Reviews, Impressions, Rants, and More from darmanastartes

[darmanastartes]

HiBy R6 Pro II Impressions

INTRODUCTION AND DISCLAIMER:

The HiBy R6 Pro II is a digital audio player (DAP) with 3.5mm single-ended and 4.4mm balanced headphone and line-out outputs. It retails for $749. I received the R6 Pro II through a review tour organized by HiBy. I was able to test it for a week and a half before writing my review. I paid the shipping costs to the next reviewer, and no compensation was received for this review.

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES:

The HiBy R6 Pro II comes in a square white box. The package includes a leather protective case, screen protectors for both the front screen and the glass portion of the rear of the device, a long, sturdy USB-C to USB-C cable for charging and data transfer, a female USB-C to male USB-A adapter, a quality control pass chit, and a user manual.

The USB-C to USB-A adapter lacks backpower protection and is not recommended. The areas of the protective case which cover the device’s buttons are not labeled. If I had more time with the device to learn the layout this would be less of an issue, but I opted not to use the case during my time with the R6 Pro II as a result. In addition, these areas should be more prominently raised from the surface of the case. They blend into the rest of the case and are easy to miss.

BUILD QUALITY AND DESIGN:

On the one hand, the HiBy R6 Pro II has an attractive and visually interesting design that makes excellent use of a variety of premium materials and surface textures. On the other hand, this is a large, bulky, and heavy device. While I can see myself taking this device to a coffee shop to listen to while working, I cannot picture myself carrying it on my person and using it on the go with any regularity.

I was also not a fan of the R6 Pro II’s button layout. The device has power and volume up/down buttons along the right side, which is familiar to me as a Google Pixel user. However, the R6 Pro II’s play/pause and fast-forward buttons share the same raised surface. The similarity in profile between the left and right side controls repeatedly led me to rewind to the beginning of a track when I intended to turn the screen on. I would have liked to see three distinct buttons on the left side dedicated to playback control.

DEVICE PERFORMANCE (NON-SOUND):

The HiBy R6 Pro II is disappointingly sluggish and not nearly as responsive to input as I would expect from a device that retails for more than my Google Pixel 7. The Fiio M11 Plus​ I had the opportunity to try last year at a Head-Fi meet was much snappier despite its older Snapdragon 660 processor.

I was also not a fan of certain user interface choices. Specifically, adjusting the device volume while the screen is powered on triggers a full-screen volume control overlay which interrupts menu navigation. I could not locate an option to disable this overlay.

While I did not keep track of how much continuous listening I could get out of the R6 Pro II on a single charge, I needed to charge it roughly once every 36 hours. The device appears limited to 12 Watt charging, which is slow by modern standards.

THIRD-PARTY MUSIC APPS:

I encountered inconsistent results when first using Spotify on the HiBy R6 Pro II. After I first downloaded the app, I was unable to initiate music playback. Songs failed to play or buffer upon selection, and the “Home” tab refused to load at all. After revisiting Spotify later in the day, however, I was able to play music and access the “Home” tab without difficulty.

SOUND AND THERMAL PERFORMANCE:

The HiBy R6 Pro II offers tremendous resolution, catapulting the already impressive detail retrieval of my beloved Moondrop S8 to new heights against a pitch-black background. The AK4499EX digital-to-analog converter (DAC) chip, by Asahi Kasei Microdevices Corporation, is impressive. HiBy’s Mage Sound 8-ball (MSEB) pseudo-parametric equalizer (PEQ) is a useful feature, but I always prefer to have true PEQ if possible.

The R6 Pro II’s amplifier section fails to impress and likely isn’t enough to power many over-ear headphones. I reached my usual listening volume with the HiFiMan HE400SE through the R6 Pro II’s balanced output with high gain and a volume of 75/100. I did not notice an audible difference between Class A and Class AB amplification, which the R6 Pro II allows the user to toggle between. Class A mode does make the device warmer and drains the battery faster, so it’s best to leave it in Class AB.

CLOSING WORDS:

Since the advent of high-performance balanced output dongle DAC/amplifiers and increased storage availability on flagship smartphones, I have had little interest in DAPs. They tend to be bulky, underpowered, and expensive for their specifications. Despite its impressive resolving capabilities, the HiBy R6 Pro II does little to change my mind. I would not purchase it with my own money.

[darmanastartes]

Tanchjim Space Lite Impressions

DISCLAIMER:

I received the Tanchjim Space Lite, a DAC/AMP combo with a 3.5 mm single-ended output and CS43131 DAC, from ShenzhenAudio in exchange for my review. This unit costs $44.99 at ShenzhenAudio.

HEADPHONES:

I tested the Tanchjim Space Lite with the following headphones:

• Moondrop S8
• Kiwi Ears Orchestra Lite
• Dunu Vulkan
• SeeAudio Bravery
• Moondrop Void
• HiFiMan HE400SE

MUSIC:

I tested this device with FLAC local files and Spotify Premium streaming. Check out my last.fm page to see what I’m listening to:

XenosBroodLord’s Library | Last.fm

STANDARDS COMPLIANCE AND FUNCTIONALITY:

Disappointingly, the Tanchjim Space Lite does not implement headset controls, pause on headphone disconnect functionality, or connector status transmission to the host device. I have complained about limited manufacturer support for these standards for years and the number of brands that make standards compliance a priority remains short. I realize this concern may not be widely shared across the audiophile market, but I cannot imagine that ensuring compliance would be a heavy burden on manufacturers.

POWER DELIVERY:

I made the following observations with a system-wide -4 dB pre-amp setting as suggested here. While I recommend using this pre-amp setting to preserve fidelity, it does reduce the headroom of all connected source devices.

With the Tanchjim Space Lite and the Moondrop S8, I achieve a roughly 80 dB listening volume at a Windows system volume setting of 20/100. To reach the same volume with the Moondrop Void, I need to adjust the system volume to 35/100, while the HiFiMan HE400SE requires a setting of 60/100.

POWER CONSUMPTION AND HEAT MANAGEMENT:

I measured the power consumption of the Tanchjim Space Lite connected to my PC with the Windows system volume set to 35/100. The Space Lite was used to play a -10.1 dBV 1 kHz test tone from REW through the Moondrop S8, while the measurement below was taken. This level of output achieved an SPL of roughly 94 dB, as registered by my IEC-711 clone microphone.

The Space Lite does not appear to have an idle mode. The following measurement was taken with no headphone connected to the device:

The Space Lite has excellent heat management and does not get warm to the touch even with prolonged use.

SOUND:

Note: I made the following observations switching back and forth between the Tanchjim Space Lite and the Apple dongle repeatedly under sighted conditions. I attempted to volume-match the two devices were volume-matched to within .5 dB. Any perceived differences between the two sources may be a result of a remaining volume difference. There was also a delay of several seconds when switching between devices. The Moondrop S8 was used as the transducer for this comparison. In most cases, any differences between competently designed sources are infinitesimal and not necessarily apparent under uncontrolled testing conditions. Using the Space Lite I achieved my regular listening volume with the Windows system volume set to 20/100. I had to set the the Windows system volume control to 30/100 using the Apple dongle to achieve a similar volume. Android is another story. Because the Apple dongle’s output is limited on Android devices, achieving my usable listening volume using the Apple dongle and the Moondrop S8 required a volume setting of 24/25.

The Space Lite provides a slight bump to clarity and resolution compared to the Apple dongle. In particular, the Space Lite brings more emphasis to mid treble sparkle and upper treble air. This difference is ultimately minimal. At the same time, the Space Lite brings a sensation of maturity and control to transient delivery that stands in contrast to the sense of oversharpening one sometimes hears with ESS chips. This is the same quality I observed in the Truthear Shio, a more expensive DAC/AMP that also uses a Cirrus Logic DAC chip.

CLOSING WORDS:

The Tanchjim Space Lite is a good all-rounder dongle DAC/AMP. It provides greater clarity and more headroom compared to the Apple dongle, but does not consume vastly more power. While the lack of attention to standards compliance and the absence of an idle mode are regrettable, the Space Lite is still a good option for audiophiles who don’t require a balanced output for portable listening.

The Tanchjim Space Lite can be purchased here:

TANCHJIM SPACE Lite CS43131 Portable USB DAC/AMP (shenzhenaudio.com)

[John_W_Clark]

Thanks, I was curious about this one. The sub $50 market for dongle DAC/Amps doesn’t have many. I still think the 7HZ SEVENHERTZ 71 is my favorite in the category, but it is about half the power of the Space Lite.

