Dire Straits’ “Money For Nothing”, Alphaville’s “Sounds Like A Melody”, and Dio’s “Holy Diver” album are a perfect showcase of FH9’s percussion speed capability. I repeat, crisp, fast, and snappy are the treble qualities that FH9 possesses.

Soundstage & Imaging

To be honest, I had very high expectations of FH9’s soundstage. To put it lightly, my expectations weren’t met. With the semi open-back design, I expected a very transparent and wide soundstage. From my experience, I found the design to act more like a big vent than anything else. As is usually the case with open-back designs, if you don’t dampen them enough, you will lose a significant amount of bass. So, my guess is that Fiio used a thick and/or dense dampening. However, the design choice is audible in the sense that there is no pressure build-up or that closed-back feeling when IEMs are snugly fitted in your ear canals.

Size wise, the soundstage is average. The whole presentation is intimate, so there is no holographic soundstage and qualities of that nature. But then again, I don’t think you can expect such qualities at this price point.

I will go over this part in the section below, but even though the imaging is, it gets lost in the crowd.



Separation & Detail Retrieval

Unfortunately, this is not a field where the FH9 particularly excels in. The presentation is crowded and I fine there to be a lack of space for all of the elements in music to breathe. This causes details to be lost and doesn’t allow them to be fully appreciated.

My personal take on as to why this might be happening is as follows. I believe that the high number of drivers and their implementation might be the cause. FH9 is a fairly averagely sized IEM, it’s not overly thick or big, nor is it overly slim or thin. For this reason, the physical amount of free space to spread out those 7 drivers is quite limited.

I think that in the future Fiio should utilize their current knowledge and explore the design with less drivers but more space inside the shells. I have no doubt that Fiio is going to be one step closer to perfection whether they go that route or not.

Conclusion​

The FH9 has got it all: switchable nozzles, modular cable, titanium build, premium design, and a pretty decent sound performance. I think Fiio aimed to make a very versatile IEM that comes in a package for those who want to explore what they like, and that it certainly successfully achieved. The package is equally as future-proof as it is beginner-friendly.

FH9 possesses exceptional mid-range and bass qualities. The treble leans towards the safer side, with no risky tuning present. For those who are looking for an IEM for extreme analytical listening, look elsewhere because that’s not what Fiio was aiming for. I would say the same for those who are looking for an IEM for critical listening. The latter group is usually the one that is really looking to be immersed in the music, and for this they seek a holographic soundstage, separation that allows them to dissect each and every element, and pin-point imaging. Anyhow, while it falls short in some areas, it makes up for it in others.

In my eyes, the FH9 is simply put a very good package. With this package also comes good tuning. What you should not expect is to be blown away by its soundstage, imaging, or separation, i.e. technical abilities. It’s an well-tuned IEM that you can listen to and forget about it.

This said, I think that it would make for a great introduction to the premium IEM market for the masses. More than that, it would make a great for present for a loved one who you are trying to convince to enter this world.

So much more than just a bass cannon!​

Design & Build Quality

Bullet. Fixed cable. Short nozzle. Aluminum… That’s about as short as I can make it.

BIE is a bullet-style IEM that features a single 10mm dynamic driver which uses N52 neodymium magnets. The shells are made of high-quality aluminum that is of a pale gold color. It’s easy to mistake the color for silver, especially in online photos, but in reality it’s a very beautiful and subtle pale gold finish.

The shells consist of two parts, and the seam is visible. At the back of the shell, there is a single vent. The nozzle is considerably shorter than usual, which is something I noticed only later down the line. It has a notch, but I didn’t find it to be as functional as it should be. Most ear-tips I tried easily come off, but the ones that are tighter seem to have no problem staying on.

Even though BIE has a vent, I still experienced driver flex when inserting the IEMs, but also when taking them out. This forced me to be more gentle.

As it’s usually the case with fixed cables, there’s nothing really to compliment here. It's not the most flexible cable and it's microphonic.

Comfort

BIE is perhaps the most ear-tip sensitive IEM I’ve come across. I had to go through just about every ear-tip I own, only to settle down with the size M tips that come with the Samsung EO-IG955BSEGW earphones. With these tips, I am able to get a secure and tight fit, but also a deep insertion.

As already mentioned, the BIE is extremely tip sensitive, so, depending on which tips you use, the sound performance will significantly differ. For example, the stock tips provide MASSIVE bass, extreme levels of bass quantity, and the tips I decided to use (from the EO-IG955BSEGW) tone down the quantity, and instead increase the quality. With this out of the way, be aware that my review is mostly based on BIE’s performance with 3rd party tips.

Sound Performance​

Lows

Before switching out the tips, this is what I wrote:

“Did I mention that these are bass cannons yet? No? In that case, yes, these are bass cannons. If you are a basshead, you will almost certainly love these.

When I say they rumble, I mean it. If you can picture being in a club, that’s exactly how I’d describe BIE’s bass performance — you feel it.”

I take that back, because that’s only the case with the stock tips. These IEMs have so much more to offer! Switching out the tips makes them a completely different IEM.

Quality-wise, BIE doesn’t have the most defined bass, but it packs a serious punch while maintaining surprisingly decent speed qualities. In MOON’s “Hydrogen”, it’s apparent that the bassline is rich in quantity, has very good decay response, and has a softer/slower attack. It’s not overly slow to the point that the bass sound sloppy or loose, but it’s not fast enough to make it sound snappy and punchy. It’s not tight, I am trying to say. In “Smoking Mirrors” by Lee Curtiss, the bassline is more refined. The body is more defined, but at the same time there is more depth. The same qualities I noticed in “Hydrogen” are also present here, the speed is not so fast to the point it’s snappy, but it’s also not so slow to the point it’s sloppy.

Sub-bass, on the other hand, isn’t as emphasized. Well, with the 3rd party tips, that is. With the stock tips, the sub-bass has “too” much quantity. By “too much”, I mean that the quality suffers so much that it’s nothing more than a great volume of sub-bass hitting you. There’s not a lot of definition. However, when I switched out the tips to my preferred 3rd party ones, the quality was significantly better.
In Hans Zimmer’s “Why So Serious?”, the sub-bass drop occurring at the 3:27 minute mark shows these qualities. The sub-bass is pulsating, and is more subtle than present. It’s not overwhelming like it is with the stock tips.

The track that made me go nuts is Arctic Monkey’s “Do I Wanna Know?”. Mind you, when I took these out of the box, I didn’t fiddle with different ear-tips. When I listened to this track with the stock tips, I was like “Yep. These are for bassheads. This is insane.”. With my preferred 3rd party tips, the introduction of this tracks still sound above average, but with the stock tips… it’s a whole different story. The drum kicks have such thump, such density. This is the second IEM ever to have such a special performance in this track. The only other IEM being TRI’s original i3 (not the new i3 Pro).



Mids

Since the BIE is generally a V-shaped IEM, the mids aren’t the star of the show. I will say though, I was surprised to hear how much of a difference the tips make here. At least in my eyes, the difference in performance in the lower frequency range was expected to be significant, but in the mid-range, not so much.

The stock tips have a greater upper mid-range extension, while my preferred 3rd party ones have a greater lower mid-range extension. As you can imagine, which one sounds better is differs from track to track. The two track I quickly went over to notice these differences are “Speak Softly, Love” and “One More Time” by Yao Si Ting. I’d say the mids aren’t perfect on neither the stock pads nor the 3rd party ones.

One thing I will say is that there is significant amount of mid-bass bleed when using the stock tips. It’s audible in several tracks, of which I wouldn’t set apart any particular ones. It’s apparent that the mid-bass bleeds into the mids, and it can be noticed in just about every track where there are elements in both the lower frequency range and in the mid frequency range. If those two elements are playing at the same time, you will very easily hear it… It doesn’t take a trained ear.

When it comes to acoustic stringed instruments, I prefer the tonality and the sound of the 3rd party tips. Piano sounds fuller and weightier on the stock tips, and that’s largely because of the greater lower end extension.



Highs

Once again, depending on which tips you use, the amount of high end extension will differ. As I expected, there is a greater top end extension when using the stock tips (which are more focused/concentrated due to the narrower opening). My preferred Samsung tips give a more relaxed and smooth upper end.

In fact, the lower treble is so smooth with the Samsung tips that I consider it as warm. On the other hand, the upper treble has a great extension. And when I say “great”, I am referring to quality-wise, not quantity-wise. It’s not overly emphasized, it’s not piercing or fatiguing, it’s just a very good V-shaped treble extension. For example, Dire Straits’ “Money For Nothing” is a track where I would expect crisp and pronounced percussion, but on the BIE that’s not the case. However, when it comes to peaks from, e.g. vocals, instruments, they are out there. This is what I mean when I say that the upper treble has a great extension while the lower treble is warm.

Speaking of peaks, “Stop Trying to Be God” by Travis Scott is a reference track of mine for brightness. In particular, it’s Stevie Wonder’s mouth harmonica at the very end of this track that I’m listening to (from 4:43 – 5:38). BIE’s sound performance in this track had audible qualities of near-sparkle levels of treble. When I talk about sparkle qualities, this is how I sort them in terms of quantity:
piercing>sparkle>shine>sheen>warm

Soundstage, Imaging & Separation

How much did you say these cost again? Nope. The price simply doesn’t make sense. The soundstage, imo, is on-par with IEM 15 times its price. The soundstage is roughly 10-15 centimeters outside the IEMs themselves. It may not sound like a lot, but when it comes to IEMs, it is. Although I wouldn’t say BIE has anything outstanding to offer in terms of staging and separation, the soundstage is above average when it comes to its size.

Conclusion​

Believe it or not, I had zero expectation for the BIE. All I knew is that it was perceived to be a bass cannon and that it had Venture Electronics’ house sound.

On one hand, what people were talking about turned out to be true — BIE is a bass cannon. Behaving like a sub-woofer in your ears, it can produce the physical sensation of rumble. On the other hand, when you switch out the stock tips, you get a completely different experience. It’s a two-way street. You are not stuck with the bass-focused sound signature. Not only can you alter its sound signature significantly with tips, but also with your source. I first started listening to the BIE with the DX300 + AMP11Mk1 amp module, and that's the combo that gives the ultimate bass-focused performance. When paired with the DX300 MAX, the sound perforamnce is more refined and tame.

This is why I titled this review “So much more than just a bass cannon”.

With the stock tips, it’s a very fun IEM. Like very, very fun. I would definitely use it for casual listening and when I’m trying to get hit in the face with bass. However, if I want a more refined listening experience, I will throw my Samsung tips on and get just that.

Price-wise… yeah, this is not a $20 sounding IEM. I know people want to hear names and not just “it sounds 15x the price”, but to stay on the safe side, let’s just say that it doesn’t sound anywhere near 20 bucks. I, as someone with limited IEM experience, cannot say it sounds better than something I’ve never heard, but when my friend who owns the MMR Thummim tried the BIE out, he was blown away. That says enough by itself.

I think Lee wanted to give the world a “trial” of the Grand Duke. Like “Here’s a little taste, and if you want the full package, it exists ”
But there’s a catch: BIE on its own is a package that is of such an extreme value that it successfully exists as a standalone product.

---

Setup:
Source: iBasso DX300 MAX (Gain: Low | DAC Volume: 90 | Ultimate Mode: ON | OS: Android)
Ear-tips: Samsung EO-IG955BSEGW (M), Stock SM tips

Design and Build Quality

INK follows the exact same design and build of the original Diamond. The only difference would be the color of the shell. INK has a black anodized shell, while the Diamond had a green-ish anodized shell. The nozzle is still in a golden polished finish, and the faceplate is still resin-like.

To make it a long story short, it’s still has the good old well-built and lightweight qualities.



Lows

Like the good old Diamond model, INK retains a good bass response. Not only that, but if doesn’t suffer from the lack of sub-bass that was present in the Diamond. The KBEAR team took the tuning seriously and make sure to implement improvement in the new model. They certainly took their time with it, which is apparent when you listen to the new model.

Full-body bass, moderate slam, and fast attack & decay are how I would characterize INK’s bass qualities. It doesn’t necessarily provide the depth that some more expensive models would in the bass region, but it certainly stands its ground in terms of bass qualities. Qualities such as full-body bass, fast attack and decay are present in Lee Curtiss’ “Smoking Mirrors”. Fast attack is even more audible on a track such as MOON’s “Hydrogen”. In both of these tracks its apparent that INK has responsive bass.

For sub-bass, while it doesn’t possess the presence in Arctic Monkey’s “Do I Wanna Know?”, it is certainly capable of producing sub-bass tones. Not only is it capable of producing sub-bass tones, but it’s also capable of rumble — something that the Diamond was lacking of. Per usual, my standard test track for sub-bass and rumble was “Why So Serious?” by Hans Zimmer. Another track where the sub-bass is present is in the deeper cello notes in the “Theme for The Irishman” by Robert Robertson.

In summary, it is a major improvement over the old Diamond. The mid-bass is well-defined, the sub-bass is good enough and INK is capable of producing rumble.

Mids

Upside down. Why do I say this? In my opinion, the mids are the exact opposite of the mids of the Diamond, which had good timbre when it came to instruments but had unnatural vocals. INK has very natural and “transparent” vocals, but has a not-on-point timbre when it comes to instruments. Strings that is, strings aren’t what I’d call natural-sounding. The key part that’s missing to make the strings sound natural is what is usually the case with the majority of IEMs, and that’s the bottom-end. It’s the subtle lower sub-tone that contributes to the timbre of stringed instruments. This is most audible in acoustic stringed instruments. Essentially, without the bottom-end, a pluck doesn’t sound or feel like a pluck.

Let’s talk about vocals for a minute. From memory, Diamond’s vocals were far from pleasant, and to even say that INK’s vocals are a major improvement would be an understatement. It’s a night and day difference. I would go as far to say that INK has a forward presentation of vocals, and that’s quite apparent when it comes to more aggressive vocalists like Sia.

One thing about the mid-range that stuck out to me (no pun intended) is that it’s kind of aggressive, meaning it’s leaning towards the brighter side of the spectrum. It’s not shouty to the point the previous model (Diamond) was, but it is still audible that the upper-end of the mid-range is sharp.



Highs

To my surprise, the highs aren’t as sharp as I thought they would be. INK’s highs would be in the sheen zone (sibilance>sparkle>sheen).

This is apparent in my standard test tracks. Mouth harmonica is a great instrument to listen to treble qualities, and that’s why I use Miles Davis’ “Portia” and Travis Scott’s “Stop Trying to Be God” (outro in which Stevie Wonder’s mouth harmonica is present). In both of these tracks I noticed that at no point does the treble cross the sheen quality.

Percussion-wise, I found the treble to be a little underwhelming. The best way to put it, there isn’t enough “energy”. It’s not as though it’s missing a whole lot, it’s only by a small amount. For example, percussion present in the introduction of Dire Straits’ “Brothers in Arms” is a perfect example of this. Another example of this is the percussion present in the outro of Led Zeppelin’s “Stairway To Heaven” .

Conclusion​

INK is a major improvement over the original Diamond model. If Diamond wasn’t my cup of tea, then INK is exactly the opposite. It has an improved bass response, finally a listenable mid-range, and has just enough of the top-end to make it sound lively enough. No, it’s not the most detailed IEM out there. No, it doesn’t have exceptional soundstage. No, it will not blow you away with its separation capabilities. But, it is good enough in all of those. I don’t find it to be below average. What it is is a refined version of the original Diamond.

What you are about to read is only a part of a bigger article. This part only covers the critical evaluation of the Euridiche. If you are interested in the history behind the company, the founder, and the Euridiche (how it was born and created), then you can read my "Soltanus Acoustics — The Full Story" article here:
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/soltanus-acoustics-euridiche-%E2%80%94-the-full-story.962997/

Author's Note​

In memory of my dear aunt & grandfather, who passed away this month, in April.​

Like the majority of my work, this article was not written overnight. It took a great amount of effort, energy, and patience. Well over 300 hours has been invested into this article. This includes: listening time, composing the article, formatting, taking the photography & editing it, audio interview and transcription of the same one, email exchanges, and general research. The article was set to be published in February/March last year, but due to unexpected delays, it had to be delayed by 12 months.

"Soltanus Acoustics — The Full Story" is 27 pages/13,450 words long. For this reason, as its author, I suggest you read it in chapters, with pauses in between each chapter.​

Disclaimer: The Euridiche was provided to me free of charge for the purpose of writing a review. I am not affiliated with Soltanus Acoustics in any way, nor am I gaining any financial benefit from writing this article. The article is strictly based on my experience and opinion, it is free of any bias from an external force (online influence, other people’s opinion, or the manufacturer itself). The article in itself was fully my idea and was not a requirement from the manufacturer.

Click to expand...

Chapter 4 | Critical Evaluation

Unboxing Experience

When you are in the premium headphone market, you expect premium presentation and packaging. To some people, it’s of more significance than others. In the case of Soltanus Acoustics, you definitely get a premium treatment when it comes to packaging.

The Euridiche comes in a 29.4 cm × 28.5 cm × 28.5 cm (L x W x H) wooden box. On either side of the box, you have what’s called a toggle latch. This latch uses tension to keep the box closed and secured, you can find a similar mechanism on some beer bottles (often called a swing-top bottle). If you wish to lock the latch, there is a hole in which you can stick a pin that prevents it from opening.

The box itself features a military-like paint print. “Soltanus” is on the front side, while “Acoustics” is on the top side. For portability and moving around, there is a well-made rubber handle on top. It is secured with the help of two matte-black metal pieces that are screwed in place. The same metal pieces have “teeth” that bite down on the wood.

Once you open the box, you will discover that it’s separated into two departments:

1) The energizer/amplifier department

2) The headphone department

The latter has two more compartments that are created with wood separators. You can store your cable, extra ear-pads, or similar accessories in them. Both the headphone and energizer are secured in place with firm foam blocks. The cover of the box also has foam blocks that prevent the energizer from moving around, while also protecting both devices from scratches.

While the unboxing presentation won’t blow you away, I think that the packaging is very well-made both looks and feels premium. I am happy to see that no plastic was used, which remains the whole sustainable ideology that Soltanus Acoustics is going for.



Technology & Design

You’re probably looking at the Euridiche and thinking to yourself “Hmm, that looks familiar”, and you’re not wrong. It heavily resembles Audeze’s flagship LCD-4 and it’s not trying to hide it. Both the headband design and system remain almost identical. The rod headband system offers 7 height adjustment steps and roughly 45˚ of swivel (horizontal rotation).

Unlike the early wooden version of the Euridiche, the current one has circular ear-cups. Besides the Soltanus Acoustics logo by the headband, the ear-cups’ faceplate features “soltanus acoustics” typeface on the upper end and “Euridiche” on the bottom end in a cursive font. Speaking of the faceplate, it is held down with the help of 8 hex screws. However, it’s a little bit more complex than that. The ear-pads themselves feature a firm and sturdy base that has 8 holes, and the faceplate is screwed into that base. Because this is a rather unusual design, it means that you cannot just swap out the pads with any aftermarket ones. This sandwich design allows both the faceplate and the ear-cups to be pressed hard against the housing, and this should mean that there is a tight seal. It is basically a sandwich design. The faceplate on its own features a honeycomb design for airflow.



But let’s get to the most interesting part about this headphone... The technology.

Among the first things that you will see are the 3-step toggle switches that are located behind the tube-like headphone connector housings. I knew that some people would question what this toggle switch does and how it works, so I went ahead and asked Zoltán some technical questions about it.

As it is explained on Soltanus Acoustics’ website and in the user manual, this is a tuning switch. Before I go ahead and explain how it works, I need to explain what the electrostatic driver setup inside this headphone looks like.