[darmanastartes]

Audirect Beam 4 Review

INTRODUCTION AND DISCLAIMER:

The Audirect Beam 4 is a DAC/AMP combo with both 4.4mm balanced and 3.5 mm single-ended outputs, an ES9281 AC PRO DAC chip, and a 1200 mAh onboard battery. I received the Beam 4 from ShenzhenAudio in exchange for my review. The Beam 4 costs $239.99 at ShenzhenAudio.

HEADPHONES:

I tested the Audirect Beam 4 with the following headphones:

• Moondrop S8
• Moondrop Chu 2
• Moondrop Void
• HiFiMan HE400SE

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES:

The Audirect Beam 4 comes in a small plain blue rectangular box. It includes a short USB-C to USB-C cable, a USB-C to USB-A adapter, and a user manual. The adapter lacks active circuitry to prevent backpower, as is often the case with these included adapters.

STANDARDS COMPLIANCE AND FUNCTIONALITY:

Unlike several other Audirect DAC/AMPs I have evaluated, the Audirect Beam 4 does not implement headset controls, pause on headphone disconnect functionality, or connector status transmission to the host device. This is especially disappointing considering Audirect’s inclusion of these features in many of their other products.

The onboard battery is a helpful feature under certain conditions but the implementation needs additional fine-tuning. When the Beam 4 is paired with a smartphone as its transport device, the Beam 4’s onboard battery meaningfully extends the amount of time the smartphone can be used for music playback. While I do not have exact figures, I can use the Beam 4 with my Google Pixel 7 for music playback at least as long as I can use a far more power-efficient dongle DAC/AMP such as the Moondrop Dawn, if not longer. However, the onboard battery appears to run into issues when connected to a constant power source, such as a PC. When I was using the Beam 4 at my desktop, the Beam 4 ran out of power entirely several times and would not run solely off of the USB-C connection from my PC. I was forced to turn off the Beam 4 and recharge its internal battery before I could resume using it. This should never happen with a DAC/AMP connected to a constant power source. Hopefully, this flaw can be addressed through a firmware update, but as of right now, this is a dealbreaker for me.

POWER DELIVERY:

With the Audirect Beam 4 on the low-gain setting and with the Moondrop S8 connected to the 4.4mm balanced output, I achieved my typical listening volume of around 85 dB at a Windows system volume setting of 25/100. To reach a perceptually similar volume with the Moondrop Void using the 3.5mm single-ended output, I increased the system volume to 65/100. The HiFiMan HE400SE required a setting of 60/100 using the 4.4mm balanced output. I did not need to use the Medium or High gain modes for any of my headphones.

POWER CONSUMPTION AND HEAT MANAGEMENT:

I measured the power consumption of the Audirect Beam 4 connected to my PC with the Windows system volume set to 35/100. The Beam 4 was used to play a -10 dBV 1 kHz test tone from REW through the Moondrop S8, while the measurement below was taken. This level of output achieved an SPL of roughly 94 dB, as registered by my IEC-711 clone microphone.

This is a very high power consumption value, especially compared to a device like the Truthear Shio, measured under the same conditions using the balanced output:

The Beam 4 does appear to have an idle mode:

The Beam 4 heats up with extended use, especially when stored in a pocket or other enclosed space.

SOUND:

I made the following observations with a system-wide -4 dB pre-amp setting as suggested here. While I recommend using this pre-amp setting to preserve fidelity, it does reduce the headroom of all connected source devices.

The Audirect Beam 4 is a neutral, uncolored, and resolving source device. However, it does not audibly distinguish itself from any number of other neutral, uncolored, and resolving source devices from a variety of manufacturers that come in around a third of its asking price.

CLOSING WORDS:

Even if the issues I encountered using the Audirect Beam 4 in a desktop setting are resolved through a firmware update, the Beam 4 still appears to use its onboard battery to mask a much higher power draw than any of the other similarly configured source devices I have evaluated to date. If the Beam 4 was more efficient, it either would not require an onboard battery, which might make a smaller form factor possible, or could be used far longer than its peers in conjunction with the average smartphone. As it is, the Beam 4 is competitive in terms of runtime but is larger and heavier than its competitors while not sounding noticeably better than much less expensive devices. I cannot recommend the Beam 4 at its current price.

The Audirect Beam 4 can be purchased at the link below:

AUDIRECT Beam 4 ES9281AC Pro Portable USB DAC/AMP (shenzhenaudio.com)

[darmanastartes]

Moondrop Chu II Review

INTRODUCTION AND DISCLAIMER:

The Moondrop Chu II is an in-ear monitor (IEM) with one 10mm aluminum-magnesium composite alloy diaphragm dynamic driver in each housing. It is a sequel release to the Moondrop Chu and now features a removable 2-pin cable. The Chu II retails for $18.99 at ShenzhenAudio. I received the Chu II from ShenzhenAudio in exchange for my review.

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES:

The Moondrop Chu II arrives in a rectangular grey cardboard box with a lid adorned with an anime waifu illustration. Technical specifications and a frequency response graph for the Chu II appear on the back. Within, the Chu II earpieces are secured in a black sheet of foam. The package includes three pairs of generic silicone eartips (S, M, L) and the same small Moondrop-branded black pleather storage pouch included with the Moondrop Jiu. Unfortunately, the Chu II does not include Moondrop Spring Tips like the Jiu and the original Chu. Also inside the box are a quality control pass chit, user manual, and contact card linking to Moondrop’s Tencent QQ account.

BUILD QUALITY AND DESIGN:

The Moondrop Chu II is similar to the Moondrop Jiu and the original Moondrop Chu in appearance:

The Chu II’s finish is smooth with a shiny luster…The faceplates are oval-shaped…“L” and “R” indicators are also printed in copper adjacent to the cable entry sites. There are two pinprick circular vents on the interior face of the IEM body.

Unlike those two IEMs, the Chu II has a detachable cable. The cable connector housings are forward-swept at the same acute angle as the Jiu and Chu. The connector ports are recessed below the housing.

The Chu II has replaceable screw-in nozzles which contain the filter material. In the few weeks that I have had the Chu II, the finish on these nozzles has tarnished noticeably. The nozzles have a lip to secure eartips. The nozzles have saucer plate-style mesh coverings.

The cable is unbraided and uses a soft transparent sheath. The Y-split hardware is a simple translucent rubber cylinder. There is no chin-adjustment choker and the cable is mildly tangle-prone. The cable does have preformed earguides. The 3.5mm jack uses an L-shaped housing with significant strain relief. There is no strain relief at the Y-split.

COMFORT, FIT, AND ISOLATION:

The Moondrop Chu II is identical in comfort, fit, and isolation to the Moondrop Chu. The Moondrop Chu II is intended to be worn cable-up. The nozzles have a shallow insertion depth. Given the relatively small size of the earpieces, the Chu II is very comfortable to wear for extended periods, but secureness of fit and isolation are slightly below average. The Chu II has worse driver flex than the original Chu or the Jiu.

MEASUREMENTS:

My measurements of the Moondrop Jiu can be found on my expanding squig.link database:

Moondrop Chu 2 — Squiglink by Bedrock Reviews

SOUND:

Unlike the Moondrop Jiu, which was essentially a minor refinement of the original Moondrop Chu, the Chu II has a noticeably more V-shaped sound signature compared to the Chu.

The Chu II has more bass presence than the Chu down from the sub-bass to around 400 Hz. The Chu II sounds more full and impactful as a result. Thankfully, this bump is moderate enough to continue to avoid bass bleed. The Chu II’s bass is more resolving, textured, and sharply articulated than the original Chu’s.

The Chu II has greater contrast between its upper and lower midrange regions than the Chu. Due to the increased bass presence, this does not negatively impact the overall tonality. The Chu II actually has much better timbre than the Chu. The Chu sounds thinner and more compressed, particularly with respect to analog percussion. Midrange clarity and instrument separation are excellent. However, I do feel that the Chu II has too much presence. This is most evident when listening to distorted electric guitars, which take on a buzzsaw-like quality on some tracks. Female vocals are more prominent compared to male vocals and enjoy slightly better clarity, but both sound full and intelligible.

The Chu II not only retains the Chu’s prominent lower treble emphasis but has a hair more energy in this region. This did not bother me, but treble-sensitive listeners may want to approach it with caution. The Chu II also shifts some energy from the upper treble to the mid-treble, which helps provide some of the sparkle that the Chu lacked. The upper treble remains well extended. The Chu II has superior overall detail retrieval and improved soundstage height compared to the Chu.