Electrostatic drivers are divided into two categories: flat, conductive sheets (Sennheiser, HiFiMan, Warwick Acoustics, Kaldas Research, ES Lab, Stax, Koss) and stretched wires (Soltanus Acoustics). Now, in the loudspeaker world, there are several companies using either of these stators, but in the headphone world, Soltanus Acoustics appears to be the sole company using stretched wire stators. An electrostatic driver works by placing a static electric charge on a film (membrane) that floats between two stators. Zoltán took the stator design from loudspeakers (his own Virtuoso) and applied it to his Euridiche headphones. Once you take off the faceplate and the ear-pads, you will find two stators (four in total). Each stator consists of 21 vertically placed copper wires (rods). Unlike flat, conductive sheet stators, stretched wire stators allow you to electrically separate them. Now that you have a basic understanding of electrostatic stators inside, I can go on to explain how the tuning switch works and how it takes advantage of this design.





As Zoltán explained, the first 8 rods from the front are always directly connected to the full signal, i.e., they receive the full frequency range (low, mid, high), while the remaining 13 are connected through the tuning switch (electrically separated). The switch allows you to gradually decrease the high frequencies (>1 kHz) by 2 dB. The Euridiche has three tuning modes/steps:

1. Outwards (full-frequency) — All 21 rods are receiving the full-frequency spectrum

2. Middle (2 dB decrease in high frequencies) — The affected 13 rods have a 2 dB decrease in high frequencies.

3. Inwards (4 dB decrease in high frequencies) — The affected 13 rods have a 4 dB decrease in high frequencies.

Besides the decrease in upper frequencies, this also moves the sound image forward. You have to remember that the first 8 stators are always receiving the full signal, so if you are decreasing the high frequencies on the 13 stators, the sound image will gradually move forward as you change modes.

Personally, I couldn’t hear a huge difference in sound. As far as being an audible difference, I heard that position 1 (full-frequency) is brighter and has more sparkle than position 3 (4 dB decrease in high frequencies), but I couldn’t hear a difference between 1 and 2, and 2 and 3.

I would also like to go back to the stators because there is more to cover. As mentioned before, Zoltán made 20 different stators until he settled on the rod type. He explained his reasoning as to why he stays away from conductive sheets:

“The holes that are present on perforated conductive sheets have a resonance. The little holes act as a small resonator. The perforated holes are actually tubes because you have the thickness of that plate and you have the diameter of the hole, within that hole you have a mass of air. That mass of air and the resistance to airflow create a resonant circuit that affects high frequencies. In my rod stators, you do not have such a problem because sound travels much easier through it.”

I also mentioned earlier that Soltanus Acoustics is the only company that uses such stators in headphones and there might be a very prominent reason behind it. These types of stators require a lot of labor, as opposed to perforated conductive sheets that can be made with a CNC machine. The rod stators require straightening, cutting down to size, soldering, gluing, putting them in place on the mold, etc. This type of work cannot be done for mass production, which might be another reason why we haven’t seen it in this space.



Build Quality

Moving onto the construction aspect, let’s start from the top to the bottom.

The headband is made of carbon fiber just like the Audeze ones. I found out that it’s made by a local company that specializes in manufacturing sports tricycles. The main piece of the headband (the part that holds together the whole headband construction) has a plastic housing and anodized aluminum plates. When you are looking at it from the top view, you can see that it has a hole that allows the yoke rods to run through it. Speaking of the yoke rods, they are made of metal, while the headphone yoke and the headphone faceplate are made of anodized aluminum.

I went over how the early versions were made of wood, so I’d like to cover the story of how we got to the material that is used in today’s pairs.

Zoltán switched to 3D printing technology only a year after making the first wooden Euridiche model. Considering that he made the wooden pair exclusively for Dr. Rudolf Klein, and not as a public release, this was a pretty major step to make. He saw the future in 3D technology, and he went on to mention all the benefits:

“This is the most modern technology that you can buy as of now. You do not have material waste, you don’t waste any material, and you don’t have to stand by the printer […] It uses very little energy. Sure, it is not for mass production, but that’s not something that I want to do with my products anyway. This technology is perfect for my needs.”

He also owns a CNC machine, but explained why he doesn’t use it:

“The first reason is that I do not have to control and stand by the machine all the time. The second is because 3D printing technology allows me to make shapes and pieces that are impossible to make on a CNC machine. I am able to make very fine shapes on the 3D printer that would be otherwise very, very hard to make on a CNC machine, but also, I would never be able to make inside-hollowed pieces with a CNC machine. And the third is that I am not littering or polluting the environment. I am using such materials that when they are thrown away, they degrade […] It is a special 3D printing material, it’s more expensive than others, but it is a very good and sturdy material.”

That just about covers the construction and materials used on these headphones, but what about the inside? The stators are made of factory lacquered pure copper. The lacquer layer acts as insulation, which is essential for an electrostatic driver. The rods that Zoltán is using feature two layers of fabric lacquer. Without this insulation layer, there would be a dielectric breakdown and due to the high-voltage present, sparking would occur. On the inside of this headphone, you have the already described stators, but there’s also the membrane which I haven’t covered. This membrane is made of 2 μm (micron) thin Mylar foil that is placed between two fiberglass pieces. To put this thickness in perspective, human hair is ~70–180 microns thick. The membrane has a nanocrystalline graphene coat on it that allows the driver to function in a push-pull design. The said fiberglass is a total of 1 mm in thickness (2x 0.5 mm). The Mylar is glued to the fiberglass with special elastic glue.

The membrane is 104 mm in diameter, making it the largest on the market—at least from what I could find.

“When they invented Mylar, somewhere around in the ’60s, they drove a Volvo car on the foil itself, they wrapped the Mylar around the car like a bag, and they tied it in a knot to a crane. When they lifted the Volvo car, everybody dropped on their bums and wondered how such foil can lift a car that weighs a tonne and a half.” Zoltán explained the strength of Mylar foil. As I had done my homework and research, I found that Mylar was actually invented in the early ’50s. I also found out that the car that they lifted actually weighed 3 tonnes! You can actually take a look at the original photograph of this very event here: https://digital.hagley.org/AVD_2004268_P00002245

Euridiche is a flagship headphone, and something that stands out is the fact that the membrane is easily replaceable, just like every part of this headphone.

“The only part that can degrade (after 10, 20, 30 years) in my headphones is the membrane. That’s why it is replaceable. This is an innovation, up until now, nobody featured a membrane that you can replace by yourself.”

I would agree with this statement. Kaldas Research is the only other company that offers a replaceable membrane. This is a crucial feature that allows a product to theoretically last a lifetime.



Cable

One thing I want to get straight out of the way is that the current (March/2022) photographs on the Soltanus Acoustics website are outdated. The Euridiche no longer comes with a flat wire cable. The Euridiche series now comes with a premium custom-made cable.

It consists of a high-purity (99 999%) mixture of copper and silver. The copper and silver are sourced from England. Instead of the standard stranded wire, Zoltán went the solid-core way and this was not by accident:

“Based on our findings, solid-core sounded better. Soltanus Acoustics cables have a lot of wires of varying thicknesses (0.15–0.45 mm). It is very important that everything is individually insulated, that not all the wires are in single insulation.”

The cable on the Euridiche is a 9-core cable, and every wire is individually insulated with a Teflon sleeve. It should be noted that this very cable used to be manufactured by Dr. Rudolf Klein, who is the original designer. However, Zoltán took over the responsibility, and now he makes the cables himself.

When I asked whether the cable has shielding, Zoltán had this to say:

“It is not shielded. It’s not needed for headphones. If it were shielded, it would create a capacitance that would have a negative effect. If the cable were shielded, it would have a greater capacitance than the headphones themselves.”

That’s what’s going on on the inside, but on the outside, you have a cotton sleeve that wraps all of the Teflon-insulated wires. The whole cable itself is quite rigid, and you can’t straighten out any hard curves that are present. It makes it a good cable if you are sitting in a chair and the amplifier is in front of you. However, if the cable has to bend and curve, you might find yourself fighting with the cable. What’s also worthy of mentioning is that Zoltán recently introduced the option of choosing between 3-pin XLR connectors and a STAX Pro Bias 5-pin connector. If you choose the 3-pin XLR option, you will have two separate strands of cable that each end in 3-pin XLR. So far, I believe that Zoltán’s amplifiers are the only ones that support the dual 3-pin electrostatic XLR connection. If you prefer, you can also make a cable yourself or buy one because the Euridiche has 3-pin mini-XLR connectors on the headphone end. For example, I had no issues using the cable that was supplied with the Kaldas Research RR1.




Comfort

Weighing in at 620 grams, it sits at the far end of the weight spectrum. Yes, there is the HEDDphone which sits in at 700 grams, and then there are some Audeze headphones that weigh over 700 grams, but 620 grams certainly falls under that “heavy-heavy” headphone weight category.

Despite its weight, it’s surprisingly comfortable. This is all thanks to the oversized ear-cups and the highly flexible ear-cups. Zoltán went through a number of ear-pad variations, of which I had a chance to experience three: very hard ones, semi-hard ones, and softer ones. The very hard ones were the first iteration and weren’t comfortable. The semi-hard ones are pretty good and they are the ones I spent the most time with. The softer ones are also pretty nice, but since the clamping force isn’t all that strong, the difference is barely noticeable. I suggested the use of memory foam, but it turned out that the ear-pads fully compressed and thus negatively impacted the sound performance. At the end of the day, everything was figured out and a somewhat perfect balance has been found. The ear-pads are very thick, measuring around 3.2 cm. They also have a fairly large surface area, measuring around 2.1 cm. My ears had no issues with the inner size of the ear-pads. The inner diameter measures 7 centimeters. It’s the combination of all three of these factors that makes the seal good.

I’d say that within the first hour or two, everything is completely fine. However, after that period of time, I experienced some physical fatigue. Though obvious, I do think it’s important to state that the majority of that fatigue formed on my head, that is, from the weight on the headband. If it weren’t for such an open-back design, I am almost certain that the fatigue would’ve occurred much earlier.

I wouldn’t exactly say that the Euridiche is a headphone you’d be walking around with or banging your head like a maniac to... The best-case scenario would be sitting in a comfy lounge chair that supports your neck/head. It’s really important that you rest your neck against something soft.

Sound Performance​

Lows

Among my first speculations about Euridiche’s sound performance was its delicate yet deep bass performance. Why “delicate”? Well, I believe that the lower frequency range isn’t particularly pronounced, especially not like it is in many headphones. It’s not overwhelming. There is a sense of balance, a focus on the quality of bass instead of quantity. Sure thing, I appreciate a great lower extension, but I also appreciate an overall balanced sound signature—something that I also came across in the Ollo S4X.

I sometimes experience ear fatigue when a headphone has a too overwhelming low-frequency response. This is not the case here. The bass has the depth of the body but in a very subtle way. As far as words can go, I think that no word describes it better than “soft” and “delicate”. Again, for clarification purposes, do not misinterpret these two terms, because Euridiche is more than capable when it comes to its bass quality and quantity capabilities.

Perhaps “Theme for The Irishmen” by Robbie Robertson surprised me the most. As soon as you play this track, you are met with a drum and percussion with long decay. The parts that completely blew me away occur at the 1:03 and 1:04 minute marks. At these parts, the drum is panned to the left, and it sounds so realistic, so true that it doesn’t even feel like I’m listening to a headphone. This is more related to imaging, but I simply had to state it. Where you can really hear the sub-frequency capability of this headphone is at the 1:46 and 3:58 minute marks. What’s in question is a growl and tone coming off a cello. It is a very deep tone that you feel, proving Euridiche’s ability to dig deep and break away from the stereotype that electrostats are incapable of producing strong sub-tones.

“Why so Serious?” by Hans Zimmer, a standard test track of mine, is a perfect example of the deepest sub-frequencies present in the music. Though subtle, at 3:26 the climax is reached and the drop occurs. What I am able to feel rather than hear are the very deep frequencies. They have quite a lot of weight and truly feel heavy, but are barely audible—which is how this part is supposed to sound. Michael Jackson’s “Smooth Criminal” is another special testing track of mine. I listen to the “heartbeats” in the introduction. In this track too, this headphone was able to produce a clean sub-bass tone. Each heartbeat is felt, it sounds like a strong “thud”. Another example of Euridiche’s sub-bass capability can be heard in Angel Olsen’s “Spring”, where there is a sub-bass undertone present in the bassline.

Even “Do I Wanna Know?” by Arctic Monkey has the said depth quality. I always this track as a bonus, it serves as icing on the cake track. If the headphone performs well in the lower region in this song, I know that it is doing something special. The introduction (0:00—0:04) features a thumping drum. It usually sounds too boomy, too thin/flat, or sounds just right. With these headphones, you can hear both the “oomph” and the decay. At around 0:05 you can hear the even deeper tones that are coming off the bass guitar. Although this is a very well-known track, it’s not a track that gets carried out well by most headphones. I was pleasantly surprised by Euridiche’s performance here, because, as I said, headphones rarely are able to pull this one-off.

The Euridiche also bears very well in terms of mid-bass qualities (impact, punch, speed). This kind of goes back to what I said in the beginning, that the focus is on the bass qualities. In terms of speed, much like the high-frequency response, both the attack and the decay are responsive and fast. This is the reason why I found the bass to be snappy. Besides my standard speed test tracks (MOON — “Hydrogen”, Lee Curtiss—Smoking Mirrors), I really found the same snappy quality in both the usual percussion drums and in electronic music. Whether it was Deadmau5, Burial, Massive Attack, Daft Punk, rave, hip-hop, or just rock, the low-end always had a fast attack & decay, fast delivery, and strong impact. “Bulletproof Soul” by Sade is a perfect example of bass depth, speed, and presence, and it’s another one of those tracks where Euridiche doesn’t disappoint. In Fleetwood Mac’s “Oh Daddy”, the kick drum (if I am not mistaken) has a very mature “thud” quality.

During my visit to Zoltán, I also brought my iBasso SR2 and Ollo Audio S4X headphones. This is something I didn’t initially mention, but this is the perfect segment to reveal it. When Zoltán listened to both headphones, he was amazed and pleasantly surprised by how neutral the S4X sounded, and it was also the headphone he liked more. On the other hand, I definitely preferred the SR2 for music listening. Then, a while later, I had a friend visit me. Something that you should know about him is that he has a pair of Megnepans and they are his primary speakers, the speakers he is used to hearing. When he listened to the S4X, he had a very similar reaction as Zoltán. He liked them very much, he liked the balanced sound signature, and he also preferred them over the SR2. What I could conclude is that both of them were used to flat-panel speakers (without subwoofers), so they are used to that more balanced sound signature where you do not have a big emphasis on the lower frequencies. I think that the Euridiche offers similar performance in a headphone form factor. Imagine the Euridiche as a pair of Magnepans with good subwoofers.



Mids

Anyone who has been reading my previous work is aware of my admiration of strings. With this being said, I’d like to start off by talking about strings.

The Alan Parsons Project— Some Other Time
Led Zeppelin – Babe I’m Gonna Leave You
Dire Straits – Private Investigations
Fleetwood Mac – Go Insane - Live 1997
Fleetwood Mac – Oh Daddy
Joan Baez – Diamonds and Rust
Joan Baez – Song of Bangladesh
Deep Purple – Soldier of Fortune

Strumming or plucking of a guitar (usually either classical or acoustic) is present in all of these tracks. That is the element that you should listen to.

Ugh… Just listening to strings, it’s hard to pull myself away from them and type. I mean, how can you distract yourself from such pleasure?

Euridiche is a dream when it comes to strings. To keep it short and sweet: it has the bottom end that defines a string pluck, it has the mid-range tonality that makes a string sound like a string (timbre), and it has the upper end that is another very, very important aspect when it comes to making a string sound like a string. This is a very vague description, but each element consists of its own set of complex details and qualities. It depends from guitar to guitar, from recording to recording, but I personally most enjoy guitar plucks that are felt. And for a guitar pluck to be felt, the headphone must have a good lower mid-range response. It must have fast attack and a responsive decay (if you think of the sound of a guitar pluck, it is very snappy at the beginning, and has a soft, but long-lasting decay). However, there are also guitar plucks that possess both fast attack and short delay, resulting in a “dry”, metal-like sound. The one I described before could be related to the sound of a guitar with reverb. I’m no music/instrument expert in any sort of way but think of it like the sustain pedal on a piano.

“Some Other Time”, “Babe I’m Gonna Leave You”, “Go Insane” fall in the first category: more “dry” strings.

“Private Investigations”, “Oh Daddy” (though at several parts the guitar sounds very tight and tense), “Diamonds And Rust”, “Song of Bangladesh”, “Soldier of Fortune” fall in the latter category: guitar plucks have more reverb/sustain.

As for vocals, I think it’s quite a love it or hate it situation. You are either going to fall in love or you are going to be unsatisfied. This is especially the case if you listen to a lot of “old” rock because that’s where you notice the raw nature of vocals the most. I use the word “raw” to describe the quality of vocals due to the lack of another word that accurately describes how vocals sound. Usually, vocals sound pretty full and not lifelike on headphones, and this is done with a purpose. It sounds better, especially for the masses. It’s easier on the ears, which is something I noticed more people lean towards. However, on the Euridiche, vocals really sound lifelike, they sound like there is a person actually singing, instead of it sounding like you are listening to a person singing on headphones. Keeping this in mind, it’s also worth mentioning that vocals sound more aggressive. When you come across a track where the singer really opens up their voice, you can both hear it and feel it— the same way you’d experience it in person. “Transparent” would also be a word that describes this sonic quality. There is no indication that the sound is being altered, it feels “raw” and “transparent”.



Highs

The most prominent feature of this headphone, by far—in my humble opinion—is its upper-frequency response. That is, if we are only taking into consideration the frequency response. I am a sparkle junkie, and my, oh my, have the sparkle gods spoken. I don’t know about everyone else, but I find sparkle the very element which gives life, excitement, and energy to music. You can have head-shaking bass, crystal clear highs, but if that treble doesn’t tingle your ears, damn does it feel empty. I won’t say that the combination of a very good mid-range and a very good low end doesn’t sound good, but I will say that after a certain period of time I always find myself looking for that sparkle.

At this point, I know that I am a lover of a good bright headphone. I’ve probably said this a dozen times, but I will repeat: bright ≠ piercing, sibilant.

Unfortunately, due to false stereotypes, the “bright” sound signature has gotten a bad name. Bright is a good quality, but due to the common bogus belief, it is associated with bad qualities. To cleanse the word “bright”, let’s break down what are good and what are bad treble qualities.

Good: sheen, sparkle

Bad: piercingness, sibilance

Here’s an excerpt from my iBasso SR2 review: ”

1) Shine is a sound characteristic of a good amount of clarity and detail retrieval. In this case, a headphone with no shine would be a warm headphone.

2) Sparkle is a sound characteristic of a greater amount of clarity and detail retrieval than shine - it is a very hard characteristic to pull off because oftentimes it’s easy to cross the line and go into sibilance. When done correctly, you experience a very satisfying “tingle” feeling in your ear.

3) Sibilance is a sound characteristic of “extreme” clarity and detail retrieval, i.e., the most revealing. This is a known characteristic of an analytical sound signature, and one of its drawbacks is that it easily becomes fatiguing, making it a not so ideal option for long listening sessions.”

But wait, how can sibilance be a bad quality if it’s a sonic characteristic of an analytical sound signature? Well, it all depends on what area it is in. In the professional audio field, sibilance is common. From speakers monitors to studio headphones, it’s common to find professional audio listening equipment unenjoyable for music listening. The field of application severely matters! When it comes to music listening, sibilance should be seen as a negative quality, while in the professional field it is seen as a positive quality. However, to make matters even more complicated and unclear, as it is often said, it’s all subjective.

What one finds piercing and sibilant, the other finds “enjoyable”. That’s the subjective factor.

To conclude this little rant: if a headphone is unpleasant due to its treble response, it is not bright. It is either sibilant or piercing. This concluding statement overlooks any objectivism because we are strictly talking about one’s experience that is related to their emotional interpretation of music/sound. e.g., it doesn’t matter how aggressive a person likes the treble response to be, the point from which it becomes unpleasant should be called and considered piercing or sibilant. Hope that makes sense.

The biggest downside of this is that you must know the person’s taste in order to fully understand what is piercing for them.

From albums such as Daft Punk’s highly acclaimed “Discovery” to Kendrick Lamar’s “DAMN.” and “good kid, m.A.A.d. city”, from The Alan Parsons Project’s “I Robot” to Russian Circles’ Geneva, from Roger Waters’ “The Pros And Cons Of Hitch Hiking” to Yes’s “Drama”… you get the point, I can go on and on forever. You simply cannot overlook the bright nature of the treble. It’s a highly resolving headphone—in fact, the most resolving I’ve heard—and that’s something that you either like or dislike.

When I first had a chance to listen to the Euridiche, I kept coming back to it. And while many factors attracted me so much, I think that it was primarily the treble response that had me so curious about it. Excuse the vulgarity, but it takes some balls to pull this off the same way that Soltanus Acoustics did.



Soundstage, Imaging & Separation

This is the selling point of these headphones. It is simply too good in all three of these. Way too good. "Exceptional" wouldn’t even be close to describing how good it is. However, you know what would? To say the following:

This doesn’t sound like a headphone.

It’s the most precise, accurate, and grandest-sounding headphone I’ve heard. Unfortunately, I haven’t had a chance to listen to other TOTL headphones, so I can’t say how it compares to them. I can, for example, refer to some physical qualities such as that the soundstage is wider than my arm span. For more context, the distance between the outside of Euridiche’s ear-cup and the tip of my fingers is roughly 86 cm.

The soundstage width isn’t what makes this the most spacious and open-sounding headphone I’ve heard. The full credit for that goes to the other two qualities: imaging and separation. I can firmly and confidently say that the Euridiche possesses hyper-realistic imaging & separation qualities. To me, hyper-realism (in sound) refers to something that doesn’t sound like it’s coming from a speaker/headphone anymore but sounds fully lifelike. I guess you can say “realistic”, but I think that that term has gotten a completely different meaning. When I say “hyper-realistic”, I am essentially saying that the listening experience through these headphones is like the real-life listening experience through our ears. More often than not (I’d personally say 99%), headphones sound like headphones. They can possess realistic qualities, but at the end of the day, it still feels like you are listening to headphones. On the other hand, the listening experience on the Euridiche is everything but headphone-like. I would go as far as saying it’s lifelike.

You know how an artist holds a microphone when they are performing live? Well, with the Euridiche you are in the position of that microphone. Note how I didn’t say that it sounds like you are the microphone. Though, I will say that I don’t think we will ever have a headphone that can compare to the real “experience” of a live concert — especially an outdoor live concert. Even trying to put you in the position of the performer, I don’t think any headphone will ever be able to present the sheer size and feel of a live concert. Also, I put experience in quotation marks because I am not referring to the personal experience, but rather to the physical sensation/experience of a live concert. Live performances aside, I’d say that Euridiche’s capability to paint a lifelike image is unmatchable. This is a very bold statement, especially coming from someone who didn’t listen to other flagships. Depending on the recording, you can fully picture the room that the track was recorded in, and that’s what inspired me to say what I just said.

The thing with the Euridiche is that it’s fully transparent. To clear any confusion, I am talking about its physical behavior (isolation & sound leakage). It doesn’t block any noise. It neither blocks sound coming in nor sound coming out. For this reason, I am challenged calling it a headphone. I think that it’s much more appropriate to consider it an ear-speaker because that’s exactly what it is. This is the most sensitive headphone to its surroundings I’ve heard. Just placing my hand ~30 cm away from an ear-cup, I could hear that it affects the sound. Though this is a quality that allows it to have such an open sound, it’s a con if you don’t listen to your headphones in a space where there is nothing nearby, aka an open space.

I’m not even sure whether I can do an analytical evaluation because these three qualities are truly present and audible in just about every track.

Of course, for the soundstage, you have Yosi Horikawa’s “Bubbles”, which sounds surreal, but it is a binaural recording, which is cheating in a way. While I did hear elements in that track extending around or beyond my extended arm (86 cm), I also heard the same quality in other tracks which weren’t binaural recordings. Unfortunately, because I spent so much time listening to different tracks, I truly cannot recall the exact tracks in which this insane soundstage width was present. Listening to music with these headphones is like listening to it for the first time. You are able to hear things you’ve never heard before. All of a sudden, you start observing all those things. “Oh, so this violin is placed upwards”, “this guitar is placed farther back, to the bottom”, “this cymbal is placed forward, to the left”. You get this very large 3D platform, and you can analyze and hear every element in that 3D space.

For imaging, you have Pink Floyd’s “Dogs”, which is another track that I swear by. In fact, I think “Dogs” was one of the earliest tracks where I truly noticed how precise the imaging is. Another track that I remember is Rare Bird’s “As Your Mind Flies”. As I was exploring different albums, I came across Symphony from Rare Bird, and there are a bunch of great tracks on it, but “As Your Mind Flies” in particular stood out to me due to the panning of the drums.

For separation, I clearly remember Sia’s “Dressed in Black” just completely blowing me away. At first, the track sounds pretty standard, then some drums kick in, and bam, an explosion of elements happens and all of a sudden it’s pretty crowded. This so-called explosion occurs three times: at 0:55, 2:23, 3:33 minute marks. Each time it’s slightly different, with the last one being the most different because it extends to the end of the track (6:40). On the Euridiche, all the elements are crystal clear and possess exceptional definition. However, the most fascinating thing I found is how easily you can separate out the different vocal tracks. In the first two “explosions”, there are two vocal tracks: the primary one and the secondary/background vocals. In the third one, there are three vocal tracks. Now, the interesting thing is how well you can separate out these vocal tracks. If you wanted to, with the help of focus, you could completely isolate and focus on the background tracks and “bring” them to the foreground. This is something that I haven’t heard on other headphones. Yes, you can hear the different vocal tracks, but they are not as well-defined and as clear as they are on the Euridiche. I could also put it as though the background vocal tracks are voices of their own — it’s not as though they are overridden by the primary vocals, they sit in a space of their own.

The conclusion I came to is rather logical, but a conclusion nonetheless. The Euridiche’s soundstage, imaging, and separation capability are the most audible when the mixing and mastering engineers did their job right. How can you know if they did their job right? That’s a good question! I guess the answer would be subjective because it depends on what their goal was, but I will say that when the mixing and mastering engineers put in the effort to separate each element in the mix, Euridiche picks it up in an exceptional fashion. Engineers can spend countless hours putting together a complex mix, only for it to be listened to on stock earphones that come with your phone. Every layer, every position, every element, everything is crystal clear. You can hear everything.

To be fully honest I’ve tried doing an analytical evaluation numerous times. What happened every time is that I’d listen to a song or an album, then I’d go to the next, I’d make pretty solid observations, but I wouldn’t write them down. I always went “one more, just one more”… the next thing I know is that I spent 10 hours listening to music and haven’t written down a single thing. I am not even exaggerating. Let’s just say that it’s easy to get carried away by music. As it should be!

Bonus | Outstanding Performance

If there is a single album that has all sound qualities present, it's Sérgio Mendes' "Brasileiro". A severely underrated and largely unknown album, but without doubt, one of the greatest engineered albums I've listened to. I would be a liar if I told you this album is anywhere close to my preference in terms of taste and genre, but what I can appreciate and praise about it is how well put together it is. While it's a mostly unrecognized album these days, back in 1993 it got the deserved critical praise and approval. Brasileiro won the second-ever "Grammy Award for Best Global Music Album" and the engineer—Moogie Canazio—was nominated for the "Grammy Award for Best Engineered Album, Non-Classical", but lost to Michael Jackson's "Dangerous". There is a reason why some refer to Brasileiro as "the Bible of engineering". It's a true masterpiece, an engineering masterpiece. Sérgio Mendes probably wouldn't be so happy if he found out that I only play his album to listen to its technical qualities. If you never listened to it, please give it a play. I promise you will not regret it! It's a ride you don't want to miss, especially because it's such a unique experience. It's also very fun to explore your headphones with it, see how much they blow you away. This is pretty much the summary of the 54:41 minutes:

Conclusion​

I know that many people in this hobby never get fulfilled. It's almost as though they are chasing something, that craving that needs to be satisfied… but they never catch it and that craving never gets satisfied. With the Euridiche, I feel like this is the tip of the mountain, I don’t have that need to search for something more. I can certainly picture this headphone as the endgame for many. With dozens of headphone models getting released every year, I am left scratching my head wondering how nobody found out about this gem. It makes no sense. If it was an entry-level product, then sure, it’s easy to overlook such a product in such a saturated market. However, this is a flagship product, and for a flagship product to remain anonymous for two full years… it’s a first for me. I’ve never seen it happen.

A great number of you that have made it to this point most likely would’ve never imagined that such an unknown product could have such a rich story, but hey, this is what I love about being an author. Aside from critical evaluation, I love storytelling. While it’s not the case here, usually a product has a whole team of people behind it, and each person from that team holds a story. I believe that critical evaluation is just a small part of a product, but perhaps the most important to someone purchasing it. It’s important, I won’t debate that, but not enough attention is paid to the people who made that product come to life.

With virtually no previous experience in the headphone field, Zoltán Mikovity successfully made a masterpiece. Not only is it a masterpiece, but it also puts the “electrostats have no bass” stereotype in the bin. The best part of it all? It happened by accident. It was never in his plan to create a headphone.

That’s my favorite part of the story.

The price to performance ratio is not to be questioned. It's a top-of-the-line headphone, and it performs like one. I could talk about its sound performance for eternity. Putting the whole experience into words isn’t exactly easy. The Euridiche puts you in the booth with the artist like no other headphone. Instead of it feeling like you are listening to music through a headphone, it feels like you are in the music. It’s not a headphone listening experience, it’s far from it. If you were to ask me to describe the Euridiche in two words, they would be: raw and real.

Vocals sound human, they have the dynamics and the energy that a human voice has in real life. Instruments have the timbre and aren’t static. Simply said, everything sounds alive.

It doesn’t sound digital, it doesn’t sound analog, it sounds real.

Chapter 5 | The Setup

Amplifier: Soltanus Acoustics Fortissimo







DAC: EarMen TR-Amp…

Unfortunately, due to Fortissimo’s lack of balanced inputs, I couldn’t use my iBasso DX300 MAX as the DAC, which was something that I really wanted to do. You can look at this as the only weak part of the chain. With this being said, you can only imagine how good this headphone can sound with a proper TOTL DAC if it blew me away with an entry-level one.

Cables & Accessories




First of all, let me get this clear: I was never and will never be the person who will say that cables do or do not significantly alter the sound. There are a lot of different people in this hobby, but you can generally divide it into those who are equipment first and those who are music first. I fall in the latter category. Now, don’t get me wrong, I fully understand the first group, it’s just that I am not a part of it. I understand those who are highly passionate about technology & equipment, I understand going to extremes for the slightest differences. You can be enthusiastic about either music or gear or can be enthusiastic about both. That’s why you can’t exactly fit everyone in two vague categories. I myself find AB testing something such as a cable highly exhausting, both emotionally and physically. It makes me hate the process of listening to music, hence why I avoid doing it. This is also the reason why I neither deny nor embrace that something like a cable can alter the sonic performance. To me, it is unimaginable to sit down and listen to a cable. To give you a clearer image of what this feels like, imagine putting a claustrophobic person in a coffin. This brings me to a rather harsh quote from Alan Parsons on audiophiles:

“Audiophiles don't use their equipment to listen to your music. Audiophiles use your music to listen to their equipment”

However, when it comes to cables I know that you buy them once and will never again… unless you want more cables.

That’s why it is not a bad investment. I also believe it should be among the last purchases you make for your setup. I don’t think anybody should be spending their last penny on a cable, but I do think it’s a choice if you can afford it and it is reasonably priced compared to your setup. I look at it as the icing on the cake. But if you are going to be spending any money on a cable, you want to make sure that the claims make sense and aren’t negatively affecting your listening experience. In other words, you want to make sure that you are paying for quality, not for false claims.

Disclaimer: All the accessories featured below were supplied to me free of charge. I am neither affiliated with ViaBlue nor Lavricables.

Without further ado, here are the cables and accessories that I used:

ViaBlue​

Unsatisfied with the then-market’s cables, Jörg Loidl founded ViaBlue in 2001. The company’s headquarters remain in Malsch, Southern Germany to this day. Mr. Loidl has a professional audio background. After all, he founded the company because he couldn’t find cables for his studio monitors, that is, he couldn’t find cables that had a good enough performance for professional studio use.

The company first caught my eye when I saw one of its now-authentic plugs on some cables. After doing a quick Google search, I found its website. Surprised I was, to say the least. Not only does ViaBlue manufacture cable connectors, but just about everything you can imagine that is related to cables… and beyond. You can buy pre-made cables, but you can also buy individual parts (e.g., sleeves, splitters, ferrite filters, solder & more). This is what fascinated me because usually cable companies keep their components exclusive to their cables. ViaBlue does not do that. Perhaps you want to use their plugs, but want to use your own cables. Mix & match, it’s all possible!

You are not forced into a closed ecosystem where you are limited to buying only cables. You literally have the freedom to use parts that ViaBlue implements into its pre-made cables. There is no sort of hierarchy present. No gatekeeping. It’s as transparent as it gets!

That is just the first aspect that amazed me. I was blown away on a whole different level once the cables arrived and I had a chance to feel them in person. The materials are top-notch quality, and that is quite apparent just by holding one of their cables. They got weight to them! In my eyes, ViaBlue cables possess all three elements that make a high-quality cable: look, feel, quality. Let me elaborate. First of all, they are very appealing. When you see one of their connectors, you immediately know it’s a ViaBlue connector. Secondly, the quality to price ratio present in their cables is insane. Each cable is built like a million bucks. Each cable feels like a million bucks. Each cable looks like a million bucks.

X-60 Power Cable [EU]




This cable uses ViaBlue’s T6s power connectors. These connectors tick all the industry standards and also come with a few premium extras. On the power outlet end, there is a CEE 7/7 Shuko EU plug. Citing to Wikipedia: “The CEE 7/7 plug is a hybrid which includes both side earthing strips, as in CEE 7/4 Schuko, and an earthing socket, as in the CEE 7/6 plug. It can therefore achieve an earth contact with both CEE 7/3 (Schuko) and CEE 7/5 sockets”. On the amp end, there is an IEC C15 plug.

Now, the premium extras. Both plugs feature 24 karat real gold-plated contacts. Also, both plugs are sat in “massive” polycarbonate housings. Last but not least, the housings feature ultragrip coating which makes them scratch-resistant and gives them a satin finish. Due to the polycarbonate material used, the housings are flame-redundant and “break-proof” according to ViaBlue.

Both T6s power connectors use dust-free cable sealing through soft-disc technology and cable fixing by double screw connection (double-screwed strain relief).

The cable itself consists of 3 cores made up of silver-plated OCC copper strands. To achieve “100%” shielding, the cores are surrounded by braided and aluminum foil shields. For the cable sleeve, it uses ViaBlue’s exclusive Cobra braided sleeve.

In addition, the cable features two VIABLUE™ ferrite filters. What exactly is a “ferrite filter”? It consists of a ferrite core which is housed in a satin-matte aluminum shell. The function it serves is “suppressing the amount of high-frequency electromagnetic interference (EMI) noise found in electronic circuits”. Ferrite on its own is a ceramic material of iron oxide and additional metallic elements. All are electrically non-conductive, meaning that they are very good insulators”. The model used on the X-60 cable is the “ferrite filter 18”.

If you are feeling curious, you can unscrew the top part of the ferrite filter just by twisting it with your bare fingers. Once unscrewed, you will actually be able to see the ferrite core.

NF-S1 “Quattro Silver” RCA Cables



This is the company’s entry-level silvered RCA cable. It features ViaBlue’s T6s RCA connectors which are 24 karats real gold-plated. The connectors use a completely closed tubular ground contact for complete insulation and shielding. Two strain relief screws provide a strong hold of the cable. The connectors are sat in satin-matte aluminum housings.

The cable itself consists of two oxygen-free copper (OFC) inner conductors. Each conductor uses polyethylene insulation and is made up of 19 mm × 0.19 mm single strands. It gets the name “Quattro Silver” from the four shields it uses. It features two silvered spiral shields and two ALU-PET foil shields. For the sleeve, it uses ViaBlue’s exclusive Cobra braided sleeve.

The version I have is the Mono version, and it is made up of two individual NF-S1 cables. Each cable features two ferrite filters. The model used on the NF-S1 cable(s) is the “ferrite filter 9”.

Also, do note that the two “wires” on the sides are just fillers to achieve a round shape.

TRI Spikes



The TRI spikes consist of two parts: the base and the upper body. The upper body itself is made up of the body and the spike plate. The spike plate is screwed into the body, and at the same time, this screwable design acts as a height adjustment system. The spikes are screwed into the spike plate. The body and the spike plate are made of coated metal, while the spikes themselves are made of stainless steel. The base is also made of two parts, but they are joined together. The body of the base is made of the same coated metal the upper body is made of, while the inlay of the base is made of stainless steel.

Extra info about ViaBlue

How does the strain relief work?


It's a fastener/clamp that holds the cable so that the strain load does not hang on the solder joint or the strands. In our case, the strain relief on the small connectors consists of the rear screw in the T6s sleeve, which presses on the cable and thus clamps it tightly.

At the moment we do not have any pictures of this.

How do the diameter decreasers work (these are included when you purchase ViaBlue T6 connectors separately)?


These are two rings with different diameters which are only to hold the cable in the center / on the central axis of the connector. Thus, even very thin cables can be mounted in the relatively large inner diameter of the T6s shells. Depending on the diameter of the cable, you can use none, one, or two.

What is “soft-disk technology"?

The soft-disk technology is an advanced damper technology containing special material mixtures and adapted damping values for the best possible absorption.

How do your Cobra sleeves differ from the standard sleeves you offer?

The COBRA designed sleeves are similar in material and structure to the other sleeve designs sold on our website.

The only difference is that the COBRA sleeve is not available for purchase. Thus, if customers see a cable with the COBRA design, they can be 100% certain, that it was handmade in our VIABLUE Germany facility.

Lavricables​

This is a UK company, with its production being based in Latvia. Lavricables specializes in manufacturing silver cables. It was founded in 2012 as a hobby, and over the years it has grown and become one of the, if not the most well-known silver cable manufacturer in the industry. In total, this company offers four lines of cables: Reference, Ultimate, Master, and Grand. The first three offer headphone, IEM, USB, RCA, XLR, speaker, bi-wiring, power cables, and DIY supplies. Because the Grand line is its flagship line, DIY supplies aren’t sold. Besides having the choice between 4 different lines, customers can customize each cable with a number of options: length, silver, headphone plugs, plug, Y-splitter, silk sleeving, and a burn-in service. Above everything, Lavricables is a company that prioritizes customer satisfaction. From my understanding, that and customer support are the two main fields where the focus is on.