CLOSING WORDS:

While I may take issue with its presence region and mourn the absence of Spring tips included in the package, I think the Moondrop Chu II’s tuning is going to be well received by the average listener. More importantly, Moondrop has once again raised the bar for what is possible in terms of technical performance in a $20 IEM with the Chu II’s new dynamic driver. This is a great starting point for a budding audiophile.

Finally, while the Chu II is a marked improvement on the Chu, I still recommend saving for a higher tier IEM instead of replacing one with the other.

The Moondrop Chu II can be purchased below:

MOONDROP CHU 2 10mm Dynamic Driver In-ear Headphone (shenzhenaudio.com)

[darmanastartes]

Moondrop Starfield II Impressions

INTRODUCTION AND DISCLAIMER:

The Moondrop Starfield II features a 10mm lithium-magnesium composite alloy diaphragm dynamic driver in each housing and retails for $109.99. It is a sequel release to the Moondrop Starfield. I received the Starfield II from ShenzhenAudio in exchange for my review.

NON-SOUND IMPRESSSIONS:

It is clear that the Moondrop Starfield II reuses shells from the the poorly received Moondrop Stellaris. This suggests that the Starfield II may be intended to capitalize on consumer goodwill towards the original Starfield to salvage some of the material costs associated with the Stellaris project.

The Starfield II includes rubber bass plugs that can be inserted into the IEM’s pressure vents. This has the effect of boosting the Starfield II’s sub-bass region substantially. In practice, the bass plugs are poorly designed and implemented. The diminutive size of the bass plugs means that it is not possible to quickly insert and remove them from the pressure vents. Successfully inserting the plugs required many minutes of effort. The plugs appear inconsistently produced, as I had to try several to get one to fit. Once inserted, the plugs can easily fall out and, if inserted too deeply, can block the pressure vents and cause the dynamic driver diaphragm to become misaligned. As a result, sound from the earpiece will be lost until pressure is re-equalized. Finally, I expect the plugs to be easily misplaced. Moondrop includes six of these plugs with the Starfield II, perhaps in anticipation of some of these issues.

MEASUREMENTS:

My measurements of the Moondrop Starfield II can be found on my squig.link database:

Moondrop Starfield II (No Bass Plug) — Squiglink by Bedrock Reviews

SOUND:

Both with and without the bass plugs, the Moondrop Starfield II is a significant departure from the restrained, mature, and inoffensive tunings that Moondrop built its popularity upon.

Without the bass plugs, the Starfield II is a bright, midrange-forward, bass-light IEM that, depending on the track, can often be described as harsh-sounding. Heavy rock genres and electronic dance music are particularly fatiguing to listen to. With the bass plugs inserted, the Starfield II is more tolerable sonically, even if not as subjectively powerful sounding as measurements might indicate.

However, even with the bass plugs inserted, bass notes come across as blunted and lacking texture. Resolution in the bass range is acceptable for the Starfield II’s price.

In both configurations, there is too much ear gain and too much presence, so much so that even male vocals can sound sibilant. Male vocals sound thin and strained, and female vocals sound sharp. On the other hand, midrange clarity and instrument separation are excellent, and the timbre is surprisingly realistic given the issues listed above.

The Starfield II has too much lower and mid-treble, which further exacerbates ear fatigue. There is an excess of sparkle, and treble transients sound oversharpened. Considering the cost, detail retrieval is average. Imaging and soundstage are better than expected.

CLOSING WORDS:

The Moondrop Starfield II fails to meet expectations associated with its predecessor — one of the most popular budget IEMs of the last five years. There are expectations associated with the Starfield name. A Starfield sequel should have been easy to recommend to a broad swath of listeners even if it were not the most exciting-sounding IEM on the market. The Starfield II falls well short of that bar. I do not recommend it, and urge Moondrop to treat this lineage of products with greater care and respect for consumer expectations.

[darmanastartes]

Hidizs MP145 Review

INTRODUCTION AND DISCLAIMER:

The Hidizs MP145 is an in-ear monitor (IEM) with a single 14.5mm planar magnetic driver in each housing. The MP145 is currently available at an early bird price of $139 on Kickstarter. I received the MP145 directly from Hidizs in exchange for my review.

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES:

The Hidizs MP145 comes in a black plastic box with a black slipcover. Technical details, in Chinese, English, and Japanese, are printed on the back of the slipcover. The lid of the box is embossed with the Hidizs logo. The MP145 earpieces are cushioned in a black sheet of foam within. The package includes three sets of silicone eartips (Vocal, Balanced, and Bass), each with three sizes (S, M, L) as well as a Hidizs-branded black pleather pouch, quality control pass chit, user manual, warranty card, and velcro tie.

BUILD QUALITY AND DESIGN:

The Hidizs MP145 earpieces are crafted from aluminum alloy and feature a seven-sided oblong faceplate with a three-sided fin-shaped element. A stepped pattern descends from each edge of the fin to the edges of the faceplate. Along the fin’s vertical axis are two elongated vents. A single circular vent is located above the nozzle on the interior of the housing. “HIDIZS MP145” is printed on the inside face around each earpiece’s directional indicator (also printed). The 2-pin entry sites are flush with the surface of the earpiece.

The MP145 features screw-on, interchangeable tuning nozzle caps that are slightly wider than their respective nozzles. This ensures a secure fit for eartips.

This review sample included a stylish and flexible 4.4mm balanced cable in gunmetal gray. It has a quad braid below Y-split and double helix pattern above. It features mirror-polished dark grey metal hardware with a single brass-colored ring at jack. There is rubber strain relief at the jack but none at the Y-split. The 2-pin connector housings are distinguished by blue and red rings for left and right. It has a chin-adjustment choker and preformed clear plastic earguides. The cable can occasionally get tangled but I did not find it to be a major issue.

COMFORT, FIT, AND ISOLATION:

Despite their size, the MP145’s earpieces are comfortable — the majority of their bulk rests outside the ear canal, and the nozzles have a shallow insertion depth. The fit and noise isolation are average, and there is no driver flex.

MEASUREMENTS:

My measurements of the Hidizs MP145 can be found on my expanding squig.link database:

Hidizs MP145 (Rose Gold) — Squiglink by Bedrock Reviews

SOUND:

The Hidizs MP145 has a warm sound signature with plenty of mid-bass presence and a prominent lower-treble peak.

The MP145 has excellent sub-bass extension, with tight, detailed and punchy bass. However, there is a bit of mid-bass bleed.

The Red filter of the MP145 provides the most bass, followed by the Silver filter and then the Rose Gold filter with the least bass. The filters do not alter the bass tuning, but the Red filter differs from the Silver and Rose Gold in the ear gain region. It has a mild, broad vocal plateau-style tuning from 1.5 kHz to 8 kHz. With the Rose Gold and Silver filters, the MP145 has a more distinct ear gain peak centered at roughly 2.5 kHz. While I generally prefer a distinct ear gain peak centered at 3 kHz, in the case of the MP145, I enjoyed the more relaxed upper midrange that the Red filter provided and spent most of my time with the MP145 using the Red filters.

Male vocals with the Red filter have good body, but lack presence and definition. Though switching to Silver or Rose Gold helped with male vocal separation, they still lacked detail. Female vocals, however, are more prominent and better defined. Female vocals are more forward, better separated, and more detailed. Timbre is realistic and there is a healthy amount of presence.

I preferred to use the MP145 with misodiko foam eartips rather than the included silicone eartips or my usual liquid silicone Softears UC tips. The lower treble peak was too intense for me with silicone eartips but foam eartips effectively reduced it, with minimal loss of upper treble extension.

Despite the MP145’s strong bass emphasis, it has excellent upper treble extension and a wide soundstage. However, instrument separation is average. Detail retrieval is very good for the price point.

CLOSING WORDS:

The Hidizs MP145 is a very good IEM and belongs on the short list of recommendations between $100 and $200, particularly if you are looking for a warmer IEM than many of the more neutral or reference-tuned options in this price bracket.

Hidizs Next Gen Ultra-large Planar HiFi IEMs — 9 Sound Types by Hidizs — Kickstarter

[darmanastartes]

Moondrop Dawn Pro Review

INTRODUCTION AND DISCLAIMER:

The Moondrop Dawn Pro is a DAC/AMP combo with both 4.4mm balanced and 3.5 mm single-ended outputs, dual CS43131 DAC chips, and a $49.99 price tag. I received the Dawn Pro from ShenzhenAudio in exchange for my review.

HEADPHONES:

I tested the Moondrop Dawn Pro with the following headphones:

• Moondrop S8
• Moondrop Void
• Moondrop Para
• HiFiMan HE400SE
• Hidizs MP145
• Hidizs MS1 Galaxy
• HiFiMan HE400SE

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES:

The Moondrop Dawn Pro comes in a round metal tin. Technical specifications for the Dawn Pro are printed in English and Chinese on the rear of the box. The product is held inside a foam mounting sheet inside the tin. In addition to the Dawn, the box includes a USB-C to USB-C cable, a quality control pass chit, a user manual, a contact card, and an unbranded Baseus USB-C female to USB-A male adapter (not recommended for use due to lack of backpower prevention circuitry). The C-C cable features a straight transparent rubber sleeve with visible wire-to-pin connections through the clear plastic connector housings.

STANDARDS COMPLIANCE AND FUNCTIONALITY:

The Moondrop Dawn Pro does not implement headset controls or pause on headphone disconnect functionality, nor does it send connector status to the host device.

POWER DELIVERY:

With the Moondrop S8 connected to the Moondrop Dawn Pro’s 4.4mm balanced output, I achieved a listening volume of around 77 dB at a Windows system volume setting of 7/100. To reach a perceptually similar volume with the Moondrop Void using the 3.5mm single-ended output, I increased the system volume to 20/100. The HiFiMan HE400SE required a setting of 36/100 over the single-ended output and 22/100 using the 4.4mm balanced output.

POWER CONSUMPTION AND HEAT MANAGEMENT:

Using my IEC-711 clone microphone, I measured the power consumption of my Moondrop Dawn Pro connected to my Windows PC with the system volume set to 26/100. For the test, I used the Dawn Pro to play a -10 dBV 1 kHz test tone from REW through the Moondrop S8. This sound level achieved an SPL of roughly 94 dB.

This is an average power consumption value for a device of this kind. It draws slightly more power than the Truthear Shio:

The Dawn Pro does not appear to have a true idle mode:

The Moondrop Dawn Pro can become warm if left in a pocket or other confined area for an extended period.

MOONDROP LINK SUPPORT:

The Moondrop Dawn Pro is supported in Moondrop’s Link app. You can select between four digital filters, turn off the LED lighting temporarily or permanently, switch between low or high gain, and adjust the hardware volume through the app:

SOUND:

Frequency response measured with 3.5mm jack out into motherboard Line-In

Note: I made the following observations switching back and forth between the Moondrop Dawn Pro and the Truthear Shio repeatedly under sighted conditions. There was a delay of several seconds when switching between devices. The two devices were volume-matched to within less than .1 dB. The Moondrop S8 was used as the transducer for this comparison. In most cases, any differences between competently designed sources are infinitesimal and not necessarily apparent under uncontrolled testing conditions.

In addition, I made the following observations with a system-wide -4 dB pre-amp setting as suggested here. While I recommend using this pre-amp setting to preserve fidelity, it does reduce the headroom of all connected source devices.

The Moondrop Dawn Pro is a neutral and uncolored source device. The Dawn Pro sounds more resolving than the more expensive Truthear Shio. The Dawn Pro has marginally better instrument separation and more controlled, impactful bass reproduction.

CLOSING WORDS:

Going into this review, I expected to prefer the Pro version of Moondrop’s Dawn over its non-Pro version. However, I found I appreciated the Dawn’s compact design for portability, and likely would choose it over the Pro if only selecting a device for on-the-go use. That said, the Pro offers greater versatility and is the better choice for desktop applications. Both are great-sounding devices that are remarkably affordable. For the foreseeable future, the Pro will be taking up space on my desk, which is the highest praise I can give it.

The Moondrop Dawn Pro can be purchased at the link below:

MOONDROP DAWN PRO Dual CS43131 Portable USB DAC/AMP (shenzhenaudio.com)

[darmanastartes]

Moondrop FreeDSP Review

The Moondrop FreeDSP is a 2-pin cable with an integrated USB-C DAC/AMP. The FreeDSP has a retail price of $29.99. I received the FreeDSP from ShenzhenAudio in exchange for my impressions.

HEADPHONES:

During my review process, I used the Moondrop FreeDSP with the Moondrop S8.

APPEARANCE, DESIGN, AND BUILD QUALITY:

The FreeDSP is an attractive cable, with gunmetal grey wiring and hardware. The cable uses a quad-braid below the Y-split and a double-helix pattern above the Y-split. There is a microphone with a three-button control panel on the right hand side. I understand why this was included, but I personally would have prefered a more streamlined mic-less design. There is a chin adjustment choker and strain relief above the USB-C connector housing as well as above the Y-split. The cable has pre-formed plastic earguides. The 2–pin connector housings have black and red colored bands to indicate left and right. The cable is moderately microphonic and I recommend using the chin-adjustment choker to the extent possible (the mic control panel prevents the choker from going up as far along the cable as I would normally prefer).

POWER CONSUMPTION:

I tested the power consumption of my Moondrop FreeDSP with a Windows system volume of 60/100. To ensure that my results can be compared to my other power consumption measurements, I ran a -10 dBV 1 kHz REW test tone through the Moondrop S8 to reach an SPL of 94 dB as measured by my IEC-711 clone microphone.

This is stellar power consumption and plays in the ballpark of the Apple Dongle:

MOONDROP LINK SUPPORT:

The FreeDSP’s primary feature is PEQ, accessible through the Moondrop Link app. However, while the Link app has recently been updated, the newest iteration is inferior to the older version in many ways.

The new app appears designed mainly to advertise Moondrop’s other products, rather than enable the use of a Moondrop product the user actually owns.

The new app requires access to all files on the user’s Android device. This seems to be an effort to allow users to import EQ presets, however it is unclear what format the presets need to be in for the app to successfully import them. For example, the text file format used by AutoEQ exports from SquigLink is not compatible with the app. It is highly likely that Moondrop could have designed the app to not need such a privileged permission.

The Link app frequently failed to recognize my FreeDSP cable. When granted access, it crashed; otherwise, a toast message saying “no compatible device found” appeared.

When I was able to get the app to see the FreeDSP, the Link app’s PEQ has serious restrictions. Only 9 bands can be used, and adjustments can be made only within a 40Hz-10kHz window with gains between -12db and +3db, and Q values from 0.2 to 10. These limits make it tough or impossible to export presets from AutoEQ or Room EQ Wizard.

SOUND AND AMPLIFICATION:

The Moondrop FreeDSP is a neutral and uncolored source device. It is comparable in resolving capability to DAC/AMPs in the same price range in a more traditional dongle form factor. If you are listening on the go, you will be bottlenecked by ambient noise long before the resolution of the FreeDSP becomes a limiting factor.

At a Windows system volume of 16/100, I reached my typical listening volume with the Moondrop S8. Playing a -10 dB pink random noise signal, my uncalibrated IEC microphone reached a dB level of about 75 dB at this volume setting. With my Pixel 7, I was able to get my typical volume at an Android system volume of 11–12 out of 25.

CLOSING WORDS:

The Moondrop FreeDSP is an excellent dongle DAC/AMP substitute, with superb energy consumption, great detail retrieval, and enough power for any IEM in my collection. It also works seamlessly with Wavelet. However, as a standalone PEQ delivery system, the FreeDSP is a failure. I hope that Moondrop can redesign the Link app to be more functional, reliable, and less intrusive as quickly as possible.

[darmanastartes]

Moondrop Para Review

INTRODUCTION AND DISCLAIMER:

The Moondrop Para is an open-back over-ear planar magnetic headphone. The Para retails for $299. I received the Para from ShenzhenAudio in exchange for my impressions. During my review, I used a Moondrop Line V 4.4mm balanced cable, which was also provided to me by ShenzhenAudio.

SOURCES:

During my review process, I used the Moondrop Para with the Moondrop Dawn Pro.

MUSIC:

I assessed these headphones using FLAC and Spotify Premium. To see what I’m listening to, visit my last.fm page:

XenosBroodLord’s Library | Last.fm

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES:

The Moondrop Para comes in a rectangular black box with a white slipcover. The slipcover has an unironically beautiful illustration of Moondrop’s anime waifu mascot wearing the Para. The Para includes two types of earpads: fenestrated polyurethane ones with large circular ear cutouts and hybrid velour/polyurethane ones with smaller ovalular cutouts. The earpads fit around the edges of a perforated metal disc, held in place by the planar drivers’ magnetic attraction. I think this is a clever design feature. The Para comes with the same black fabric-wrapped cable included with the Moondrop Void. This cable uses dual 3.5mm leads to connect to the earpieces and is terminated in a 3.5mm single-ended jack. This is a standard configuration for many over-ear headphones with detachable cables. The Para is therefore compatible with a wide variety of third-party aftermarket cables, including balanced ones. The Para also includes a substantial user manual, a 3.5mm to 1/4" adapter, a contact card with a quick response code that links to Moondrop’s QQ profile, a quality control pass chit, and a postcard.