Grand Power Cable



Going by the official name of “Grand 30 core Silver mains EU US power cable”, this is the company’s flagship power cable. It is a braided 30 core silver cable. Out of those 30 cores, 20 are made of AWG 28 5N solid silver wire. Out of those 20, 10 cores are used for the active line and the other 10 are used for the neutral line. The other 10 cores are made of silver-plated copper (0.3 mm diameter) and are used for the earth line. The cable is terminated with rhodium-plated plugs. Though the plugs are high-quality and heavily resemble Furutech plugs, they are in fact not Furutech. For insulation, it uses high-grade Teflon. The manufacturer claims that “the unshielded design brings more air & transparency to the soundstage”, “woven Teflon Litz construction is ideal to deliver RFI and EMI rejection and provides low capacitance”, “5N silver transmits electrical signals faster and with less distortion than ordinary OFC”, “high-grade Teflon insulation gives a predominant air dielectric and is regarded as the best insulator for bare cable”.

One of the most prominent physical features of this cable is its flexibility. You can quite literally wrap the cable around a finger! This plus the somewhat thin nature of the cable makes it ideal for tight spots that you would otherwise have a hard time reaching.

I will also say that there are similar cables to this specific model on the market, but they are all considerably more expensive than the Lavri Grand Power Cable.

While best-known for their planar-magnetic headphones, HiFiMan has explored several other fields; earphones being one of them. The original RE800 was released in 2017 had a gold finish. The RE800 Silver was released in 2018. “What’s the difference besides the color?” you may ask. The difference is that the Silver edition does not have 24K gold plating and was $100 cheaper than the Gold edition. Somewhere down the line, HiFiMan decided to add a removable cable to the Gold edition.

I don’t know about you, but I remember the year of 2017 and 2018, especially when it came to the audio business. I think that 2014-2018 were quite similar in terms of the head-fi offerings. At the time, I was far from being crazy about earphones and the high-end market, and this was the situation for many. Sennheiser Momentum series was considered as TOTL in the consumer market, and the rage was all about Sony headphones. In terms of earphones, many of us were looking at Sennheiser CX300-II Pecision and some cheap Philips earphones. The high-end market for earphones wasn’t that large, there wasn’t a lot of interest as far as I know. However, if there is one earphone/IEM that I am sure everyone remembers, it is the Shure SE846. In particular, I remember the time that I walked into a large electronics store and seeing the €1000 price tag on these clear and transparent earphones and just laughing to myself. It seemed absolutely absurd to have something like an earphone cost that much. Luckily for us, time has changed and now there is a large high-end IEM market with companies who are serious about making such a fine products — but Shure deserves all the respect for being among the earlier companies who took the production of professional-grade IEMs seriously.

Unboxing Experience & Presentation

After the one-of-a-kind luxury unboxing experience with the RE-600s, I expected more from the RE800 Silver. This time around, the earphones are packaged in a rather large cardboard box which follows the elegant design that HiFiMan commonly implements into their products’ packaging. There is a large visual print of the RE-800 Silver on the front with the logo and model name in a silver color placed below it. The back features short specifications, contact information, and HiFiMan socials. On the inside you will find a nicely printed owner’s guide booklet. Here you will be able to find the evolution of the company’s earphones, breakdown of the driver technology, specifications, design choices & more.

Design & Build Quality

Compared to the RE-600s, the RE-800 Silver is not only more refined, but also of superior premium build quality. I think that both the design aspect and the build quality is a big improvement over the RE-600s.

Instead of a braided and stiff rubber cable, the RE800 Silver features a high-quality single rubber cable. Instead of a black piano finish, the housing is made of high-quality anodized aluminum. Instead of a low-quality rubber housing for the plug, a more premium and robust metal housing is used.

When it comes to the design, it is smoother, more fluid, and more organic. The housing still features a single vent underneath, it is still made of two pieces, but unlike the RE-600s, the curvature of the back piece is subtler and smoother. Another similarity to its predecessor is that the nozzle is straight and is not angular.

Some subtle details are the “HiFiMan” and “RE800” prints on the Y-splitter housing, the company logo and the left & right print labels on the earphone.

Comfort

When it comes to HiFiMan’s earphone line-up, the comfort is top-notch. Though slightly larger in size than the RE-600s, I found the comfort & fit to be a big improvement due to the included ear-guides. I have not taken the ear-guides off ever since I first tried them on. They truly do improve the comfort by that much. Both the ear-guides and the earphones themselves are extremely lightweight, and this is why wearing them for hours is a joy rather than a nightmare. I was able to get a very deep fit and insertion into the ear due to the angle that the ear-guides made possible. Actually, I think that the RE-800 is the deepest fit I have ever gotten with an IEM. I should also mention that I used the straight silicone ear-tips from the RE-600s. I found them to fit the best and I got the deepest insertion with them. They are not included with the RE-800!

As I said earlier, the RE-800 is slightly larger than the RE-600s, and because of this you cannot lie on the side of your head as comfortably and seamlessly. This aside, the comfort is 10/10 because the earphones disappear in your ear and you can enjoy music endlessly.

Sound​

Lows

Bass heads, be gone, because the RE-800 Silver will definitely not satisfy your needs! Similar to the RE-600s, the bass is quite balanced and is not overly emphasized.

I played my standard sub-bass testing tracks (“Why So Serious?” by Hans Zimmer, “Theme for Irishman” by Robbie Robertson) and it is definitely there, but it is very subtle. The mid-bass has more quantity and is easier to appreciate (by the masses). The mid-bass seems to lack in definition and leans towards the slower side of the spectrum when it comes to the attack & the decay.

Mids

From my experience, the mid-range leans towards the thinner side of the spectrum, opposite of full-body mid-range. Something interesting I noticed is that strings, due to the presence of higher frequencies, sound more forward than vocals and other elements in the mix. To get back to what I was saying earlier, the mid-range, especially vocals, sound distant. I can agree with how @earfonia described the mid-range in his RE-800 review (not RE-800 Silver):
“Midrange is clear and transparent but sounds rather lean, not the full-bodied type of midrange. All my friends that have tested the RE800 mostly mentioned about the midrange as being lean sounding, sometimes too lean to their liking. Someone even said the midrange sounds hollow for his recordings.”

On the other hand, stringed instruments sound very satisfying due to the brighter sound characteristic.

When it comes to tracks of “essy” nature, none of them raised any red flags, meaning that there was no fatigue or piercing quality to them. Some of my go-to “essy” tracks include:

Joan Baez — Babe I’m Gonna Leave You
Paul Simon — Something so Right
Jeff Buckley — Forget Her

Highs

To my surprise, the top-end seems to have a roll-off which makes it ideal for people who don’t like the bright quality, but makes it a turn-off for people who like the edge in the upper frequency range. I went through all my standards tracks that would otherwise showcase “edge”, “shine”, or “sparkle”, and I didn’t hear none of those qualities. This indicates to me that there is a roll-off in the upper-frequency range. However, due to the brighter nature of the mid-range, I cannot say it has warm sound signature.

The previously mentioned tracks include:

Travis Scott — Stop Trying to Be God
Miles Davis — Portia
Led Zeppelin — Stairway to Heaven (percussion, 7:16 – 7:23)
Etta James — Damn Your Eyes (percussion)

Conclusion​

Even though it's a 4 year old IEM, RE800 Silver manages to still be relevant today. The RE800 Silver is a major step up from the RE600 line, but it still keeps that balanced/neutral sound signature that the RE600 line is loved for. Not only that, but it also keeps that slim and small nature of the RE600 line.

The RE800 Silver is a good IEM in my book. It's a perfect daily driver, but also a big appeal to those who like to listen to instrumental, acapella, and classical music.

Besides for "audiophile listening", I would seriously consider the RE800 Silver for casual listening... I'd even take it when going for a bike ride or for a run.

A bullseye! — BQEYZ’s breakthrough​

Even though I released my first review of a BQEYZ product in 2020, I’ve been following the company since the beginning of my IEM journey. When I first joined Head-Fi, I was heavily active in the “Best Budget Earphones Thread”. It wasn’t rare at all to see the name “BQEYZ” mentioned often when it came down to the best <$100 IEMs. It dominated the budget IEM space, and later accomplished the same success and praise with its Spring series.

My first experience with a product from this company was actually quite some time before I got the Spring 2. I had a first encounter with Spring I, but because I couldn’t get a good fit, I just scratched the idea of publishing a review. I simply couldn’t rate the IEMs if I couldn’t get a nice fit. Some time later BQEYZ sent me their updated Spring model: Spring 2. It was a major improvement over the previous model, but it still had areas for improvement.

And here we are, BQEYZ just surprised everybody with the release of its brand-new model “Autumn”.

I am personally very, very proud of how far the company has come. I’ve given them honest feedback numerous times in the past, and with Autumn I can see that they took it into consideration. All the issues have been fixed.


Unboxing Experience

For some reason, I was extremely excited unboxing IEM. I have to give props to the packaging design team, because they absolutely crushed it. From what I’ve seen in the past from the company, this is the best unboxing experience. It is minimalist, professional, and very well thought out. First of all, the whole packaging design reminds me of the luxury automotive industry. The black with minimalist shapes and illustration are the two things that are responsible for that.

The packaging consists of two parts: the cover and the main box. Usually, a cover design unveils a box with a lid, but here it’s straight to the point: you slide the main box out of the cover, and you see your precious IEMs. The main box features a no-lid design. However, my favorite part of the packaging design has to be the bright orange color of the main box. The first thing that came to my mind was Hermés’ authentic orange color. It looks so, so good! I love it.

Design-wise, as already said, the packaging is minimalist. The front part of the cover features Autumn’s silhouette, with the model name printed in white in the middle, and some small details such as the company name in the top-left corner and “replaceable tuning earphone” printed in the bottom-right corner. The back side is also pretty clean, with only the specifications and a line illustration of the IEM being featured (aside from some minor details such as company info, etc.).

Once you take out the main box, you will find your Autumn IEMs placed in some foam—the usual—and a second cover which hides the replaceable tuning filters and the magnetic “wand”. The IEMs, the replaceable tuning nozzles, and the magnetic “wand” are all placed in the same foam block. When you take out this foam block, you will find the ear-tips and the carrying case which houses the cable.

The experience and presentation are well-executed. As always, BQEYZ like to switch it up with every model.



Design

The overall appearance and design is very similar to the Spring series, especially the shell shape. From personal experience, Autumn is the best IEM the company has released so far. It is a major improvement over the previous flagship Spring series. I had a big issue with the angle of the nozzle of the Spring 1, Spring 2 was much, much better, but still not perfect. Autumn has the perfect angle, size, and depth of the nozzle. While the Spring series featured a relatively smooth shape of the shells, Autumn has much more curvature going on. On the faceplate, it features two very attractive curves that give it a premium look, and on the inner side a “wing” has been added. To best describe this, imagine the letter “u”. Imagine that the right side is where the nozzle is. Now, keep the left part of the letter “u” the same height and extend the height of the right side. Spring 2 also had this wing, but it was much more subtle. Just like the Spring series, it features vents on the inner side of the shell. Instead of two large ones, it features three small vents. The nozzle now features a metal grill with fewer larger perforations and a micro-mesh below it.

However, the real star feature of Autumn is the replaceable tuning filter system. It took BQEYZ's R&D team over 2 years to bring this innovation to reality.




Build Quality

BQEYZ continues its tradition of releasing metal-only IEMs. What I said in my Spring 2 review still remains true:

“If there is something that makes BQEYZ stand out in the market, it is build quality. This company is among very few others that only make their products from metal — not a single IEM shell released by BQEYZ was made out of anything other than CNC machined & anodized aluminum.”

The shells of Autumn are made of 5-axis CNC machined & anodized aluminum. It is cold to the touch and extremely smooth.

Instead of a metal ear-tip holder, Autumn comes with a metal tuning filter holder & a metal wand.

I don’t see any flaw in the build quality, and can say it’s 10/10. The IEMs are very lightweight, which is a major plus.



Cable

While not as fancy and premium-looking as Spring 2’s, the cable is good. It’s different, but it’s good.

This time around, the marketing had no mistakes. It’s a 4-core cable with each core consisting of 8 shares. Each share consists of 7 Ø.05 Litz strands of wire. Out of the 8 shares, 4 are made of high-quality copper and 4 are made of silver-plated copper.

The cable is extremely lightweight and flexible. It might be the most flexible cable I have around.

I didn’t come across any issues with it.

Comfort

For me, Autumn is a match made in heaven. The very first time I took it out of the box and put it in my ears, I just knew that it’s for me. From the fit to the sound, it matches my preferences. Spring 1 was one hell of a sure not for me in terms of comfort, Spring 2 was better but still not perfect, and then Autumn, Autumn is perfect. BQEYZ finally nailed the angle of the nozzle!

The seal is tight, while the insertion isn’t too deep. In fact, in my ears the nozzle sat in relaxed fashion. I haven’t come across this combination before, and the result is a very comfortable IEM. I only now realized that it is not the shallow fit that I do not like, but rather a relaxed seal/fit, and that’s something that Autumn doesn’t suffer from.

Finally, the lightweight nature of the IEM makes it suitable for long listening sessions.

Sound Performance​

As previously said, Autumn is simply a match made in heaven for me. I think that it only took two or three dozen seconds of listening time to realize that it meets all my expectations and satisfies all my preferences.



Lows

Autumn is quite a capable IEM in terms of the low-end response. The mid-bass is present, the sub-bass is present, and best of all, both posses good qualities.

Just playing my three standard bass quantity and quality tracks for the first time, Autumn passed all of them right off the bat. The three tracks being “Hydrogen” by MOON, “Smoking Mirrors” by Lee Curtiss, and “Why So Serious?” by Hans Zimmer.

In “Hydrogen”, it’s noticeable that Autumn has a strong impact/slam, full-body mid-bass, exceptional speed (attack & decay), and great bass depth.

In “Smoking Mirrors”, all of the above-mentioned qualities are too present, but it challenges the bass “thud” capabilities, which Autumn certainly possesses.

Last but not least, in “Why So Serious?” Autumn shows its sub-bass capabilities. To keep it short and sweet, let’s just say it’s capable of growling.

I wouldn’t say that sub-bass is noticeably stronger than mid-bass, and vice versa. They sound in level.

One thing I will say, I do not think that bass lovers will be disappointed. Autumn possesses both the quantity and the quality in the lower region. However, if you are looking for something with overwhelming bass, look elsewhere.



Mids

Upon closer listening, I thought that Autumn had thin mids, but after I switched out the amp module on my iBasso DX300 from AMP11Mk1 to AMP12 I found that not to be the case at all. Sure, it’s not a mid-centric sound signature, but the mids are certainly not thin. If I had to specify which sound signature is resembles the closest, I’d say the U-shaped one.

The mids lean towards the warmer side of the spectrum. This isn’t one of those IEMs where you are going to experience harsh vocals, which makes it a safe all rounder. For example, if you listen to a lot of old recordings, you won’t have to worry about them sounding sharp.

The warm nature of the mids combined with the slight U-shape result in instruments to have unnatural timbre. As a big fan of strings, I just didn’t find it to posses the qualities to make them sound satisfying. Perhaps this is a direct result of the safer tuning? Maybe.

The tonality of vocals is similar to instruments, where it doesn’t necessarily sound accurate or natural.

I’d describe the mid-range as “fun”.



Highs

To compensate for the mid-range, the upper-range is pronounced and sharp.

After going through my two standard treble and sparkle test tracks, I concluded that Autumn is an IEM that is capable of sparkle. The two tracks are “Portia” by Miles Davis and “Stop Trying to Be God” by Travis Scott (only listening to Stevie Wonder’s mouth harmonica at around the 4:43 minute mark).

The treble response is apparent in just about every track that has any sort of percussion or instrument that sits in the treble area.

In my opinion, one of the most important aspects of a brighter sound signature is that the treble is clean. Autumn did prove to have clean treble, and that was apparent in tracks like “Money For Nothing” by Dire Straits. I am specifically referring to the percussion present in that track. The same quality can be heard in Robbie Robertson’s “Theme for The Irishmen”.

Soundstage & Separation

Here everything is just about average. I didn’t find it to possess an above average soundstage nor separation capabilities. If anything I think that the separation is a little underwhelming, because at times, especially when you put on a busy track, it’s easy to lose detail and definition of different elements.

Conclusion​

As a whole, I really, really like Autumn. It’s an IEM that completely surprised me. While I was very excited about the innovative tuning system, I didn’t have extremely high expectations for the sound performance. It turns out that from the very moment I took it out of the box I knew that this is something good.

Autumn isn’t one of those IEMs that is necessarily natural sounding or reference tuned, but it for sure is a very well tuned U-shaped IEM.

I was the most impressed by its technical capability in the lower range, because it truly possesses all the qualities one would want in the lower range. I enjoyed modern music the most — think commercial and mainstream. It performs exceptionally in those two genres.

If you are after that good ol’ balanced sound signature of the Spring series, you might want to skip this release. However, if you want a technically advanced and capable U-shaped IEM that allows you to alter its frequency response, Autumn is certainly something you want to take a look at.

I strongly believe that if BQEYZ brings an IEM with the replaceable tuning filter system and a replaceable nozzle system, that it would be one of the most versatile and adjustable IEMs on the market. Of course, it would have to be executed right, and that's the hardest part that the R&D team must take their time with.

TinHiFi is now one of the biggest names in the portable audio space. It is also one of the more widely known Chinese earphone companies. I will always remember TinHiFi as one of the first companies to bring the “Chi-Fi” world on the map. Its T2 model was always featured and mentioned in “top X” lists, but it was also often featured on Massdrop (now Drop).

Today I will be taking a look at TinHiFi’s flagship P2+.

Most of you are already familiar with the P2, the company’s “other” flagship. Well, P2 Plus is a “Commemoratory Edition” of the P2. What does this mean? Read on…

Unboxing Experience


Most certainly, the first thing you will notice is the unboxing experience. It is screaming “premium”! Do note, P2 and P2+ share the same overall unboxing experience, but have some differences in the packaging design.

At first, you are met with this standard looking cardboard box, but once you slide it out of the cover, you see the special side. Ribbons, texture, moving parts... perhaps TinHiFi should make one of those motorized luxury watch boxes?

The box features the model name, “P2+”, in the center. In the upper-right corner there is text that says “Commemorative Edition”. In the bottom-left corner there is a print of the company’ standard logo. All of these prints are raised (they can be felt). The box itself is completely white, but has a circuit-like texture. Aside from the front-facing side, all the other sides of the box are plain (no text prints or anything alike).

One you pull the top ribbon, you will see a diagram showcasing the driver used in the P2+. You will also see the frequency response & specifications. After you completely lift the “lid”, you will find the P2+ IEMs, a carrying case, a white cleaning brush, and plastic tweezers.

Once you pull the front-facing ribbon, you will reveal the “drawer” that holds all the ear-tips, cable connectors, and the cable itself.

It’s quite apparent that TinHiFi carefully thought out the packaging design for its flagship IEMs, offering a truly exceptional presentation & experience. In my eyes, P2+ would make for a great gift, especially because of the unboxing experience. This is something I also said for HiFiMan’s RE600s V2, which too had an unordinary unboxing experience.

Formal format of what’s inside:

1x Mogami modular cable
3x adaptors (balanced 2.5mm, Single-Ended 3.5mm, balanced 4.4mm)
3x pairs of replaceable metal nozzle filters
1x cleaning brush
1x plastic tweezers
1x set of foam ear-tips (S/M/L)
1x set of color silicone ear-tips (S/M/L)
1x pair of Medium SpinFit CP100 ear-tips

Click to expand...

Design

In terms of physical design, these are identical to the P2 model. However, what is different between these two is the visual design.

You probably remember the standard P2 as the satin silver IEMs. If you were to ask me, I’d say that the P2 reminds me the most of Apple’s MacBooks. While some people consider MacBook’s finish “matte”, I consider it satin. It reflects light, but retains that stainless nature of a matte finish. P2+ is a bit different from the P2… Maybe more than just a bit. Instead of a silver satin finish, it features a polished gold finish.