BUILD QUALITY, DESIGN, COMFORT, FIT, AND ISOLATION:

The Moondrop Para is heavier and less comfortable than the Moondrop Void, but lighter and more comfortable than the HiFiMan HE400SE. The fenestrated PU earpads seem to clamp less and are more comfortable than the hybrid earpads. The Para uses mostly metal construction, with some plastic hardware on the headband sliders and inside the earpiece cups. The headband does have a suspension strap, which prevents uncomfortable hotspots from developing. The Para is not very isolating — depending on your needs, this can be a benefit or a drawback.

MEASUREMENTS:

I do not yet have the equipment to measure over-ear headphones. Measurements are available from other sources.

SOUND:

The Moondrop Para has a neutral-bright sound signature that will be familiar to anyone who has used a HiFiMan planar magnetic headphone released over the last several years.

The biggest difference between the hybrid and fenestrated earpads is that the hybrid earpads provide significantly better bass extension. While not quite linear, the bass response with the hybrid earpads comes very close. The fenestrated earpads result in noticeable bass roll-off. With either set of earpads, the Para’s bass is detailed and snappy, with adequate texture. There is enough energy in the mid-bass region to provide impact to percussion, but does not intrude into the midrange.

The Para delays the beginning of its ear gain rise past 2 kHz. This tuning trick is also used by many of HiFiMan’s planar magnetic headphones to improve soundstage. There is a little too much ear gain for my tastes, and the Para can be moderately sibilant as a result. I suggest reducing it by 2–3 dB at 3.2 kHz with a moderate (Q=2) EQ filter. Male and female vocals are clear and present, electric guitars are crunchy and aggressive without being overpowering, and overall clarity is superb. There is a bit of plasticity to the timbre, which is most noticeable when listening to overcompressed, sampled analog percussion.

The Para has outstanding treble extension. While no part of the treble response comes across as harsh or peaky, it does have more upper treble than sounds realistic to my ears. This extra energy makes cymbals stand out a bit too much. Overall detail retrieval is at least adequate for the price point, outshining the HiFiMan HE400SE by a significant margin. The Para’s imaging and soundstage are also significantly better than the HE400SE’s.

AMPLIFICATION REQUIREMENTS AND SOURCE PAIRING:

With the Moondrop Dawn Pro and a 4.4mm balanced cable, I reached my typical listening volume with a Windows system volume of around 40/100. To reach a perceptually similar volume with the included single-ended cable, I had to increase the volume by 10 steps. As always, I listen with a system-wide -4 dB pre-amp setting as suggested here. I did not hear any hiss with this source.

CLOSING WORDS:

In general, I prefer to listen to in-ear monitors or speakers, and my use of full-size, over-ear, open-back headphones has been limited primarily to gaming since moving into a living space that made speaker listening more convenient. Over the course of this review, I have increasingly reached for the Moondrop Para over the Moondrop S8 or the pair of Vanatoo Transparent Zeros I keep at my desk. These are excellent headphones and hopefully a harbinger of increased competition in the over-ear headphone market.

The Moondrop Para can be purchased at the link below:

MOONDROP PARA Full-Size Planar Headphone (shenzhenaudio.com)

[darmanastartes]

Dekoni x Hifiman Cobalt Review​

INTRODUCTION AND DISCLAIMER:​

The Dekoni Cobalt is a closed-back over-ear dynamic driver headphone. The Cobalt is a collaboration project between Dekoni and HiFiMan. While HiFiMan is most known for their planar magnetic headphones, the Cobalt is likely based on HiFiMan’s R series of dynamic driver headphones. The Cobalt retails for $499. I received the Cobalt through a review tour organized by Dekoni. I was able to test it for a little less than two weeks before writing my review. I covered the shipping costs to the next reviewer on the tour, and no compensation was received for this review.

SOURCES:​

During my review process, I used the Dekoni Cobalt with the following sources:

• Audirect Beam 4

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES:​

The Dekoni Cobalt comes in a rectangular black box. The headphones and the extra set of earpads are secured in a molded plastic tray inside the box. The Cobalt comes with both velour and fenestrated sheepskin earpads. The included cable uses dual 3.5mm leads to connect to the earpieces and is terminated in a 3.5mm single-ended jack. This is a standard configuration for many over-ear headphones with detachable cables and enables compatibility with a wide variety of third-party aftermarket cables, including balanced cables. The included cable is plain black with simple rubber sheathing. It is a good length for desktop use but is a little bit microphonic.

BUILD QUALITY, DESIGN, COMFORT, FIT, AND ISOLATION:​

The Dekoni Cobalt is a lightweight headphone. While the Cobalt uses plastic housings for the drivers, it avoids feeling cheaply made. Compared to the first generation Moondrop Void, there is much less flex, though there is minor creaking when the headphones are adjusted. Clamp force is reasonable and both sets of pads are comfortable for long-term wear. Unfortunately, the Cobalt opts for HiFiMan’s monoblock headband, which I find uncomfortable and ill-suited for long-term wear. This is the same headband found on the HiFiMan HE400SE, which I found neccessary to jerryrig with a makeshift suspension strap to use for extended periods. As a result of this headband, I develop an uncomfortable hotspot at the top of my skull after an hour or two of listening. The Cobalt is not especially isolating, which may be a good thing or bad thing depending on the noise level of your listening environment and your need for other people in your surroundings to be audible while using the headphones.

MEASUREMENTS:​

I do not yet have the capability to measure over-ear headphones. However, I converted Dekoni’s official raw measurements of the Cobalt with both sets of earpads to .csv files using WebPlotDigitizer and then uploaded the results to Audio Discourse’s headphone graph database. The resulting presentation is more visually comparable to other common headphone graphs than the image provided by Dekoni. The uploaded frequency responses can also be compared against common headphone target curves. Given the process described above, the image below should not be viewed as authoritative.

SOUND:​

With the velour earpads, the Dekoni Cobalt has a bright tuning with poor bass extension and a recessed upper midrange. Bass extension is noticably better with the fenestrated sheepskin earpads. Despite this, I opted to use the velour earpads for the majority of my review, as the fenestrated sheepskin earpads create an extreme lower treble peak between 8000 KHz and 9000 KHz.
The Cobalt creates an adequate sense of dynamic contrast but there is little texture to the bass response. There is a bit of extra energy in the midbass region that provides slam and prevents electronic dance music from sounding completely anemic. Bass articulation is snappy and well-controlled. Bass resolution is good. The bass does not bleed into the midrange.
The Cobalt’s midrange sounds thin, hollow, and distant. Male vocals and analog percussion lack body and power, and distorted electric guitars sound shrill and fuzzy. Furthermore, there is very little separation or contrast between these three elements. Drums and guitars especially seem to blur together. Female vocals are bright and grating. Midrange resolution is poor. Timbre is paper-like and lacks substance.
With the velour earpads the Cobalt has a present, well-controlled, but ultimately unremarkable treble response. The lower treble is more present than the upper midrange but does not come across as harsh or peaky. The Cobalt has a lot of upper treble air but treble transients are hazy and indistinct. Overall detail retrieval is less than I would expect from a headphone of this price. Imaging and soundstage are excellent for a closed-back headphone.
The missing upper midrange is the the biggest issue with this headphone. The limited bass extension with the velour earpads is correctable with equalization. On the other hand, attempting to add roughly 20 dB of ear gain to the Cobalt with equalization had predictably disastrous results.

AMPLIFICATION REQUIREMENTS AND SOURCE PAIRING:​

With the Audirect Beam 4 on its low-gain setting, I reached my typical listening volume with a Windows system volume of around 75/100. As always, I listen with a system-wide -4 dB pre-amp setting as suggested here. I did not hear any hiss with this source.

CLOSING WORDS:​

I appreciate Dekoni’s transparency in the Cobalt’s promotional materials, including their providing potential customers with the Cobalt’s frequency response measurements right on the product page. I also find that Dekoni’s subjective description of how the Cobalt sounds is largely accurate. However, the Cobalt is not a headphone I would purchase at any price, much less $499.99.
The Dekoni Cobalt can be purchased at the link below:
Dekoni x Hifiman Cobalt Closed-Back Dynamic Headphone | Dekoni Audio

[darmanastartes]

Hidizs MS1 Galaxy Impressions​

INTRODUCTION AND DISCLAIMER:​

The Hidizs MS1 Galaxy is an in-ear monitor (IEM) with a single 10.2mm dynamic driver in each earpiece. I received the MS1 Galaxy directly from Hidizs in exchange for my impressions.