The shells are fairly slim. I can say with confidence that this is one of the slimmest IEMs that I’ve had, if not the slimmest. Although they are made of two pieces, they have a very organic look. This is mainly due to the absence of sharp corners. Without the cable, they have a UFO-like silhouette. With the cable, they heavily resemble ear-buds — the old, classic ear-buds; not the modern wireless ear-buds — because of the stem-like figure.

On the outer part of the shell, there is a raised portion that is slanted at an angle. This part is flat and has a textured gray faceplate. At first, I thought the faceplate would be rough like sandpaper, but found that to be false (more on that in the “Build Quality” section). In P2’s marketing section, the company calls this a “SPL Pneumatic filter ventilate panel” and also gives an “explanation”. As far as I can see, this faceplate is solid, making me think that this was just for some marketing. Either way, it looks nice. Whether or not it serves the said function is something that I cannot confirm or validate.

P2+ uses industry standard 0.78mm connectors. However, instead of going with the usual recessed connectors, TinHiFi opted for protruding ones. They can work with non-recessed connector cables, but the best and most desirable “fit” is achieved with recessed connector cables.

As a whole, the P2 series is well-designed. I like the different look. However, I am by far the biggest fan of the polished finish. Unlike a mirror finish, P2+’s finish is fairly stainless. I’m not sure if there is any sort of a special layer that is contributing to this, but I definitely noticed that stains aren’t as apparent as on a mirror finish. Unless you are very close to the IEMs, the stains aren’t really visible.



Build Quality & Cable

Just like the standard P2, P2+ features stainless steel shells. P2’s shells have been treated with some sort of a process (e.g. sand blasting) to achieve the satin finish. In similar fashion, P2+’s shells have been electroplated with 18K gold to achieve the polished gold look. This is another feature that makes the “Commemorative Edition” special. Fun fact: P2+ is also referred to as the “Gold Edition”.

There is not much more to say regarding the build quality. It feels rock solid and the gold electroplated layer also feels of pretty good quality.

On the other hand, the cable had me much more intrigued. It is a custom Mogami 2381 modular cable. Let me tell you one thing: I LOVE IT!

I don’t know about everyone else, but I am one of the people that’s rooting for modular cables to become the next industry-standard feature. They are not bulky, they are convenient, and who the hell can not like them? I guess there are people who do not need the extra connectors, hence why they might consider them unnecessary, but for those who often find themselves switching connectors, they are a must-have. One thing is for sure, and that’s that they made the “old” adaptors seem almost unacceptable. Cable connectors are already bulky enough by themselves, let alone adding a bulky adaptor on top of that. *Brr* Yikes!

The part I love the most about this cable is the cable itself. While transparent cables are gorgeous because they show off the cable’s material beneath the sheathing, I love the good ole black rubber cables. I’m married to my Sennheiser HD598’s rubber cable, everyone knows that, and this Mogami cable heavily reminds me of it. It is silky smooth, it has that sheen, and it’s durable. It’s not necessarily the most flexible cable I’ve used, but it holds its shape when I want to put it away, and that’s what matters to me.

The housings (IEM connectors, Y-splitter, angled part of the connectors) are made of high-quality plastic. It would’ve been much more appropriate if they were made of metal, especially when you remember this is a premium IEM. The only reason why it’s forgivable is because the plastic matches the metal finish and feels high-quality.



The modular cable uses a 4-pin “system”. Imagine two 2-pin connectors next to each other, and bam, you have the today’s modular cable system. You can actually stick a normal male 2-pin connector inside the female part (3.5mm, 2.5mm, 4.4mm connectors) — do note that I did this while the cable was fully disconnected from the IEMs and the amp/dac. Both IEM connectors are labeled with a colored metal ring at the end (red for the right, blue for the left). The male end is is fully made of metal and is labeled for the ease of use. There is a small textured section that helps you lock/unlock the connectors, and right above it there is a label that indicated that if you rotate it to the left, you will release the lock, and if you rotate it to the right, you will secure the lock. Not only that, but there is a white dot on the very end of it, helping you to aline the connectors, which also have a white dot. It’s a pretty straightforward mechanism that is quite reliable.

There’s no doubt that both the IEM shells and the cable are well-made, but I do have a pet peeve: the plastic bead chin slider. Ugh… me and bead chin sliders, we do not get along. I just don’t like their appearance. I’d rather have no chin slider than a bead one. Bead sliders, be gone!

Comfort

While the P2+ isn’t uncomfortable, comfort is definitely a field that needs to be worked on.

The IEMs themselves are very light, making them non-fatiguing weight-wise. In similar fashion, the ear-guides are very flexible and the cable is also fairly light, both of these lead to no fatigue or discomfort around the ear.

However, the main issue lies within the part that goes inside your ears: the nozzle.

It’s not too big, it’s not too short/deep — both of which are good aspects — but the angle of the nozzle just isn’t right. While, yes, it is angled outwards, it severely lacks the upward angle that is needed for a deep insertion into the ear. In my opinion, and also from experience, the best fitting IEMs have the nozzle sitting at a 45˚ angle upwards, while P2+’s nozzle appears to be at a 90˚ angle. If you ever put a finger in your ear, you will know that to reach your ear kanal (not recommended), you have to go 90˚ in, then go upwards (if you were to align the angle with your face, it would be towards the ends of your eyebrows). A very sharp upwards angle is needed for the IEM to fit like a glove.

Because IEMs are little objects, it’s possible to angle them and push them in, but then you have to face the consequences. What happens when you angle an IEM (instead of it being the other way around) is that the whole IEM sits at that angle… which also means that the cable will sit at a very awkward position.

Sound Performance​

Lows

Up until this point, I’ve never really experienced the “planar bass” in its fullest form. I think that even if you tried to, you wouldn't be able to ignore P2+’s bass. The texture, the volume, the depth—chef’s kiss—the good stuff! Since I’ve already done a comparison between iBasso’s DX300 + AMP12 and DX300 MAX, I’ll go on to include an excerpt from my DX300 MAX review:

Setup:

DX300 MAX:
ᴀɴᴀʟᴏɢ ᴘᴏᴛ sᴇᴛ ᴀᴛ 12 ᴏ’ᴄʟᴏᴄᴋ
ᴅᴀᴄ ᴠᴏʟᴜᴍᴇ: 75
ɢᴀɪɴ: ʜɪɢʜ ɢᴀɪɴ
ᴅɪɢɪᴛᴀʟ ꜰɪʟᴛᴇʀ: D3
ᴜʟᴛɪᴍᴀᴛᴇ ᴍᴏᴅᴇ: ON

DX300 + AMP12:
ᴠᴏʟᴜᴍᴇ: 45
ɢᴀɪɴ: ɢᴀɪɴ
ᴅɪɢɪᴛᴀʟ ꜰɪʟᴛᴇʀ: D5 (ɴᴏs)

Rihanna — Final Goodbye │00:32, sub-bass is considerably more refined and has more depth & presence on the DX300 MAX (on the DX300 + AMP12, it sounds thinner and the delay isn't as audible as on the DX300 MAX)

Sia — Where I Belong│sub-bass/bass in the beginning has more depth and texture on the DX300 MAX. My ear notices and "feels" (I can feel more of the vibration) more on the DX300 MAX, especially in the delay of the bass

Daft Punk — Giorgo by Moroder│bass is more controlled, is tighter and punchier (has a sharper attack & delay), cleaner (less "oomph"), and has more texture on the DX300 MAX; 07:46 - 07:48, each drum hit and its vibration is felt more on the DX300 MAX

Pink Floyd — Dogs│just like in other tracks, I noticed that the bass is cleaner and has more of a thud than an "oomph" on the DX300 MAX

As you can tell, the difference between the two is audible.

I also wanted to hear how DX300 + AMP1MK1 differs from the DX300 MAX. I’ve done some A/B testing in the past between the AMP11MK1 and AMP12 modules, and the difference between the two is quite significant. AMP11MK1 has more bass quantity, while AMP12 has a more controlled and balanced sound signature altogether. AMP12 also has better tonality and clarity in the mid-range.

Starting off with my reference sub-bass testing track “Why so Serious?” by Hans Zimmer, I can immediately notice that the P2+ has not only more sub-bass quantity, but also better quality on the DX300 MAX. However, as soon as I played a track where there is more of a focus on mid-bass, I came to the same conclusion as I did before: AMP11 has more bass quantity, but less quality compared to AMP12 and DX300 MAX. A neat track to listen to this is “Do I Wanna Know?” by Arctic Monkeys. Focus on the drums’ qualities at the very start of the track. P2+ has more “oomph” with the DX300 + AMP11MK1 combo, but has a much clearer and present decay on the DX300 MAX. Also, by saying there is more “oomph” I am saying that the body is fuller, but also that the decay and the overall drums are less defined. Have you ever made you eyes go out of focus? If so, you probably know that everything in sight loses its definition, but everything becomes “larger”. Nothing is in focus, but because everything lost its definition, everything is “larger”. This is how I’d describe the previously-mentioned comparison.

I heard similar differences in Pink Floyd’s “Hey You” at the 01:18 minute mark. The first two drum hits have more depth on the DX300 MAX.



Mids

Everything here is “smooth” and nicely executed. From vocals to instruments, for the most part, the timbre is life-like and natural.

I’d say the mid-range is more warm than analytical. None of my shouty/peaky testing tracks sounded edgy or peaky. I usually play “Forget Her” by Jeff Buckley, “I Will Survive” by Gloria Gaynor, “Strange Fruit” by Nina Simone, and “Babe I’m Gonna Leave You” by Joan Baez. Although in all of these tracks the peaks has somewhat of an edge, I wouldn’t say they had enough of it to make the recordings as “grainy” in the peaks as they are supposed to be (as they would be on a brighter set of IEMs). However, I also wouldn’t say that the peaks have been polished to the point where the peaky recording don’t sound peaky anymore.

Listening to several tracks with strings, I noticed that the overall mid-range and the upper mid-range are right on, but the lower mid-range doesn’t have enough “body” or “oomph” to give that authentic plucking sound. I don’t know if I’m the only one, but I came to the conclusion that this lower mid-range is what gives a pluck its definition, its nature of sounding like a pluck, its texture. To come to this conclusion, I went through dozens of tracks that I am familiar with, some of them include: “Go Insane - Live 1997” by Fleetwood Mac, “Oh Daddy” by Fleetwood Mac, “Soldier of Fortune” by Deep Purple, “Private Investigations” and “Sultans of Swing” by Dire Straits, “Beyond the Realms of Death” by Judas Priest, “When a Bind Man Cries” by Metallica, “Some Other Time” by Alan Parsons Project

The mid-range isn’t the most impressive part of the P2+, especially when you are someone who likes to listen to a lot of acoustic and instrumental music. Also, if anything, I found vocals to sit slightly “behind” other elements in music.



Highs

In my opinion, this is where the majority of excitement comes from. This is the so-called cherry on the cake.

I know that some people described the normal P2 as a U-shaped IEM, and I think that might be the case with the P2+. However, unlike with the P2, I find P2+’ treble response to be the factor that attracts me to enjoy it so much.
Playing my two tracks of choice for sibilance (“Portia” by Miles Davis, “Stop Trying to Be God” by Travis Scott — Stevie Wonder’s mouth harmonica at around 4:43 minute mark) I didn’t notice any signs of sibilance or piercingness. Sure, I can say that there is edge at the peaks, but I wouldn’t say that there is sparkle. In terms of my definition of sparkle, read this excerpt from my iBasso SR2 review:

“Sparkle is a sound characteristic of greater amount of clarity and detail retrieval than shine - it is a very hard characteristic to pull off, because often times it’s easy to cross the line and go into sibilance. When done correctly, you experience a very satisfying “tingle” feeling in your ear.”

It’s the treble quality that’s “borderline” with sibilance, or as one might say, the very last quality of “good” treble quality before it crosses into the bad treble qualities (piercing, sibilant).

Percussion, on the other hand, is something that I would call bright-sounding, but not in an unpleasant way. In fact, it’s quite the opposite: lovely!

Hm… maybe “lovely” isn’t the correct word, because that might give one the impression that it’s soft and forgiving. To get straight to the point, percussion is crisp, sharp, and aggressive. It is forward, but not to the point where it’s hurting your ears or distracting you from the rest of the elements in the mix. Because it is forward, it does stick out in the mix, but in a tasteful way. I know that I can say that I absolutely like how percussion sounds on the P2+. I’ve listened to a whole bunch of tracks and music, and percussion always sounds good. If I had to only use a single word to describe it, the word would be “crisp”.

I don’t think I’d pick out any specific track that showcases this, as though the majority of the already mentioned tracks showcase the crisp nature of percussion. “Heaven and Hell” by Black Sabbath, “When a Blind Man Cries” by Metallica, “Pull Me Under” by Dream Theater, “Some Other Time” by The Alan Parsons Project might be good examples of bright & crisp percussion.



Soundstage & Layering

Let’s talk about soundstage for a second. I’ve had experience with quite a few IEMs, but I don’t think that any IEM came close to the soundstage of MMR Thummim — until now. While it’s not as holographic and as life-like as the Thummim, P2+ is pretty close. Also, do note that Thummim is a humongous IEM, and P2+ is a slim IEM. Whatever the hell TinHiFi did with the P2+, they did it right.

In just about every track you can hear how spacious and “holographic” the soundstage is. And it’s not just the soundstage, every element has room, meaning that you can separate out every element in the mix. Separation, layering, both are done excellently — as they should be in this price range. I was caught off guard by the spacious nature of King Crimson’s “Epitaph - Including “March for No Reason” and “Tomorrow and Tomorrow””. The guitar which is panned to the left sounds roughly 15-20 centimeters outside of the IEMs.

A track where you can hear P2+’ soundstage and staging capability is Yosi Horikawa’s well-respected “Bubbles”. If you’ve never listened to this track, I highly recommend it! I know that just about every person who gave it a listen made it essential when listening to any new gear. In my opinion, the two most important qualities in this track are soundstage & staging, both of which the P2+ nails. I’d say that here you can really hear the 3D soundstage that the P2+ is capable of, and I would also say the soundstage is 5-10cm wider than in the King Crimson track.

It’s one thing when an IEM has a wide soundstage, and it’s a whole other thing when an IEM is spacious. If you think about it, a wide soundstage is nothing more but the “perceived” distance in music, i.e. our interpretation of the imaginative music space, while a spacious IEM is one that has room around each element. The opposite of a spacious IEM is a crowded IEM, one that doesn’t give enough room to each element in the mix. The P2+ possesses both of these qualities.

Conclusion​

I have to say that I wasn’t expecting to like the P2+ so much. To be honest, I didn’t have high expectations, but in the end P2+ proved itself in just about every field.

It is not perfect, but the number of things it gets right, in my opinion, justifies the price. I’ve never seen a mirror finish IEM that isn’t a fingerprint magnet, yet TinHiFi somehow managed to do just that in here.

The slim form-factor, the lightweight nature, the relaxed (not perfect) fit, the cable!

I never had a chance to listen to the standard P2, but the flagship P2+ is fascinating. If the P2 retains the same qualities of the P2+, it’s a no-brainer. It’s still pretty unclear if the “Plus” is just a cosmetic and cable upgrade, or if there have been any sonic differences. I’d love to debunk this, but I do not have the standard model at hand.

“U-Shaped” would be the most accurate way to describe the P2+’ sound signature in technical terms. It has growling lows which are capable of rumble, but also retains the qualities in the bass region. The qualities I am talking about are the responsiveness (fast attack & decay), depth, and punchiness (delivery). It has a warmer and slightly recessed mid-range, and fills in the warmth with a more analytical and brighter treble response.

If it had a deeper and more present lower mid-range, had a greater upper mid-range extension, and the nozzle was more angled upwards, I would without a doubt rate it at 5 stars. When you are feeding these with enough juice, they really show what they are capable of.

At $650 (currently going for $620), it sits in a very competitive space in the market. Whether it is better or worse than its competitors, I cannot say because I have limited experience. My focus is mainly on the headphone market, and there’s only a bunch of IEMs that I’ve had an opportunity to listen to, but having had the experience to listen to MMR’s Thummim on my DX300 MAX SS, I can at least give my input as to how close this experience is to that one, and as I’ve already said, the P2+ is the only IEM I’ve listened to that comes close to the spaciousness of the Thummim.

If you have any need to justify its price, the standard P2 sells for $369 (currently going for $339). The P2+ Mogami modular cable goes for $169 (currently going for $150) on TinHiFi’s official store, so we can say that the 18K electroplating, SpinFit ear-tips, the updated ear-tips, the different leather carrying case, and the unboxing experience is costing you $112 (MSRP prices) or $131 with the current discounted prices… which doesn’t sound all that bad. These are just the physical changes, I cannot confirm whether there are any sonic differences between the two models.

All in all, if you have a source that gives enough juice to this power-hungry planar, I think you will be rewarded with a very pleasant listening experience.

---

Setup: iBasso DX300 MAX, high gain, DAC volume set @ 75, Ultimate Mode on, analog volume pot's position varied from 12 o'clock to 4 o'clock, Android OS, 4.4mm balanced

TinHiFi is now one of the biggest names in the portable audio space. It is also one of the more widely known Chinese earphone companies. I will always remember TinHiFi as one of the first companies to bring the “Chi-Fi” world on the map. Its T2 model was always featured and mentioned in “top X” lists, but it was also often featured on Massdrop (now Drop).

Today I will be taking a look at TinHiFi’s flagship P2+.

Most of you are already familiar with the P2, the company’s “other” flagship. Well, P2 Plus is a “Commemoratory Edition” of the P2. What does this mean? Read on…

Unboxing Experience


Most certainly, the first thing you will notice is the unboxing experience. It is screaming “premium”! Do note, P2 and P2+ share the same overall unboxing experience, but have some differences in the packaging design.

At first, you are met with this standard looking cardboard box, but once you slide it out of the cover, you see the special side. Ribbons, texture, moving parts... perhaps TinHiFi should make one of those motorized luxury watch boxes?

The box features the model name, “P2+”, in the center. In the upper-right corner there is text that says “Commemorative Edition”. In the bottom-left corner there is a print of the company’ standard logo. All of these prints are raised (they can be felt). The box itself is completely white, but has a circuit-like texture. Aside from the front-facing side, all the other sides of the box are plain (no text prints or anything alike).

One you pull the top ribbon, you will see a diagram showcasing the driver used in the P2+. You will also see the frequency response & specifications. After you completely lift the “lid”, you will find the P2+ IEMs, a carrying case, a white cleaning brush, and plastic tweezers.

Once you pull the front-facing ribbon, you will reveal the “drawer” that holds all the ear-tips, cable connectors, and the cable itself.

It’s quite apparent that TinHiFi carefully thought out the packaging design for its flagship IEMs, offering a truly exceptional presentation & experience. In my eyes, P2+ would make for a great gift, especially because of the unboxing experience. This is something I also said for HiFiMan’s RE600s V2, which too had an unordinary unboxing experience.

Formal format of what’s inside:

1x Mogami modular cable
3x adaptors (balanced 2.5mm, Single-Ended 3.5mm, balanced 4.4mm)
3x pairs of replaceable metal nozzle filters
1x cleaning brush
1x plastic tweezers
1x set of foam ear-tips (S/M/L)
1x set of color silicone ear-tips (S/M/L)
1x pair of Medium SpinFit CP100 ear-tips

Click to expand...

Design

In terms of physical design, these are identical to the P2 model. However, what is different between these two is the visual design.

You probably remember the standard P2 as the satin silver IEMs. If you were to ask me, I’d say that the P2 reminds me the most of Apple’s MacBooks. While some people consider MacBook’s finish “matte”, I consider it satin. It reflects light, but retains that stainless nature of a matte finish. P2+ is a bit different from the P2… Maybe more than just a bit. Instead of a silver satin finish, it features a polished gold finish.