NON-SOUND IMPRESSIONS:​

The Hidizs MS1 Galaxy does not include any accesories other than three pairs of silicone eartips (S, M, L). The IEMs have simple clear acrylic shells and iridescent faceplates. The MS1 Galaxy delivers a secure, comfortable, and isolating fit. The cable is aesthetically attractive but is prone to tangling. There is no driver flex.

MEASUREMENTS:​

My measurements of the Hidizs MS1 Galaxy can be found on my squig.link database:
Hidizs MS1 Galaxy — Squiglink by Bedrock Reviews

SOUND:​

The Hidizs MS1 Galaxy is a warm V-shaped IEM with a strong mid-bass hump, a defined ear gain region that is mostly in the correct frequency range, and average to excellent technical performance.
The mid-bass emphasis is reminiscent of older budget IEMs, and not for the better. The bass is boomy and there is substantial mid-bass bleed. On the plus side, the bass is textured and dynamic-feeling, with plenty of impact. Sub-bass extension is adequate but not exceptional. Bass resolution is very good but bass articulation is average.
The mid-bass bleed hampers the clarity of the midrange. Certain tracks sound noticably less clear even as compared to others within the same genre. Lamb of God’s “Nightmare (The Little Red House)” devolved into a muddy morass, with Randy Blythe’s vocals less intelligible than usual, and the distorted, downtuned electric guitars sounding almost buried. Machine Head’s album The Blackening was much more enjoyable. Electronic dance music and hip hop fared consistently better than heavy rock genres, with better separation between synthesized and sampled percussion and male vocals.
When not competing with midrange instrumentation for space, male vocals have body, power, and grit. There is a distinct ear gain region between roughly 2.5 kHz and 4 kHz. Female vocals are clearer and more intelligible than male vocals regardless of genre. Instrument separation is average at best. There is a hint of plasticity to the MS1 Galaxy’s timbre.
The lower treble is elevated, but not so much that I found it fatiguing. There is a little more mid-range sparkle than is probably realistic, and there is little perception of air as a result of the limited upper treble extension. Despite this, the MS1 Galaxy has superb overall detail retrieval, punching well above a $16 asking price. The soundstage is cramped, and imaging is unremarkable.

CLOSING WORDS:​

I generally enjoyed using the Hidizs MS1 Galaxy for everyday listening, but when I sat down to listen to my test tracks and listen critically in the final stages of my review process, its shortcomings became impossible to ignore. Ultimately, the MS1 Galaxy applies a modern dynamic driver to a style of tuning IEMs that has fallen out of favor. The mixed performance of this IEM, particularly the mid-bass bleed obscuring midrange clarity, are a testament to why tuning practices like sub-bass shelves have gained so much traction over the last several years. The MS1 Galaxy is a great candidate for EQ given its strong internal detail retrieval, but something like the Moondrop Chu II is a safer recommendation for most listeners out of the box.

The Hidizs MS1 Galaxy can be purchased at the link below:

Hidizs MS1-Galaxy High-Performance Dual Magnetic Circuit Dynamic Drive

[darmanastartes]

Truthear Nova Review

INTRODUCTION AND DISCLAIMER:

The Truthear Nova is an in-ear monitor (IEM) with one 10mm dynamic driver and four balanced armature (BA) drivers in each housing. The Nova is currently available for preorder and retails for $149. I received the Nova from ShenzhenAudio in exchange for my review.

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES:

The Truthear Nova comes in a black cardboard box with a white slipcover featuring its anime mascot, Shiroi. The back of the slipcover lists technical details of the IEM in Chinese, English, and Japanese and displays a frequency response graph. The Nova includes six pairs of eartips: three pairs of silicone (S, M, L), one pair of foam (M), and two pairs of double-flange silicone (M, L). The Nova also includes a user manual, a warranty claim card, and a textured pleather zippered carry pouch embossed with the Truthear logo. The carry pouch lacks structure and has an obnoxiously oversized belt clip.

BUILD QUALITY AND DESIGN:

The Truthear Nova IEMs feature a black acrylic shell and glittery blue faceplate submerged below a clear resin layer. The shells have a pseudo-custom fit. The faceplates feature a detailed seashell-like relief pattern. The gap between the faceplate and shell is visibly seamless. There are four small circular vents arranged in a grid beside the 2-pin connection, which is slightly recessed. Truthear” is printed in gold along the top of the shell, along with “L” and “R” indicators. The nozzles are acrylic with three separate sound channels. The nozzles have a slight lip to secure eartips.

The cable is sheathed in a paracord-like material with two black and two blue strands, quad-braided below the Y-split and coiled in double-helix patterns above it. The cable has pre-formed heat-shrink earguides and a black anodized metal chin adjustment choker. The Y-split and 3.5mm jack hardware use the same material. There is strain relief above the straight 3.5mm jack and below the Y-split. The cable is very microphonic if the chin adjustment choker is not used. The 2-pin connectors have faintly raised “L” and “R” indicators.

COMFORT, FIT, AND ISOLATION:

The Truthear Nova is remarkably comfortable even with a deep in-ear fit. It offers excellent noise isolation and no driver flex.

MEASUREMENTS:

My measurements of the Truthear Nova can be found on my expanding squig.link database:

Truthear Nova — Bedrock Reviews (squig.link)

SOUND:

The Truthear Nova is neutral with a sub-bass boost and has one of the best executions of this tuning style I have heard to date.

The Nova’s bass response recedes almost linearly from 20 Hz down to about 200 Hz. The sub-bass extension is stellar. At its highest amplitude, the sub-bass is perhaps a dB or two more prominent than the apex of the Nova’s ear gain region, but this is by no means a basshead IEM. The sub-bass emphasis ensures that percussion has impact and weight, but the overall presentation is that of a reference monitor. Bass articulation, texture, and resolution are remarkable for the price, and better than many more expensive IEMs. There is no mid-bass bleed.

The Nova’s midrange is a further refinement of the hybrid plateau-peak tuning seen on the Truthear Hexa. There is a very broad elevation that begins around 800 Hz and is sustained through the lower treble, but there is also a narrower, more distinct peak between 2 kHz and 5 kHz. This peak is centered at 3 kHz, which matches my head-related transfer function most closely. The hybrid approach to the ear gain region creates a tasteful separation between vocals and midrange instrumentation without the former overshadowing the latter. Male vocals have grit, power, and definition, while female vocals are clear and vibrant without being sibilant. There is some extra emphasis in the presence region relative to the overall contour of the midrange plateau that gives female vocals a little extra energy. Vocal intelligibility for both male and female vocals is excellent. Timbre is very realistic.

The treble is energetic and detailed, with clear and realistic-sounding transient delivery. The mid and upper treble are well-calibrated to create sparkle and air without casting an artificial-sounding sheen over the presentation. Instrument separation is very good, and the soundstage is in line with my expectations for a five-driver hybrid.

SOURCE CONSIDERATIONS:

With a system-wide -4 dB pre-amp setting as suggested here and with Spotify’s Volume Normalization set to “Normal,” I reached my typical listening volume at a Windows system volume setting of 14/100 using the Moondrop Dawn Pro as my source device. With the Apple dongle, my Pixel 7, and Spotify’s Volume Normalization set to “Normal,” I needed an Android system volume setting of 21/25 to reach a perceptually similar volume.

CLOSING WORDS:

The Truthear Nova is the best IEM I have heard at its price and makes most sub-$300 IEMs obsolete.

The Truthear Nova can be pre-ordered at the link below:

TRUTHEAR NOVA 1DD+4BA In-Ear Headphone (shenzhenaudio.com)

[darmanastartes]

Assorted End of Year Impressions, Part 1: TinHiFI C0 Elf, Kinera Celest Wyvern Pro, Shanling Sono

The TinHiFi C0 Elf and the Kinera Celest Wyvern Pro were sent to me by TinHiFi and Kinera respectively. The Shanling Sono was sent to me by Shenzhen Audio. No monetary compensation was given in exchange for these impressions.

TinHiFi C0 Elf

The TinHiFi C0 Elf is a a bullet-style in-ear monitor (IEM). The C0 includes an average selection of eartips but unfortunately does not come with a carry pouch or case. The housings have an aesthetically pleasing finish, but the cable, despite its robust chin-adjustment choker, tends to tangle.