The shells are fairly slim. I can say with confidence that this is one of the slimmest IEMs that I’ve had, if not the slimmest. Although they are made of two pieces, they have a very organic look. This is mainly due to the absence of sharp corners. Without the cable, they have a UFO-like silhouette. With the cable, they heavily resemble ear-buds — the old, classic ear-buds; not the modern wireless ear-buds — because of the stem-like figure.

On the outer part of the shell, there is a raised portion that is slanted at an angle. This part is flat and has a textured gray faceplate. At first, I thought the faceplate would be rough like sandpaper, but found that to be false (more on that in the “Build Quality” section). In P2’s marketing section, the company calls this a “SPL Pneumatic filter ventilate panel” and also gives an “explanation”. As far as I can see, this faceplate is solid, making me think that this was just for some marketing. Either way, it looks nice. Whether or not it serves the said function is something that I cannot confirm or validate.

P2+ uses industry standard 0.78mm connectors. However, instead of going with the usual recessed connectors, TinHiFi opted for protruding ones. They can work with non-recessed connector cables, but the best and most desirable “fit” is achieved with recessed connector cables.

As a whole, the P2 series is well-designed. I like the different look. However, I am by far the biggest fan of the polished finish. Unlike a mirror finish, P2+’s finish is fairly stainless. I’m not sure if there is any sort of a special layer that is contributing to this, but I definitely noticed that stains aren’t as apparent as on a mirror finish. Unless you are very close to the IEMs, the stains aren’t really visible.



Build Quality & Cable

Just like the standard P2, P2+ features stainless steel shells. P2’s shells have been treated with some sort of a process (e.g. sand blasting) to achieve the satin finish. In similar fashion, P2+’s shells have been electroplated with 18K gold to achieve the polished gold look. This is another feature that makes the “Commemorative Edition” special. Fun fact: P2+ is also referred to as the “Gold Edition”.

There is not much more to say regarding the build quality. It feels rock solid and the gold electroplated layer also feels of pretty good quality.

On the other hand, the cable had me much more intrigued. It is a custom Mogami 2381 modular cable. Let me tell you one thing: I LOVE IT!

I don’t know about everyone else, but I am one of the people that’s rooting for modular cables to become the next industry-standard feature. They are not bulky, they are convenient, and who the hell can not like them? I guess there are people who do not need the extra connectors, hence why they might consider them unnecessary, but for those who often find themselves switching connectors, they are a must-have. One thing is for sure, and that’s that they made the “old” adaptors seem almost unacceptable. Cable connectors are already bulky enough by themselves, let alone adding a bulky adaptor on top of that. *Brr* Yikes!

The part I love the most about this cable is the cable itself. While transparent cables are gorgeous because they show off the cable’s material beneath the sheathing, I love the good ole black rubber cables. I’m married to my Sennheiser HD598’s rubber cable, everyone knows that, and this Mogami cable heavily reminds me of it. It is silky smooth, it has that sheen, and it’s durable. It’s not necessarily the most flexible cable I’ve used, but it holds its shape when I want to put it away, and that’s what matters to me.

The housings (IEM connectors, Y-splitter, angled part of the connectors) are made of high-quality plastic. It would’ve been much more appropriate if they were made of metal, especially when you remember this is a premium IEM. The only reason why it’s forgivable is because the plastic matches the metal finish and feels high-quality.



The modular cable uses a 4-pin “system”. Imagine two 2-pin connectors next to each other, and bam, you have the today’s modular cable system. You can actually stick a normal male 2-pin connector inside the female part (3.5mm, 2.5mm, 4.4mm connectors) — do note that I did this while the cable was fully disconnected from the IEMs and the amp/dac. Both IEM connectors are labeled with a colored metal ring at the end (red for the right, blue for the left). The male end is is fully made of metal and is labeled for the ease of use. There is a small textured section that helps you lock/unlock the connectors, and right above it there is a label that indicated that if you rotate it to the left, you will release the lock, and if you rotate it to the right, you will secure the lock. Not only that, but there is a white dot on the very end of it, helping you to aline the connectors, which also have a white dot. It’s a pretty straightforward mechanism that is quite reliable.

There’s no doubt that both the IEM shells and the cable are well-made, but I do have a pet peeve: the plastic bead chin slider. Ugh… me and bead chin sliders, we do not get along. I just don’t like their appearance. I’d rather have no chin slider than a bead one. Bead sliders, be gone!

Comfort

While the P2+ isn’t uncomfortable, comfort is definitely a field that needs to be worked on.

The IEMs themselves are very light, making them non-fatiguing weight-wise. In similar fashion, the ear-guides are very flexible and the cable is also fairly light, both of these lead to no fatigue or discomfort around the ear.

However, the main issue lies within the part that goes inside your ears: the nozzle.

It’s not too big, it’s not too short/deep — both of which are good aspects — but the angle of the nozzle just isn’t right. While, yes, it is angled outwards, it severely lacks the upward angle that is needed for a deep insertion into the ear. In my opinion, and also from experience, the best fitting IEMs have the nozzle sitting at a 45˚ angle upwards, while P2+’s nozzle appears to be at a 90˚ angle. If you ever put a finger in your ear, you will know that to reach your ear kanal (not recommended), you have to go 90˚ in, then go upwards (if you were to align the angle with your face, it would be towards the ends of your eyebrows). A very sharp upwards angle is needed for the IEM to fit like a glove.

Because IEMs are little objects, it’s possible to angle them and push them in, but then you have to face the consequences. What happens when you angle an IEM (instead of it being the other way around) is that the whole IEM sits at that angle… which also means that the cable will sit at a very awkward position.

Sound Performance​

Lows

Up until this point, I’ve never really experienced the “planar bass” in its fullest form. I think that even if you tried to, you wouldn't be able to ignore P2+’s bass. The texture, the volume, the depth—chef’s kiss—the good stuff! Since I’ve already done a comparison between iBasso’s DX300 + AMP12 and DX300 MAX, I’ll go on to include an excerpt from my DX300 MAX review:

Setup:

DX300 MAX:
ᴀɴᴀʟᴏɢ ᴘᴏᴛ sᴇᴛ ᴀᴛ 12 ᴏ’ᴄʟᴏᴄᴋ
ᴅᴀᴄ ᴠᴏʟᴜᴍᴇ: 75
ɢᴀɪɴ: ʜɪɢʜ ɢᴀɪɴ
ᴅɪɢɪᴛᴀʟ ꜰɪʟᴛᴇʀ: D3
ᴜʟᴛɪᴍᴀᴛᴇ ᴍᴏᴅᴇ: ON

DX300 + AMP12:
ᴠᴏʟᴜᴍᴇ: 45
ɢᴀɪɴ: ɢᴀɪɴ
ᴅɪɢɪᴛᴀʟ ꜰɪʟᴛᴇʀ: D5 (ɴᴏs)

Rihanna — Final Goodbye │00:32, sub-bass is considerably more refined and has more depth & presence on the DX300 MAX (on the DX300 + AMP12, it sounds thinner and the delay isn't as audible as on the DX300 MAX)

Sia — Where I Belong│sub-bass/bass in the beginning has more depth and texture on the DX300 MAX. My ear notices and "feels" (I can feel more of the vibration) more on the DX300 MAX, especially in the delay of the bass

Daft Punk — Giorgo by Moroder│bass is more controlled, is tighter and punchier (has a sharper attack & delay), cleaner (less "oomph"), and has more texture on the DX300 MAX; 07:46 - 07:48, each drum hit and its vibration is felt more on the DX300 MAX

Pink Floyd — Dogs│just like in other tracks, I noticed that the bass is cleaner and has more of a thud than an "oomph" on the DX300 MAX

As you can tell, the difference between the two is audible.

I also wanted to hear how DX300 + AMP1MK1 differs from the DX300 MAX. I’ve done some A/B testing in the past between the AMP11MK1 and AMP12 modules, and the difference between the two is quite significant. AMP11MK1 has more bass quantity, while AMP12 has a more controlled and balanced sound signature altogether. AMP12 also has better tonality and clarity in the mid-range.

Starting off with my reference sub-bass testing track “Why so Serious?” by Hans Zimmer, I can immediately notice that the P2+ has not only more sub-bass quantity, but also better quality on the DX300 MAX. However, as soon as I played a track where there is more of a focus on mid-bass, I came to the same conclusion as I did before: AMP11 has more bass quantity, but less quality compared to AMP12 and DX300 MAX. A neat track to listen to this is “Do I Wanna Know?” by Arctic Monkeys. Focus on the drums’ qualities at the very start of the track. P2+ has more “oomph” with the DX300 + AMP11MK1 combo, but has a much clearer and present decay on the DX300 MAX. Also, by saying there is more “oomph” I am saying that the body is fuller, but also that the decay and the overall drums are less defined. Have you ever made you eyes go out of focus? If so, you probably know that everything in sight loses its definition, but everything becomes “larger”. Nothing is in focus, but because everything lost its definition, everything is “larger”. This is how I’d describe the previously-mentioned comparison.

I heard similar differences in Pink Floyd’s “Hey You” at the 01:18 minute mark. The first two drum hits have more depth on the DX300 MAX.



Mids

Everything here is “smooth” and nicely executed. From vocals to instruments, for the most part, the timbre is life-like and natural.

I’d say the mid-range is more warm than analytical. None of my shouty/peaky testing tracks sounded edgy or peaky. I usually play “Forget Her” by Jeff Buckley, “I Will Survive” by Gloria Gaynor, “Strange Fruit” by Nina Simone, and “Babe I’m Gonna Leave You” by Joan Baez. Although in all of these tracks the peaks has somewhat of an edge, I wouldn’t say they had enough of it to make the recordings as “grainy” in the peaks as they are supposed to be (as they would be on a brighter set of IEMs). However, I also wouldn’t say that the peaks have been polished to the point where the peaky recording don’t sound peaky anymore.

Listening to several tracks with strings, I noticed that the overall mid-range and the upper mid-range are right on, but the lower mid-range doesn’t have enough “body” or “oomph” to give that authentic plucking sound. I don’t know if I’m the only one, but I came to the conclusion that this lower mid-range is what gives a pluck its definition, its nature of sounding like a pluck, its texture. To come to this conclusion, I went through dozens of tracks that I am familiar with, some of them include: “Go Insane - Live 1997” by Fleetwood Mac, “Oh Daddy” by Fleetwood Mac, “Soldier of Fortune” by Deep Purple, “Private Investigations” and “Sultans of Swing” by Dire Straits, “Beyond the Realms of Death” by Judas Priest, “When a Bind Man Cries” by Metallica, “Some Other Time” by Alan Parsons Project

The mid-range isn’t the most impressive part of the P2+, especially when you are someone who likes to listen to a lot of acoustic and instrumental music. Also, if anything, I found vocals to sit slightly “behind” other elements in music.



Highs

In my opinion, this is where the majority of excitement comes from. This is the so-called cherry on the cake.

I know that some people described the normal P2 as a U-shaped IEM, and I think that might be the case with the P2+. However, unlike with the P2, I find P2+’ treble response to be the factor that attracts me to enjoy it so much.
Playing my two tracks of choice for sibilance (“Portia” by Miles Davis, “Stop Trying to Be God” by Travis Scott — Stevie Wonder’s mouth harmonica at around 4:43 minute mark) I didn’t notice any signs of sibilance or piercingness. Sure, I can say that there is edge at the peaks, but I wouldn’t say that there is sparkle. In terms of my definition of sparkle, read this excerpt from my iBasso SR2 review:

“Sparkle is a sound characteristic of greater amount of clarity and detail retrieval than shine - it is a very hard characteristic to pull off, because often times it’s easy to cross the line and go into sibilance. When done correctly, you experience a very satisfying “tingle” feeling in your ear.”

It’s the treble quality that’s “borderline” with sibilance, or as one might say, the very last quality of “good” treble quality before it crosses into the bad treble qualities (piercing, sibilant).

Percussion, on the other hand, is something that I would call bright-sounding, but not in an unpleasant way. In fact, it’s quite the opposite: lovely!

Hm… maybe “lovely” isn’t the correct word, because that might give one the impression that it’s soft and forgiving. To get straight to the point, percussion is crisp, sharp, and aggressive. It is forward, but not to the point where it’s hurting your ears or distracting you from the rest of the elements in the mix. Because it is forward, it does stick out in the mix, but in a tasteful way. I know that I can say that I absolutely like how percussion sounds on the P2+. I’ve listened to a whole bunch of tracks and music, and percussion always sounds good. If I had to only use a single word to describe it, the word would be “crisp”.

I don’t think I’d pick out any specific track that showcases this, as though the majority of the already mentioned tracks showcase the crisp nature of percussion. “Heaven and Hell” by Black Sabbath, “When a Blind Man Cries” by Metallica, “Pull Me Under” by Dream Theater, “Some Other Time” by The Alan Parsons Project might be good examples of bright & crisp percussion.



Soundstage & Layering

Let’s talk about soundstage for a second. I’ve had experience with quite a few IEMs, but I don’t think that any IEM came close to the soundstage of MMR Thummim — until now. While it’s not as holographic and as life-like as the Thummim, P2+ is pretty close. Also, do note that Thummim is a humongous IEM, and P2+ is a slim IEM. Whatever the hell TinHiFi did with the P2+, they did it right.

In just about every track you can hear how spacious and “holographic” the soundstage is. And it’s not just the soundstage, every element has room, meaning that you can separate out every element in the mix. Separation, layering, both are done excellently — as they should be in this price range. I was caught off guard by the spacious nature of King Crimson’s “Epitaph - Including “March for No Reason” and “Tomorrow and Tomorrow””. The guitar which is panned to the left sounds roughly 15-20 centimeters outside of the IEMs.

A track where you can hear P2+’ soundstage and staging capability is Yosi Horikawa’s well-respected “Bubbles”. If you’ve never listened to this track, I highly recommend it! I know that just about every person who gave it a listen made it essential when listening to any new gear. In my opinion, the two most important qualities in this track are soundstage & staging, both of which the P2+ nails. I’d say that here you can really hear the 3D soundstage that the P2+ is capable of, and I would also say the soundstage is 5-10cm wider than in the King Crimson track.

It’s one thing when an IEM has a wide soundstage, and it’s a whole other thing when an IEM is spacious. If you think about it, a wide soundstage is nothing more but the “perceived” distance in music, i.e. our interpretation of the imaginative music space, while a spacious IEM is one that has room around each element. The opposite of a spacious IEM is a crowded IEM, one that doesn’t give enough room to each element in the mix. The P2+ possesses both of these qualities.

Conclusion​

I have to say that I wasn’t expecting to like the P2+ so much. To be honest, I didn’t have high expectations, but in the end P2+ proved itself in just about every field.

It is not perfect, but the number of things it gets right, in my opinion, justifies the price. I’ve never seen a mirror finish IEM that isn’t a fingerprint magnet, yet TinHiFi somehow managed to do just that in here.

The slim form-factor, the lightweight nature, the relaxed (not perfect) fit, the cable!

I never had a chance to listen to the standard P2, but the flagship P2+ is fascinating. If the P2 retains the same qualities of the P2+, it’s a no-brainer. It’s still pretty unclear if the “Plus” is just a cosmetic and cable upgrade, or if there have been any sonic differences. I’d love to debunk this, but I do not have the standard model at hand.

“U-Shaped” would be the most accurate way to describe the P2+’ sound signature in technical terms. It has growling lows which are capable of rumble, but also retains the qualities in the bass region. The qualities I am talking about are the responsiveness (fast attack & decay), depth, and punchiness (delivery). It has a warmer and slightly recessed mid-range, and fills in the warmth with a more analytical and brighter treble response.

If it had a deeper and more present lower mid-range, had a greater upper mid-range extension, and the nozzle was more angled upwards, I would without a doubt rate it at 5 stars. When you are feeding these with enough juice, they really show what they are capable of.

At $650 (currently going for $620), it sits in a very competitive space in the market. Whether it is better or worse than its competitors, I cannot say because I have limited experience. My focus is mainly on the headphone market, and there’s only a bunch of IEMs that I’ve had an opportunity to listen to, but having had the experience to listen to MMR’s Thummim on my DX300 MAX SS, I can at least give my input as to how close this experience is to that one, and as I’ve already said, the P2+ is the only IEM I’ve listened to that comes close to the spaciousness of the Thummim.

If you have any need to justify its price, the standard P2 sells for $369 (currently going for $339). The P2+ Mogami modular cable goes for $169 (currently going for $150) on TinHiFi’s official store, so we can say that the 18K electroplating, SpinFit ear-tips, the updated ear-tips, the different leather carrying case, and the unboxing experience is costing you $112 (MSRP prices) or $131 with the current discounted prices… which doesn’t sound all that bad. These are just the physical changes, I cannot confirm whether there are any sonic differences between the two models.

All in all, if you have a source that gives enough juice to this power-hungry planar, I think you will be rewarded with a very pleasant listening experience.

---

Setup: iBasso DX300 MAX, high gain, DAC volume set @ 75, Ultimate Mode on, analog volume pot's position varied from 12 o'clock to 4 o'clock, Android OS, 4.4mm balanced

A desktop-grade setup in your pocket! (sorta...)​

Let’s go way back to 2006, the year iBasso was founded. It started out as a manufacturer of headphone amplifiers, portable amplifiers, and DACs. In the same year, it released “Series D” of amplifiers & DACs, “Series P” of amplifiers, and “Series T” of slim headphone amplifiers. Fast forward 2011, the most important year for iBasso, the company released its first DAP — DX100 (HDP-R10). It was many things. It was the company’s greatest success and greatest accomplishment. It was the world’s first digital audio player that could play DSD while utilizing Android OS. It was the world’s first true high-resolution (24bit/192kHz) digital audio player.

iBasso accomplished this by successfully bypassing the ASLA driver on Android and using two EX9018 DAC chips. This would go on to be an industry-changing achievement.

In the coming years, iBasso would go on to release several DAPs: DX50 (2013), DX80 (2014), DX90 (2014), DX200 (2017), DX120 (2018), DX150 (2018), DX160 (2019), DX220 (2020), DX220 MAX (2020), DX300 (2020).

And here we are in 2021, we’ve witnessed the release of iBasso’s brand-new MAX series member: DX300 MAX. While the release was somewhat chaotic and made some people upset, everything turned out to be just okay in the end. The SS (stainless steel) version was limited to 400 units, while the Ti (titanium) version was limited to 100 units. Both of these releases had a set number of units reserved for the company’s homeland (China). In short, what caused the outrage is the fact that it that the Ti version wasn’t announced at the time of the release of the SS version, causing some people to be upset. Also, it wasn’t clear that the SS version would be limited to 400 units.

DAPs aside, iBasso entered the Head-Fi industry in 2016. This is the year that it released its first pair of IEMs: IT03 — a competitively priced 1DD + 2BA IEM. Then the company released its then-flagship IEM: IT04. To top it all off, iBasso also released its first headphones: SR1 — the world’s first high-definition headphones to use silicone suspension drivers. All three releases were a great success, with the SR1 being a limited edition that sold out.

In general, iBasso always moves two steps ahead of everyone else. If you just track and follow each and every step of this company, you will be amazed at how fast they are evolving. The consistency of their industry-leading products is nothing to be overlooked.