In terms of sound, the bass articulation of the C0 is lively and bass resolution is commendable. However, it lacks in bass texture and note weight. The sub-bass extension is less than impressive, which could be attributed to fit issues. I am not particularly fond of bullet-style IEMs and I found achieving a good seal challenging even with large eartips. Furthermore, the C0 is not suitable for wearing to sleep unless positioned upside down for a deeper fit inside the ear.

The midrange performance of the C0 is also mixed. The C0 provides good separation between vocals and instrumentation. Male vocals are gritty and detailed but lack body and power, while female vocals are just on the verge of being sibilant. Distorted electric guitars sound slightly overdriven. The timbre is generally realistic, albeit with a hint of compression in analog percussion.

C0 offers good treble extension and detail retrieval. However, there is a bit too much mid-treble, resulting in overly splashy cymbals. The soundstage is impressively expansive for a single dynamic driver design, with very good instrument separation.

A significant drawback of the C0 is its drivability. An Apple dongle barely gets the C0 loud enough at max output on a Pixel 7 with Spotify Volume Normalization set to “Normal”.

In conclusion, the TinHiFi C0 Elf is a reasonable choice if you’re specifically looking for a bullet-style IEM. However, if you’re open to other form factors, there are superior options available at this price point.

Kinera Celest Wyvern Pro

The Kinera Celest Wyvern Pro, a gaming-focused in-ear monitor (IEM), comes with a detachable 2-pin cable that features an integrated mini-boom microphone. However, the voice recordings I made using the microphone were disappointingly muddy. Additionally, the microphone cable does not include a chin adjustment choker. On a positive note, the bundled KBEAR KB07 eartips are quite good and do not irritate my sensitive ears. The Wyvern Pro provides a comfortable, low-profile fit.

In terms of sound, the Wyvern Pro leaves much to be desired. Sub-bass extension is lacking, bass articulation is lackluster, and bass texture is limited.

The midrange clarity is also subpar, with both male and female vocals sounding shouty. Male vocals lack body, and female vocals are sibilant and scratchy. Distorted electric guitars have a buzzsaw-like quality, and the overall timbre is dry and plasticky.

The detail retrieval of the Wyvern Pro is poor compared to other IEMs at this price point, and the upper treble extension is also lacking. The soundstage is closed-in, and the instrument separation is below average.

In conclusion, the Wyvern Pro is a mediocre IEM for music listening. I would not recommend it unless the included mini-boom microphone is all one can afford for a gaming voice chat setup.

Shanling Sono (Red Filter)

The Shanling Sono includes a modest selection of eartips and an average-quality zippered semi-rigid carry pouch. The cable, which is aesthetically attractive, features a chin adjustment choker. The Sono provides a snug, low-profile fit.

The Sono presents a notably dark sound signature. It offers acceptable sub-bass extension, but the bass is muddy and boomy, lacking in note weight and texture.

The midrange also leaves much to be desired, with a dismal separation between midrange instrumentation and male vocals and poor overall clarity. Male vocals come across as distant and unclear, while female vocals tend to be slightly piercing. The intelligibility of vocals is subpar, and distorted electric guitars lack the crunch or definition I expect. The overall timbre of the Sono seems to be passable.

Assessing the Sono’s treble transients is challenging due to the pronounced treble roll-off, but they appear to be somewhat blurred. Detail retrieval is disappointingly poor for this price point, and the upper treble extension is similarly lackluster. The soundstage is of average breadth.

In conclusion, the Shanling Sono is egregiously overpriced and I recommend against its purchase.

[darmanastartes]

Assorted End of Year Impressions, Part 2: SMSL SU-1, SMSL D6S, SMSL DA1

The three products below were sent to me by ShenzhenAudio in exchange for my impressions.

SMSL SU-1

Right from the start, the prominent MQA branding on the SMSL SU-1 was a letdown. The alleged benefits of MQA have been thoroughly debunked, and the added cost for MQA licensing is directly passed onto the consumer. With MQA Ltd. now in administration, I’m hopeful that this practice will soon be a thing of the past.

Despite this criticism, the SU-1 has many merits. It offers a robust array of input options and its compact size makes it a handy addition to any audio setup. That said, the source selection button would benefit from a more tactile feel.

For comparison purposes, I volume matched the SU-1 with my Vanatoo Transparent Zero’s integrated DAC using an SPL meter on my phone. It is worth noting that this method may not be incredibly precise as various factors, including my body position at the listening spot, could affect the reading. Also, switching from the onboard DAC to the SU-1 resulted in a noticeable delay, though less so when switching back.

When compared to the onboard DAC in the Vanatoo Transparent Zero, the SU-1 delivered a higher base volume at the same Windows volume setting.

In terms of sound quality, the SU-1 surprisingly came across as a bit clearer and more neutral, particularly in the bass and midrange. The onboard DAC, in contrast, had a noticeably warmer, slightly muddier sound, with more blunted bass note impacts. The SU-1’s bass articulation was sharper and more controlled, and it rendered female vocals with slightly more detail. These differences were more pronounced in some genres than others, with the bass reproduction difference being more noticeable in electronic dance music than rock. Apart from these, the two were largely comparable in sound quality.

SMSL D6S

The SMSL D6S’s use of USB-C for the USB input, as opposed to the more commonly used USB-B, is a feature I appreciate. However, my previous criticisms about MQA remain, even though the MQA logo is not displayed on the front of the device.

One of the standout features of the D6S is the inclusion of XLR outputs at such an affordable price point. This has allowed me to replace my Topping D30 Pro in my home theater setup, where the D6S has been feeding a pair of Kali Audio LP-6s.

Ideally, I would compare the D6S and the D30 Pro, but I believe that quick switching between source devices is essential for valid subjective source device evaluations. The process of unplugging and replugging XLR cables and returning to the listening position would take too long for my auditory memory to be reliable, and accurate volume matching would be even more tricky than in the case of the SU-1 and the Transparent Zero’s onboard DAC.

Despite these challenges, the D6S does not seem to compromise on sound quality compared to the D30 Pro, which originally retailed for double the price. However, it does not provide the same wow factor in isolation as the Topping D90SE. On the upside, the D6S has proven to be more stable and reliable than the D90SE, which has been known to make popping noises when waking up from standby mode.

When compared to the onboard Transparent Zero DAC, the D6S, like the SU-1, showed improved midrange clarity. This improvement was even more pronounced with the D6S. Additionally, or perhaps because of this blacker background, the D6S had better instrument separation and was therefore “more resolving”. Again, the increased resolution did not seem to be directly related to treble reproduction.

SOME THOUGHTS ON COMPARING SOURCE DEVICES

Generally, it is easier to compare DACs when using headphones, particularly with dongle DACs and IEMs, than in a speaker setup. This is primarily due to the faster switching that allows for more reliable auditory memory. Additionally, the isolation offered by IEMs reduces background noise. It is crucial to minimize environmental noise when trying to discern subtle differences in sound reproduction. Assuming one has a measurement rig, volume matching is also easier and more accurate with IEMs.

Given these factors, I tend to approach a lot of DAC impressions from other reviewers with a degree of skepticism, especially when they’re given in isolation, i.e., without A/B testing two volume-matched DACs with the same transducer. At this price point, the differences between source devices are often minute.

SMSL DA1

On a directly related note, I am assessing the SMSL DA1 independently, not in comparison to any other amplifier. As I just stated, impressions of source devices given in isolation from other source devices in uncontrolled testing conditions should be approached with caution. Therefore, I will focus my commentary on the DA1’s functionality and refrain from commenting on the sound quality per se.

Evaluating this device has been somewhat challenging for me, as I’ve been a long-time user of active speakers and do not own a set of passive speakers at home. I gifted the DA1 to my father for use with one of his televisions, as an alternative to the TV’s built-in speakers. He is currently using it with a pair of Klipsch speakers that were originally part of a 5.1 surround sound system. These speakers are not particularly difficult to drive and pose no challenge to the DA1.

We initially encountered some issues with ground hum, but these seem to have been resolved. I suspect the hum was related to the speaker cables my father was using, rather than the DA1 itself, especially since the hum has not been audible the last few times I’ve visited.

Generally, I believe that active monitors with onboard digital signal processing and a subwoofer output are a better choice for most people, if their budget allows. The DA1 is limited to a 2.0 setup and cannot integrate a subwoofer. However, I think the DA1 is a solid little unit that would have been ideal for use with the Micca MB42X speakers, which were commonly recommended for budget setups early in my audiophile journey.