Preface ⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯​

Everything about this review was far from ordinary. First of all, an emergency happened, and this on its own took a big toll on me. For the majority of this review I was not home, meaning that I couldn't work in normal fashion. Not only did the [ongoing] emergency disrupt my way of working, but it also didn't leave me much time for music listening. The combination of not being at home and not having a lot of free time significantly pushed back the release of this review. Secondly, as the manufacturer recommended, I burned-in the DAP for 200 hours. I usually do not do this as though I like the virgin experience of natural burn-in. However, as burn-in was recommended, I took it very seriously and made sure to document the whole journey. This way, if you want, you can repeat my burn-in process:

The burn-in was done with the following settings:
Gain: High
Volume pot position: 12 o'clock
Played from: Internal Storage
OS: Mango OS

Approach:
To keep everything versatile yet smooth, I only had three albums in my Internal Storage music library. I set the playback mode to loop, which allowed me to leave the DX300 MAX running while I went on about my life. Basically, loop made sure that the three albums were played by track order and were on repeat (loop: A, B, C, A, B, C... etc.) The three albums were: Ritchie Blackmore’s Rainbow (9 tracks, 64DSD), Yo-Yo Ma’s Classic (16 tracks, 64DSD), Chesky Record’s 2020 Audiophile Sampler (10 tracks, WAV 24bit 96.0 kHz). Besides the first day, I played the three albums on loop from a full-charge (100%) to 20% (the first battery to drop to ~20%). Then I would charge the DX300 MAX (analog battery was being charged with the included charger, while the digital one was being charged slowly with a 5.0V charger). It roughly takes 3h 20min to charge the digital section from 20% to 100% with a 5.0V charger. In terms of problems, I sometimes found the DX300 MAX to be frozen. However, even though it happened only a couple of times, I cannot confirm whether there was any music playback while it was frozen, or whether it froze only when I turned it on and interacted with the screen. In other words, this remains a question mark.

Burn-In documentation:


Disclaimer: The DX300 MAX was provided to me free of charge. I received a "Demo" unit which isn't a part of the limited 400 unit batch. I am neither paid nor am I gaining any financial benefit from iBasso for writing this review. The review is based on my personal experience, it is completely free of any bias from an external force (whether that's online influence, other people's opinion, or the manufacturer itself). Like all of my previous reviews, unless stated, there is no positive nor negative influence coming from the manufacturer. In fact, Mr. Paul always clearly states that he wants an honest review that does't hide flaws. Also, like my other reviews, this review wasn't written overnight and took many hours of research, photographing, editing and listening experience to result in the article that you are about to read.

Disclaimer #2: I was going for a very specific look of the photography, and thus I decided to make the gold accents look "golden". In real life, the gold is of a more mature and darker golden color. I usually color-grade my photography to match the colors in real life.

The featured photography of the DX300 MAX was composed and edited by me. I am also responsible for the advanced Head-Fi formatting, tables, and overall layout in this review. Last but not least, I decided to make a switch from Imgur to ImgBB. I spent way too much time making, color-grading, and editing the DX300 MAX photography, only to be forced to compress it before uploading to Imgur. In short, Imgur has a 5MB limit before it applies its own compression, so I usually do the compression beforehand and make sure the files are below 5MB. For this review I had enough of it. I uploaded the uncompressed images to ImgBB, and this is why it might take a bit longer for the images to load. Please contact me (PM on Head-Fi or email) if you can't see any photography of the DX300 MAX.

Thank you, enjoy the review =D

---

Unboxing Experience

Let’s just say that the unboxing experience leans towards the simpler side from what we are used to seeing from iBasso.


First, you will be met with a plain black cardboard box with two white stickers on the side (one of them is the bar-code, and the other is the serial number). After you open it up, you will be able to slide out a second box. Unlike the first one, this one features a matte rubber-like finish It is also plain, but features a shiny iBasso’s logo in the middle. It opens upwards, like a watch box. Inside you will first see your DX300 MAX set in a velvet-like compartment. Below this compartment are all the accessories and your exclusive 1-of-1 metal card with your unit number — not included with my Demo review unit. The metal card is held “inside” of a black envelope. In this envelope are the screen protectors, quicks start guide, and the warranty card. The accessories are separated into three velvet-like pouches. One pouch has the charger for the analog section, the other one has the leather case, and the last holds a braided coax cable, a braided burn-in cable, 2.5mm to 4.4mm adaptor, a thick rubberized 4.4mm to 3.5mm Line Out cable, and a braided USB-A to USB-C cable.

All of the accessories are premium.

Format format of what’s inside:

1x DX300 MAX
1x leather case
3x different sized velvet-like pouches
1x iBasso CA02 2.5mm to 4.4mm adaptor
1x 4.4mm to 3.5mm LO cable
1x USB-A to USB-C cable
1x coax cable
1x 1-of-1 metal card with unit number

Click to expand...

Design

DX300 MAX is a big boy, there’s no doubt about it. You can think of it as a combination of a smaller desktop amp and your classic DAP.

If this is your first time seeing a MAX series digital audio player from iBasso, then the size might come off as surprising. It wasn’t the height or the width that surprised me as much as the sheer thickness of this monster. Compared to my phone, Samsung Galaxy S8, the DX300 MAX is just about the same height and it’s a couple of centimeters wider. On the other hand, if you are familiar with the DX220 MAX, then you will find DX300 MAX’s size pretty normal. And while they are almost same in size, the two have some pretty distinct physical design differences. I will point out these differences as I reveal the design features of the DX300 MAX.

Let’s start off with the chassis. On the front panel, you will find the true 4.4mm balanced Line Out, 4.4mm Balanced Phone Out, 3.5mm Single-Ended Phone Out, and Volume Knob; in that order. On the back panel, you will find the DC-in, USB-C port, Coaxial Out, and Micro SD card slot. Finally, on the right-side, you will find the Power On/Off button and the media control buttons. The latter are “isolated” from the power button by being spaced farther apart from it. I’m glad iBasso listened and changed the media control buttons to a round design (like on the DX220). If you are unaware, the DX300 had slim media control buttons that weren’t quite ideal. The newly designed buttons are easier to press, are more consistent, and have more tactile feedback. The exact changes I asked for in my DX300 review!

Besides the volume knob, visually-wise, there haven’t been any notable changes. DX300 MAX still carries that iconic DX220 MAX look & finish. However, what has changed is the physical layout. One thing that you should know is that DX220 MAX had only one button: the power button located on the back panel. The addition of the media control buttons is a significant change, if you ask me. Having both the power button and the media control buttons in one place is something that makes using the DAP much more comfortable and convenient. In addition, the Micro SD card slot has also been moved to the back, leaving the left side completely blank.

Regarding the volume knob, it is circular in shape. The front-facing side has a brushed finish, while it features slanted “slashes” all the way around. Besides the “slashes”, it is polished all the way around, and there is an engraved ring close to the face of the knob.

iBasso DX300 MAX holds a rectangular shape with polished smoothed out edges. There is not a single sharp corner, everything is buttery smooth and gorgeous in appearance. I especially appreciate the attention to detail, such as the small part of the chassis by the display that is polished.

The front panel has CNC-milled cutouts for the audio outputs (Line Out, BAL Phone Out, SE Phone Out). All three audio outputs are recessed within the cutouts. However, on the back panel, the inputs/outputs are not recessed and do not have cutouts around them. Instead, they are set flush with the chassis.

The MAX series features a color combination of silver, as the base color, and gold, as the accent color. Each input/output is outlined with a golden faceplate. Round inputs/outputs are surrounded with a round faceplate, while oval inputs/outputs are surrounded with a rounded rectangular faceplate. To further add to the details, each faceplate has a circular engraved texture.

I know there has been a decent amount of debating about the portability of the DX300 MAX. Here’s my take on it:

My interpretation of the word “portable” is something that can be carried around without any hassle. On the other hand, I define “pocketable” something that can fit in your pockets. I am aware that “transportable” might be more appropriate for my definition of “portable”, but it is what it is.

To get to the point. Does DX300 MAX fit in the pocket with ease? No. Can it be easily carried around? Yes. Whenever I think about portable, the question “Would Tyll be able to take one with him?” always comes to mind. That’s only one of the things I question. Another aspect that I question is whether it can fit in a backpack and be carried around. DX300 MAX can certainly be thrown in a backpack with its charger & other accessories.

So, in my opinion, DX300 MAX is portable, but isn’t pocketable. That's my take on its portability.

Functions & Features

I would like to go over the details of the above-mentioned inputs/outputs.

The 4.4mm Balanced Line Out can be used when you want to use an external amplifier and let the DX300 MAX act as a source. The 4.4mm and 3.5mm Phone Outs are to be used with your desired headphones, earbuds, earphones, and IEMs. The volume knob is a story of its own and will be covered in a dedicated section.

Moving to the back-side, DC-in is where you plug in the included 12V AC/DC adapter to charge the analog battery section. The USB-C port is used for both data transfer (USB 3.1 Gen 1 Superspeed) and charging (supports QC3.0 and PD2.0 quick charging) the digital battery section. The S/PDIF Coaxial Out allows you to connect the DX300 MAX to a device with a Coax In and allows your DAP to act as digital transport — allows you to play your music library from your DAP.



Build Quality

If you limited me to one sentence to describe its build quality, it would probably be “Built like a tank”. You could seriously use this gorgeous chunk of stainless steel as a self-defense weapon. It would be of great use in a zombie apocalypse. Forgot the keys to your car? Worry not, DX300 MAX will go through those windows with no struggle… Okay, I might’ve gone a little bit too far there.

As the SS name suggests, DX300 MAX SS is made of stainless steel. While I couldn’t the exact grade of it, I did find out that it is commercial high-grade stainless steel (the factory manufacturing these specializes in manufacturing medical and airline metals). The stainless steel is treated with a brushed finish. There is also a Ti version made of a titanium alloy. More specifically, it is made of aerospace titanium (Ti-6Al-4V; also known as Grade 5 titanium).

The volume knob is also made of stainless steel. It is treated with a soft radially brushed finish.

The faceplates are made of anodized aluminum.



Custom Analog Potentiometer

One of the signature features of the MAX series is the analog potentiometer. The analog potentiometer is responsible for the balanced signal, and thus has 4 wipers. If it were responsible for a single ended signal, it would only need 2 wipers. Each potentiometer is tested before sent to iBasso. However, iBasso does one more final testing to eliminate any units that don’t meet their specifications.

For those unfamiliar with analog potentiometers — *cough* *cough* like I was — you might think something is wrong with your DAP when you hear channel imbalances at low volumes. As I and many others found out, this is a completely normal characteristic of analog potentiometers. I thought it would be of great value to hear manufacturer’s recommendation at what position the volume pot should be set. Mr. Paul suggests that the volume pot is set at 9 o’clock or higher.

“It may vary a little but that is generally where ours is at a good balance“ he said.

I like to keep mine at 12 o’clock, but I allow myself to go lower than that.

Display

While iBasso made a bold statement with its DX300’s industry-leading display size & resolution, the MAX series leans towards a different direction. DX300 MAX has a 5” IPS touch display. In comparison, DX220 MAX also had a 5” display, but instead of a IPS panel it used an LCD panel. What the two share in common is the Full HD (1080x1920) resolution.

The jump from the almost bezel-less DX300 to the MAX is not small. In fact, it is a completely different experience. I’d say it’s a love it or hate it experience. I love it.

For some reason, the thick bezels make it much more cozy to use. I think it’s moreso the top and bottom bezels that make it such a pleasant experience. The combination of thicker bezels and a smaller display result in a very convenient design that allows for one-handed use. Everything is within hand’s reach. This is one of the main reasons why it is such a joy to use.

Internal Hardware​

Let’s uncover the beast hiding underneath.

SoC (system on a chip)

Holding it all together is Qualcomm’s Snapdragon 660 SoC (system on a chip) with 128GB of internal storage, 6GB of LPDDR4X-3733 RAM that operates at a frequency of 1866 MHz, an octa-core 14nm processor (four Kryo 260 Silver cores operating at 1.84 GHz and four Kryo 260 Gold cores operating at 2.2 GHz), and a Adreno 512 integrated GPU operating at 647 MHz. When it comes to the processor, I ran CPU-Z, and it revealed that four cores operate at 633MHz – 1843MHz, while the other four operate at 1113MHz – 2208 MHz.

DX300 MAX shares the same industry-leading SoC that’s featured in the DX300. It can be considered industry-leading until Shanling officially releases its M9 flagship DAP that will feature Qualcomm’s Snapdragon 665.

DAC (Digital to Analog Converter)
Perhaps the most notable part of the DX300 MAX is the use of the now-discontinued AKM AK4499EQ DAC chips. After all, this is why iBasso was forced to make this model so limited. For those unaware, on October 21, 2020, a fire broke out at AKM’s semiconductor plant “Fab2”. This factory plant was mainly responsible for manufacturing large-scale integrated circuits (LSI) used in audio equipment, home appliances, TCXO oscillator, and other products. While AKM didn’t immediately publicize how its chips would be affected, earlier this year they officially announced which of its chips would be permanently discontinued, AK4499EQ — the company’s flagship chip — being one of them. AKM does plan to redevelop its two now-retired flagship chips (AK4498EQ, AK4499EQ), but it is uncertain whether the performance will be worse/better than the original. Regardless, I think it’s safe to assume that we will never get the same original AK4498EQ chip.



In terms of DX300 MAX and its implementation of AKM’s chips, iBasso incorporated two AK4499EQ chips (one per channel). Each DAC chip has 4 channels, totaling to 8 channels. While, yes, in theory DX300 MAX has 8 channels, they will not all be used unless you activate “Ultimate Mode” through software. When not using the Ultimate Mode, DX300 MAX uses only two channels, allowing for longer listening sessions (more battery) and less heat being generated.

AK4499EQ features 6 digital filters (these can be chosen in a couple of different places in Android & MangoOS):

D1: Short Roll-Off


D2: Slow Roll-Off


D3: Short Delay, Sharp Roll-Off

D4: Short Delay, Slow Roll-Off

D5: Super Slow Roll-Off

D6: Low Dispersion, Short Delay


Unsatisfied with how the average DAPs don’t prioritize audio playback and instead let the SoC and the OS process multiple tasks at the same time, iBasso implemented a FPGA (Field Programmable Gate Array) in Master mode. The FPGA works between the Soc and the DAC. It basically requests data from the SoC and then sends that data to the DAC. The FPGA works in Master mode using two ultra-low power noise Accusilicon Femtosecond oscillators as the clocks while synchronizing all audio clocks. This way any jitter is reduced and minimized in order to achieve the cleanest audio processing.

The following are DX300 MAX’s supported audio formats: MQA (16x), APE, FLAC, WAV, WMA, AAC, ALAC, AIFF, OGG, MP3, DFF, DSF, and DXD
PCM: 768kHz / 32-Bit, DSD512: 22.5 MHz / 1-Bit

In contrast, DX220 MAX used two 8-channel ESS ES9028PRO DAC chips. Another difference is that DX300 MAX supports PCM 768kHz (16x oversampling), while DX220 MAX supports PCM 384kHz (highest PCM non-oversampling resolution).

AMP

Yet another standout feature of this DAP is its amplifier section. Yes, I know, everything I mentioned so far has been “special”, but that’s just how iBasso does things. I cannot deny their genius!



The analog and digital circuits are fully isolated from each other. It’s almost as though the two are completely independent of one another. Just like the DAC volume can be exclusively controlled through software, the Phone Out volume is exclusively controlled by the analog potentiometer. The two are controlled independent from each other.

Once again, if you never used a MAX series DAP from iBasso, then you might be prone to making the same mistake as me. Even after reading people pointing it out under the DX300 MAX Head-Fi thread, I forgot that there is no way for you to see the AMP volume. Well, technically you can see it by looking at the volume pot’s position, but you cannot see it through software. When I turned it on for the first time and noticed the volume in the top-bar menu wasn’t reacting, I thought something was faulty. I knew the volume pot worked because it altered the volume (duh…), but was confused as to why the number on the screen wasn’t changing. Don’t be a dummy like me! This is how analog potentiometers work.

Both the digital and analog circuits use optocouplers (opto-isolators) and I2C isolators for complete isolation from interference between each other.

Let’s go over the more technical details about the amplifier section. First off, it is based on the AMP8 module — originally designed for DX150/DX200 models. It is an “optimized super class A discrete circuit”. It eliminates he switching distortion of transistors, while providing the sound signature of a Class A amplifier & significantly reduces heat generation. To better understand this, here is iBasso’s quote describing the AMP8:

“When using OPAMPs to develop an amplifier, it is almost impossible to achieve high voltage output and high current output, especially on a portable devices. Some engineers have used the TPA6120 on the buffer stage to achieve 750mA output current. However, it has 10ohm output impedance, which isn't ideal for low impedance IEMs or headphones. So, we decided to use discrete components which are usually used on desktop amplifiers to develop the AMPS, but the development process is much more difficult when using discrete components. After a long development period and with our final design, we present the AMP8 card that has both high voltage and high current output and at the same time maintains low output impedance with extremely good measurements. AMP8 complements the premium performance of the DX150 and the DX200, giving you even more choices when playing the music you enjoy.”

Or, in one sentence, “AMP8 card has both high voltage and high current output and at the same time maintains low output impedance with extremely good measurements”

Oh yeah, and iBasso couldn’t forget to mention the use of high quality components! For electrolytic capacitors, iBasso used Siemens axial capacitors, Philips BC capacitors, NOS Philips metal film capacitors & silver jacker Philips BC capacitors. As Paul explained to me, it was hard to acquire the NOS (new old stock) capacitors, and they can still be found in some places today, but are increasing in price. If I understood correctly, Vishay now took over manufacturing these capacitors, but they differ in sound performance compared to the NOS ones. In the same way, iBasso didn’t overlook the cabling used on the amp circuit. “Aside” from all the hand soldering done on the board, the cables used are peripheral cables, but also hand soldered to the board. I’m sure there are people who have opinions, but then there are also people who couldn’t care less about the cables used inside. From @Whitigir ’s perspective, peripheral cables have 3 benefits over ribbon cables:

1) The connectors are more solid and larger in size
2) They allow the wire materials to be customs made
3) They allow the user to modify and upgrade the cables

As a whole, I think it’s quite prominent that the amplifier section is one of the main attractions to iBasso’s DAPs. Many people loved the past AMP8 module, so I think it was the right move to base DX300 MAX’s amplifier circuit on it.

Here are the official specs:

Phone Out


Line Out


Something that wasn’t initially disclosed in the official specs is the output voltage at different gain settings. I remembered DX300 + AMP11’s high line out output voltage of 7.1V, so I got curious and asked Mr. Paul if he knew what the line out output voltage is at different gain settings, and he told me (you can see I actually included the specs in the table above). Another thing Mr. Paul disclosed to me is that the current output of the DX300 MAX is up to 4A, as opposed to DX300 + AMP11’s max. output current of 2.7A.

Battery

Yet… another… standout feature… is the battery section. Here is an excerpt from my DX300 review:

“Something’s got to be powering all this craziness, right? Yup, a patented dual power supply structure. iBasso pursued this innovation in the DAP space because they believe that the usual single battery powering the whole system causes distortion that negatively affects audio quality. To be more specific, the DC from the analog section interferes with the DC from the digital section. This is why the battery design is separated into two sections…”

This is another part where the digital and analog sections are fully separated from each other. The good thing is that this one is actually patented and exclusive to iBasso. DX300 MAX is equipped with a total of 9800mAh! The digital section features a single 6200mAh battery pack, while the analog features a battery pack that is compromised of four 900mAh batteries. It’s also worth mentioning that the amplifier section features an optimized power supply path with the [AMP] battery pack directly loaded on the amplifier board. iBasso states that the analog section is powered by a “true +/- 8.4V battery pack” that uses no voltage boost to “ensure the highest purity and current output”.

Just like there are two separate battery sections, there are two separate charging “sections”. The analog section is charged with the included 12V charger, while the digital one is charged through the USB-C port with a charger of choice. Although quick charging is supported (QC3.0, PD2.0), using lower voltage chargers should extend your battery’s health… but I’m pretty sure that one buying this DAP cannot be bothered to wait. One thing that you should definitely avoid (with pretty much every iBasso DAP) are Samsung chargers. To be more specific, their“Adaptive Fast Charging” chargers. They are not optimized for iBasso players, and therefore create a complete mess. For one second it says it’s fast charging, the next second it says it’s charging, then it says it’s not charging. You get the point.

The battery life greatly depends on several factors: screen brightness, DAC volume, analog volume, audio format, Ultimate Mode On/Off, how demanding the headphones are, etc. However, by far, the single factor that affects the battery the most is the Ultimate Mode.

If you care about battery health, then you should never allow your battery to drop below 25% and should stop charging at 80%. Do note that I am not referring to the burn-in period, but rather to the normal use of the DAP. In terms of how long it lasted me, I will use the data from my burn-in period, because that’s the most stable testing I’ve done (constant music playing, little to no use of the screen). Excluding the first session, the average play time I was getting during the burn-in period was 8 hours and 32 minutes. Also excluding the first session, the most play time I’ve gotten was 10 hours and 42 minutes, and the least play time I’ve gotten was 8 hours and 40 minutes. During the burn-in period, I did not let the battery drop below 20% (except once or twice when I got carried away and the battery dropped to 17-18%), and charged it to 100%. In other words, you can expect 80% to last you around 8 hours and 30 minutes. If you are more curious about this topic, check out this link (thanks to @Poganin for recommending it):
https://batteryuniversity.com/article/bu-808-how-to-prolong-lithium-based-batteries

While this is more of a software “issue”, it’s worth mentioning. The software doesn’t appear to be showing the true/correct battery percentage. How do I know this? Well, it’s actually something I found out during the burn-in period. Whenever I powered off the DX300 MAX and connected it to both chargers, the analog section always had 10% more than it initially showed while the DAP was on. The second thing I noticed during the burn-in period was that the software didn’t have a consistent battery decrease rate. What I mean by this is that although the battery life was pretty similar during the burn-in period, the software didn’t always decrease the battery at a consistent rate. For example, the analog battery could drop below the digital battery, but near the end (sometimes it was near 20%, other times it was near 60%) they would catch up to each other and digital one would drop a percent or so below the analog battery. This was apparent when I noticed that either the analog battery or the digital battery held a certain percentage for longer than expected. I’m not entirely sure whether this can be considered an issue, since you are getting constant battery life, but it is certainly an inconvenience. I’m sure it can be fixed through software, but just like anything else, it takes time to get it right.

Software & Interface​

Just like its past players, DX300 MAX comes equipped with iBasso’s authentic dual-boot OS. On one end there is an optimized Android system, aka custom ROM — a firmware based on the Android source code provided by Google. On the other end there is iBasso’s own Linux-based “Mango OS”.

Android Pie (9.0)

As mentioned above, a custom ROM is used. This Android implementation has some visual differences and some limitations compared to the stock ROM (normal Android), but the overall experience will feel homelike if you are coming from an Android device.

Since I do not have the DX220 MAX, I will compare the DX300 MAX to my DX300.

The two are practically identical, except for some minor differences. In terms of settings, DX300 has “Double-tap screen to awake” and “Indicator” in display settings, while DX300 MAX doesn’t. In audio settings, DX300 MAX has “Ultimate Mode”, while DX300 doesn’t, and DX300 has “Output” (PO/LO) and “Volume Wheel Control”, while DX300 MAX doesn’t. Other than these minor differences (which are actually differences related to hardware), the settings are identical.

There is still a flexible homepage, which allows you to customize it to your liking. Once you long press on the homepage, a small pop-up will show up. Through this pop-up you can access “Home settings”, “Widgets”, or “Wallpapers”. Once in “Home settings”, you will see three options: “Enable feed integration”, “Change icon shape”, and “The main screen”. Feed integration is an extra audio-focused desktop which can be accessed once you swipe left on the homepage. It features a mini Mango Player & audio settings (Gapless, Gain, Digital Filter, Play Mode, USB DAC). The second option allows you to change the icon shape (square, squircle, circle, teardrop). If “The main screen” is enabled, all the apps will be displayed on the homepage, if disabled, it will allow you to use the standard Android app drawer. I prefer the standard app drawer because I like to look at my wallpaper on the homepage.

To make it feel more like home, there are also widgets that you can place on the homepage. Just like on my DX300, I used the time widget and the Google search widget (a stock Google Chrome widget). If you install third-party apps like Spotify, you will be able to use their widgets as well.

“Wallpapers” is a pretty self explanatory one… right?

Although the software was stable for the most part, I did run into some problems. A not so rare problem I encountered was that while in Android, I would press the power button to “wake up” the DAP and unlock it, but the screen wouldn’t register my fingers or would not allow me to fully swipe (needed for unlocking the screen). I also sometimes encountered my DX300 MAX to bug out and just go numb. This, however, wasn’t something that happened often. When this would occur, the screen would freeze, the power button wouldn’t be responsive after you use it to turn the DX300 MAX off, but after leaving the DAP off for a couple of minutes, I would be able to turn it back on. I think that a factory reset would fix this problem, and if it wouldn’t a software update should have the power to do it.

Mango App (Version 3.0.0)

The interface of this app is quite simple and minimalist, making it easy to navigate through. In the top-left corner there is a menu icon that allows you search through your music library, or browse your internal/external storage for music. In the top-right corner there is a settings icon where all of the audio settings are located: Gapless, Gain, Play mode, Equalizer (graphic with visual representation, parametric), L/R balance, Digital Filter, Media Scan, and Advanced. In Advanced you can choose: Unplug Pause, Indicator, USB DAC, Bluetooth DAC, Display settings, Sleep Timer, System Info.

In level with the above mentioned settings, if playing an album, the track number will be displayed (e.g. “4/10”). Everything below looks exactly the same as in the Mango OS. There is a large track/album cover art, file format, track’s timeline, track info, playback options.

I’d like to mention that both the parametric equalizer and the graphic equalizer are quite refined. With the graphic equalizer, you can adjust 10 frequency bands — 33Hz, 63Hz, 100Hz, 330Hz, 630Hz, 1kHz, 3.3kHz, 6.3kHz, 10kHz, 16kHz — with 24 stops (+12, -12) of which each stop alters +/- 0.5dB. On the other hand, the parametric equalizer is much more capable and allows you to adjust make incredibly precise adjustments. Besides being able to play around with the visual graphic, you can put number values to pin-point the adjustments. There are a total of 6 filters, each can be turned on/off individually, or all can be turned on at the same time. Each filter comes with 4 options:

Filter Type (8 total): low pass, high pass, band pass, notch, all pass, peaking, low shelf, high shelf
Fc: any value (no decimals) between 33Hz - 16kHz
Gain: +/- 20dB (no decimals)
Q Factor: any value between 0.3 - 20 (infinite amount of decimals supported)

I know that there are a lot of technical terms mentioned here, but they are not rocket science. Visit this link to gain a basic level of understanding of common types of equalizers and filter types: https://iconcollective.edu/types-of-eq/

In addition, check out iBasso's thorough coverage of DX300 MAX's equalizer(s): https://www.ibasso.com/uploadfiles/download/DX300Maxusermanual.pdf#page=46&zoom=auto,-243,395

Mango OS (V 1.03.209.2)



iBasso continues the implementation of its custom operating system — first introduced in 2014, on their DX80 DAP. Mango OS is a very raw operating system, there are no fancy visual affects (that are present on Android), it’s a very stripped down operating system whose focus is entirely on audio. If you are wondering what I’m talking about, I’m talking about things such as transition animations. These animations contribute to the smooth experience on the Android OS, though you can technically turn them off in Android’s “Developer Options”. Either way, Mango OS is much more than an OS with transition animations turned off!


You will notice that the whole OS is visually quite similar to the Mango App, hence why they share the same “Mango” name.

In total, MangoOS boasts only two menus: “My Music” and “Settings”. The first one is accessed by clicking on the menu icon in the top-left corner. Through this menu, you can access everything related to music media (now playing, all music, directory, album, artist, genre, playlist). All music, as the name suggests, displays all scanned music. You are given 4 options for sorting all of your music: title, album, artist, and added. Besides “My Music”, “Album” gives you an option to sort all your albums in either a list or an icon layout.

“Settings” are accessed by clicking on the settings icon in the top-right corner. Once you’re in the settings menu, you have the option to change the following: gapless, gain, play mode, L/R balance, equalizer, digital filter, advanced, and the option to switch to the Android OS. In “Advanced”, there is a second set of settings: DAC (mode), media scan, languages, display, power management, system info, MTP (media transfer protocol), DAC Volume, Button Settings, Ultimate Mode. For those unfamiliar with MTP, it is used when you want to transfer media between the DAP and a computer.

The OS is quite simple. On the very top (where the notification bar would usually be), the volume and two battery percentages are displayed on the right side. Right below, on the left side, there his a “My Music” menu, in which you can browse, well…. your music. You can see what’s currently playing, all your music files, you can browse the DX300’s directory, browse by albums, artists, genre, or by playlists. On the right side you have the settings menu, in which you will find all the audio settings: Gapless, Gain, Output, Play mode, L/R balance, Equalizer (graphic without visual representation), Digital Filter, Advanced, and also the option to switch back to Android. Once you go into Advanced, there are the following options: DAC, Media Scan, Languages, Display, Power Management, System Info, MTP (media transfer protocol). Then you have the large song/album cover art, and below it you have the file format information. Finally, right below there is the track’s timeline and underneath it you have the track name, artist, and album. In level, on the left side there is an icon of sound waves. Once you press it, all the track info (artist, album, duration, path, delete) is shown, and you also have the option to add that track to a playlist. Last but not least, on the right side you can change the playback options.

Menus aside, MangoOS has a homepage/main screen with a bunch of important info. First of all, on the very top (where the notification bar is usually), aligned to the right, you can see the DAC volume percentage and the percentages of the digital and analog battery sections. The majority of the screen space is taken by the track/album cover art. Below the cover art, you can see the file format information (audio coding format, bitrate, sample rate, audio bitrate size).

For the most part, everything below the cover art and file format info is pretty familiar: track timeline, track name/artist/album centered & displayed one below the other, play/pause & previous/next buttons. In line with the artist/album: one the left side, is a sound wave icon which reveals thorough information about the current track (track name, file format information, artist, album, duration, path, and an option to delete it); on the right side, play mode icon (Order, Loop, Shuffle, Repeat).

And that’s the whole Mango OS for you.

Playback Modes

Order – if you are playing an album, it will be played by track order, and once it’s done, the playback will stop. The same applies for playlists and single tracks.
Loop — whatever you are playing will be played on loop. If you are playing an album, it will be played in order, but will start from the beginning once the last track is finished. If you want to play your whole music library, you can just let it play, and if you turn on Loop, it will keep playing (very useful for burn-in).
Shuffle — random order
Repeat — the current track will be played on repeat

Bluetooth & WiFi

There’s nothing new here. For this reason, I’ll insert an excerpt from my DX300 review:

“The DX220 was the first DAP to support two-way Bluetooth 5.0, which provides native support for LDAC and aptx. The DX300 inherited this feature. When it comes to WiFi, the DX300 is equipped with two antennas (2x2 MIMO), which allows it to support up to two streams of data. It also has the dual band 2.4Ghz/5Ghz ability. The WiFi standard that is implemented is the 802.11b/g/n/ac. On the other side of things, the fairly up to date Bluetooth 5.0 is used.”

Although nothing has changed, I did notice that DX300 recognizes a network faster & connects to one better. Of course, this shouldn’t matter if you are at home, close to your router, using your own WiFi. However, if you are outside and feel a little rebellious and find a network without a password, you might have a harder time connecting to it. Lately, I found myself spending a lot of time in the countryside and there I have no internet… at least not my own (oops!). I noticed that DX300 was able to both connect and recognize a network nearby, while DX300 MAX had difficulties recognizing it and had no success in connecting to it. Perhaps this is due to the thick stainless steel housing? I cannot say for sure, but it is a small “detail” I noticed.

Sound Performance​

I have to be honest and tell you that there hasn’t been a time when I plugged something in the DX300 MAX and wasn’t amazed. Before I go into details, I want to say that in order to access DX300 MAX’s sound performance, I compared it against DX300 + AMP12 module (commonly known as “DX312”). I, like others, noticed that the two setups sound quite alike. However, just because they sound alike doesn’t meant they sound the same. They have their differences, and I will state them, but first, let’s do a comparison between AMP12’s and DX300 MAX's numbers and specifications. I separate numbers, aka specifications, and the audio experience, so, I prefer to do the same when I’m writing about sound performance… though, for the most part, I stay away from mentioning them.

Balanced Phone Out (4.4mm):

DX300 MAX:

AMP12:

Balanced Line Out:

DX300 MAX:

AMP 12:

So, what can we tell from this? A couple of things.

Phone Out-wise, DX300 MAX has a higher output voltage by 0.5 Vrms. However, on paper, it has a lower top-end extension by 5kHz, a smaller dynamic range by 1dB, has a lower S/N ratio by 1dB, and has a higher crosstalk by 5dB.

Line Out-wise, DX300 MAX has a higher voltage output by 0.3 Vrms. On paper, the voltage output is the only specification in which the DX300 MAX is superior in, just like in the Phone Out segment. It has a lower top-end extension by 5kHz, a lower dynamic range by 3dB, a lower S/N ratio by 3dB, and a higher crosstalk by 5dB.

In terms of the frequency response, it is also worthy of mentioning that AMP12 has a greater variation (+/- 0.9dB as opposed to DX300 MAX’s +/-0.3).

Why do I emphasize “on paper” when it comes to the inferior specifications? Because, as you are going to find out, my personal experience has turned out to be the complete opposite. I am not the only one, if you have been following the DX300 MAX thread on Head-Fi—I have since the beginning—you know that just about everyone preferred DX300 MAX over AMP12.

Now, onto my experience…

I only had a limited selection of IEMs and headphones with me at the countryside. I will update this section once my life returns to normal. I definitely have some interesting pairings in mind, some will be possible once I arrive home, while others are yet to arrive. Either way, do expect to see more here in the future. I will also consider making a table like the one featured in my DX300 review (“Pairings” section of the review). I really want to push this bad boy to its limits! After all, that’s what it was made for.



iBasso SR2

The only headphone I brought with me is my trusty SR2. This headphone has become a core part of my headphone journey and I always put it to the test when it comes to sources, amplifiers, and DAPs.

Setup:

DX300 MAX:
ᴀɴᴀʟᴏɢ ᴘᴏᴛ sᴇᴛ ᴀᴛ 12 ᴏ’ᴄʟᴏᴄᴋ
ᴅᴀᴄ ᴠᴏʟᴜᴍᴇ: 90
ɢᴀɪɴ: ʟᴏᴡ ɢᴀɪɴ
ᴅɪɢɪᴛᴀʟ ꜰɪʟᴛᴇʀ: D3
ᴜʟᴛɪᴍᴀᴛᴇ ᴍᴏᴅᴇ: ON

DX300 + AMP12:
ᴠᴏʟᴜᴍᴇ: 50
ɢᴀɪɴ: ᴍɪᴅ ɢᴀɪɴ
ᴅɪɢɪᴛᴀʟ ꜰɪʟᴛᴇʀ: D5 (ɴᴏs)

Android OS was used on both DAPs, and since an increasing number of people is noticing a chance in sound performance with different MicroSD cards, music files were played directly from the DAP’s internal storage(s).

I’ve gone through a number of tracks, but here are some that caught my attention:

Deep Purple — Soldier of Fortune│Vocals are more realistic and natural-sounding on the DX300 MAX, while they are fuller in the lower mid-range and more forward on the DX300 + AMP12

Yao Is Ting — Speak Softly, Love│Violin at 2:14 has a slightly brighter peak on the DX300 MAX

In general, I noticed that DX300 MAX has a blacker background and provides a roomier sound (there is more space/air between each element in the mix, allowing for more details and texture). The two tracks where all of the above-mentioned observations are present are "Wayfaring Stranger" by the New Appalachians and "Little Crimes" by Melissa Menago



TinHiFi P2+

For a power-hungry IEM, I brought TinHiFi’s flagship P2+.

Setup:

DX300 MAX:
ᴀɴᴀʟᴏɢ ᴘᴏᴛ sᴇᴛ ᴀᴛ 12 ᴏ’ᴄʟᴏᴄᴋ
ᴅᴀᴄ ᴠᴏʟᴜᴍᴇ: 75
ɢᴀɪɴ: ʜɪɢʜ ɢᴀɪɴ
ᴅɪɢɪᴛᴀʟ ꜰɪʟᴛᴇʀ: D3
ᴜʟᴛɪᴍᴀᴛᴇ ᴍᴏᴅᴇ: ON

DX300 + AMP12:
ᴠᴏʟᴜᴍᴇ: 45
ɢᴀɪɴ: ʜɪɢʜ ɢᴀɪɴ
ᴅɪɢɪᴛᴀʟ ꜰɪʟᴛᴇʀ: D5 (ɴᴏs)

Rihanna — Final Goodbye │00:32, sub-bass is considerably more refined and has more depth & presence on the DX300 MAX (on the DX300 + AMP12, it sounds thinner and the delay isn't as audible as on the DX300 MAX); 00:16, vocal peak is a tad brighter on the DX300 MAX; 01:23 when more percussion hits, the percussion has more shimmer/ is brighter on the DX300 MAX

Sia — Where I Belong│sub-bass/bass in the beginning has more depth and texture on the DX300 MAX. My ear notices and "feels" (I can feel more of the vibration) more on the DX300 MAX, especially in the delay of the bass

Daft Punk — Giorgo by Moroder│bass is more controlled, is tighter and punchier (has a sharper attack & delay), cleaner (less "oomph"), and has more texture on the DX300 MAX; 07:46 - 07:48, each drum hit and its vibration is felt more on the DX300 MAX

Pink Floyd — Dogs│just like in other tracks, I noticed that the bass is cleaner and has more of a thud than an "oomph" on the DX300 MAX

Conclusion​

Let’s get one thing straight: iBasso is the king of value, and it is not planning to step down anytime soon.

I think people take for granted how blessed we are to have a manufacturer like iBasso. Imagine being among the top DAP manufacturers on the market, providing flagship & TOTL performance, providing one of the best customer services on the market, and not overpricing your products. To say “it’s rare” doesn’t do it justice. I’ve seen it with their SR2 headphone, DX300 DAP, and now with the DX300 MAX.

It’s fascinating to see iBasso’s products always, I repeat, always being compared to products at least twice their price. DX300 MAX gets to compared to the top dogs (Sony DMP-Z1 — $8499, Luxury & Precision LP6Ti — $5790, Shanling M30 — $3599). In reality, DX300 MAX stands in its own lane, with no true direct competition. The form factor, the software, the power, the portability, the price — there is nothing alike it on the market. If I may say, it’s a “one-off” package. Of course, when it comes to audio performance, the comparison branch widens.

iBasso’s MAX series continues to push boundaries. More than that, the MAX series has a very clear goal: provide “desktop-grade” performance at a portable form-factor. The regular series (DX220, DX300) is targeted towards audiophiles who want a lighter, more of a daily driver DAP, while the MAX series is targeted towards audiophiles who are willing to go out of their way in order to driver their most power-demanding headphones & IEMs from their collections. As the name suggests, everything is maxed out.

In my eyes, the MAX series is iBasso’s state-of-the-art, no boundaries, no limitations — all out series. I imagine iBasso’s team sitting together and committing to the creation of something that truly represents what they are capable of. It’s the series that represents the house, the brand, the legacy.

The MAX series is only a year old. If this is the beginning, what sort of a beast can we be expecting in the future? That I cannot answer, but I am sure it will be something mind-blowing.



Special thanks to @Whitigir , @twister6 , @Poganin , and @M0N (from HiFi Guides) for providing extra information, and a very special thanks to @Paul - iBasso for being patient with me and answering all the extra questions I asked!