[darmanastartes]

Moondrop Aria 2 Impressions

The Moondrop Aria 2 was provided to me by ShenzhenAudio in exchange for my impressions.

The eartips included with the Aria 2 are softer than most generic silicone eartips. However, it is disappointing that the package does not include any Moondrop Spring tips. The fit of the Aria 2 is not as snug as the original Aria because the housings are significantly larger. I again question whether Moondrop is trying to repurpose some of the shells from the Stellaris debacle. Even the largest size of the included eartips was too small to ensure a secure fit for me, necessitating the use of aftermarket eartips like the Dunu Stage & Studo eartips. Additionally, the exterior finish on the housings is already showing signs of wear.

On a positive note, the included modular cable might be the most aesthetically pleasing cable I’ve ever seen included with a Moondrop product. The cable comes with 3.5mm single-ended and 4.4mm balanced terminations, and the cable locking mechanism seems robust and secure.

In terms of sound, the Aria 2 and the original Aria are broadly similar tonally, but there are a few key differences. The biggest difference between the two is that the Aria 2 has a more refined treble response with less exaggerated upper treble glare, which results in a more natural timbre overall. On the other hand, the original Aria has better sub-bass extension and more substantial note weight, making the Aria 2 sound thinner in comparison. The Aria 2 has improved male vocal intelligibility but less body to male vocals. The Aria 2 also sounds more open and has a noticeably more expansive soundstage, especially along the vertical axis. The Aria 2’s instrument separation is only marginally better than the original. Female vocals, bass articulation and texture, and overall internal detail retrieval are very similar between the two IEMs.

While the Aria 2 addresses its predecessor’s greatest shortcoming, it also takes a step back in at least one significant respect. The Truthear Hexa is still a better purchase in this price bracket.

The Moondrop Aria 2 can be purchased at the link below:

MOONDROP ARIA 2 In-ear Headphone (shenzhenaudio.com)

[darmanastartes]

Hidizs S9 Pro Plus Review​

The Hidizs S9 Pro Plus is a DAC/AMP combo with both 4.4mm balanced and 3.5 mm single-ended outputs, an ES9038Q2M DAC chip, and a $89.99 price tag. I received the S9 Pro Plus directly from Hidizs in exchange for my review.

HEADPHONES:​

I tested the Hidizs S9 Pro Plus with the following headphones:

• Moondrop S8
• Moondrop Para

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES:​

The Hidizs S9 Pro Plus comes in a square black plastic box with a black slipcover. Technical specifications for the S9 Pro Plus are printed in English and Chinese on the rear of the box. The device is held inside a foam mounting sheet inside the box. In addition to the S9 Pro Plus, the box includes a USB-C to USB-C cable, a quality control pass chit, a pair of Hi-Res Audio stickers, a warranty card, and a USB-C female to USB-A male adapter. As always, I recommend against the use of this kind of adapter due to the risk of backpower. The USB C-C cable has purple markings inside the connector on one end, leading me to believe that it is one of Hidizs’ bizarre, standards-breaking unidirectional USB cables.

STANDARDS COMPLIANCE AND FUNCTIONALITY:​

The Hidizs S9 Pro Plus does not implement headset controls or pause on headphone disconnect functionality, nor does it send connector status to the host device.

POWER CONSUMPTION AND HEAT MANAGEMENT:​

Using my IEC-711 clone microphone and a WITRN U2 USB power meter, I measured the power consumption of the Hidizs S9 Pro Plus connected to my Windows PC with the system volume set to 18/100. For the test, I used the S9 Pro Plus to play a -10 dBV 1 kHz test tone from REW through the Moondrop S8. This sound level achieved an SPL of roughly 94 dB.

The S9 Pro Plus gets a little warm to the touch with prolonged use but not uncomfortably or dangerously so.

The power draw does drop noticably when no sound is being played but the S9 Pro Plus does not appear to have a true idle mode:

POWER DELIVERY:​

With the Moondrop S8 connected to the Hidizs S9 Pro Plus’ 4.4mm balanced output, I reached my typical listening volume at a Windows system volume setting of 6/100. When I played a -10 dB full-range pink random noise signal at this volume setting, my clone IEC microphone indicated a dB level of roughly 79.2 dB. Please note that the dB reading of my microphone has not been calibrated using an external SPL monitor. To reach a perceptually similar volume with the Moondrop Para using the 4.4mm balanced output, I increased the system volume to 19/100.

SOUND:​

Note: I made the following observations switching back and forth between the Hidizs S9 Pro Plus and the Moondrop Dawn Pro repeatedly under sighted conditions. There was a delay of several seconds when switching between devices. The two devices were volume-matched to within less than .2 dB. The Moondrop S8 was used as the transducer for this comparison. In most cases, any differences between competently designed sources are infinitesimal and not necessarily apparent under uncontrolled testing conditions.

In addition, I made the following observations with a system-wide -4 dB pre-amp setting as suggested here. While I recommend using this pre-amp setting to preserve fidelity, it does reduce the headroom of all connected source devices.

Overall, the Hidizs S9 Pro Plus has an up-front, energetic presentation, while the Moondrop Dawn Pro is more controlled and cohesive. The Dawn Pro seems to have slightly clearer, better-articulated bass reproduction. The S9 Pro Plus has greater impact to bass notes, more substantial note weight, and better bass texture. The midranges of the two devices are largely indistinguishable. The S9 Pro Plus seems to have imbue treble transients with more energy compared to the Dawn Pro, which makes cymbals sound more prominent and slightly sharper.

CLOSING WORDS:​

The USB dongle market is mature to the point of saturation. More than sound quality or even power delivery, I believe the main differentiator between dongles at this stage is power efficiency. Judged on this metric, the S9 Pro Plus is simply uncompetitive and does not sound special enough to justify its purchase over more powerful and efficient alternatives.

The Hidizs S9 Pro Plus is available for purchase at the link below:

Hidizs S9 Pro Plus Martha — HiFi Balanced Dongle DAC

[Rikudou_Goku]

@darmanastartes

Using my IEC-711 clone microphone and a WITRN U2 USB power meter, I measured the power consumption of the Hidizs S9 Pro Plus connected to my Windows PC with the system volume set to 60/100. For the test, I used the S9 Pro Plus to play a -10 dBV 1 kHz test tone from REW through the Moondrop S8. This sound level achieved an SPL of roughly 94 dB.

The S9 Pro Plus gets a little warm to the touch with prolonged use but not uncomfortably or dangerously so.

Btw, do you have your source power consumption data listed in a google sheet document or something like that for better viewability/comparability?

[darmanastartes]

I do not but that is a really good idea.

[darmanastartes]

EPZ Q5 Impressions

I received the Q5 directly from EPZ in exchange for my impressions.

The EPZ Q5 in-ear monitor (IEM) arrives in a large, premium package that includes a generous selection of eartips, both conventionally shaped and shallow wide-bore. The package also includes an EPZ-branded microfiber cloth and a clamshell-style semi-rigid zippered carry pouch.

The design of the EPZ Q5 is extraordinarily similar to the Meze Advar, but sports a milky white and copper color scheme that I am a big fan of. The cable is a bit tangle-prone but untangles easily and includes a chin adjustment choker.

The IEMs have a moderate to deep insertion depth. However, the vents can be blocked if the IEMs are pressed on while worn, making them not a good choice for sleeping despite the low-profile fit.

EPZ Q5 — Bedrock Reviews (squig.link)

In terms of performance, the EPZ Q5 offers very good technical performance across the board for its price point. It has very good bass articulation and texture, although the sub-bass extension is perceptually less than measurements would indicate. The note weight is average, but the instrument separation is excellent.

Both male and female vocal intelligibility are great. Female vocals are very far forward, and while not sibilant, are oversaturated. Male vocals have average body but a good amount of grit and definition. The upper midrange and lower treble are too forward, creating glare and some harshness. The presence region has too much emphasis, causing distorted electric guitars to sound like buzzsaws. The timbre is a little thin, and cymbals are too prominent. However, treble transients are passably realistic, and the upper treble extension is very good. The soundstage is wide but short, and imaging is average.

Overall, the EPZ Q5 is a good candidate for EQ because of the dynamic driver’s strong underlying technical performance, but it is not an IEM I would recommend without it.

The EPZ Q5 can be purchased at the link below:

EPZ Q5 Earphones Wired HIFI Ceramic Carbon Nano Moving Coil IEM In Ear Monitor MMCX Detachable Cable Earbuds Gaming Headset — AliExpress