Cons — Build appears a bit flimsy; no dead cats for the lavalier mics included.

Executive Summary

Introduction

Vlogging, live streaming, and virtual meetings are becoming increasingly important. When two people are looking into the same camera, a microphone for each is needed. The Maono WM820 offers this functionality. The set features two clip-on transmitters with built-in microphone and a receiver connected to your computer, phone, or other broadcasting device.

The clip-ons also offer the option to connect an included lavalier microphone for improved sound quality or simply for convenience – as well as a headset for real-time monitoring. The transmission range of the sound is up to 50 m, but in any case can one move around the house safely without losing contact to the receiver.

The WM820 set looks awfully close to the Røde GO II set, but at less than half the price, appealing to the cost-conscious consumer.

Maono is a high-tech company that produces affordable microphones, audio interfaces, headphones, and other audio accessories. They preferably sell directly to consumers to keep their prices reasonable.

I am a big fan of good sounding microphones and have certain expectations. Spoiler alert, the WM820-A2 deliver, albeit they cannot be compared to radio-station microphones, just to state the obvious.

Specifications

Physicals

The WM820 set comes with all necessary accessories other than OTG adapters for phones. For example, you have to buy an Apple Audio Adapter for use with iPhone.

In the box…is a lot: 2 transmitters, 1 receiver, a charging cable with three USB-C connectors for simultaneous charging of all three units, a 3.5mm TRS Cable (for cameras), a 3.5mm TRRS Cable (for phones), 2 lavalier microphones, 3 dead cats for the transmitters, and the paperwork. And all that comes in a big pouch.

The receiver and the two transmitters feel a bit light and the plastic a bit flimsy, and I would not want to drop them onto a concrete sidewalk (to be fair, the same accounts for my iPhone). But being heavier would make them more difficult to wear around one’s collar. The pouch smells a bit like petroleum and the lavaliers and the other accessories are sturdy.

Functionality and Operation

The principal idea is to assign a “talking head” to each of the two transmitters, and to connect the receiver to a DSLR, smartphone/tablet, or computer so that the two people can have a recorded or streamed conversation with the outside world.

There is a 3.5 mm output jack on the Maono WM820’s receiver for this purpose. The transmitter features a 3.5 mm jack for connecting an external lavalier microphone (which bypasses the internal mic) as well as a 3.5 mm headphone jack for real-time monitoring.

Both receiver and transmitters feature three buttons on the side with various functionality. First, apart from ON/OFF, for Bluetooth pairing by simply holding button combinations down on both. Pairing has a memory: once done, you will not have to do it again. The receiver buttons allow to adjust the 22 dB gain in 2 dB steps of the incoming signal as monitored through a connected headset (also works for the mics).

Transmitters and receivers features a couple of LEDs on their front top, one as battery-level indicator and the other for Bluetooth connection status.

The set can be used indoors and outdoors. The receiver fits any standard camera shoe or phone rig as you see below. The company claims a 6 h battery life, which is more than sufficient. The build-in 350 mAh batteries are charged with a standard 5V USB charger (not included, but any phone charger or computer port will work). Charging time is 2 hours.

The microphones built into the transmitters follow a polar pattern and are (to some extent) omnidirectional with noise cancelling technology. Transmission distance is given as 50 m without physical obstruction such as walls. I tested this in the following video.

Sound Quality

When it comes to spoken word and speech intelligibility, I am fuzzy. First, I love talk radio and own several old-fashioned FM radios. Second, one of my first cousins and one of my nieces are voice actors. When listening to the “big” radio sound, you hear differences depending on the microphones used.

There is always a competition of richness against clarity, and the question is how well extended a voice is towards the top and bottom of the frequency spectrum. A microphone with little upper extension makes the voice sound boxed in and blunt, one without lower extension makes one sound tinny and analytical.

My wife and I tested the transmitters with both the built-in microphone and the added lavalier. According to specs, the lavaliers should yield a richer sound, but listen yourself to the sound of the video below.

So, what do you think? I did not change the default gain or process the sound. You get the raw data, just like somebody in a live stream or zoom call. I find the sound strikes the right balance between richness and clarity. And since you can attach any microphone to the transmitter you want, I also tried my Sony ECM-CS3, which sounded clearer, but also sterile and analytical. The Manao delivers the more natural sound with a bit or warmth added.

Concluding Remarks

The Maono WM820 is a well working and good sounding set…though I see a bit of “copycatting” as it comes optically very close to the Røde GO II (at more than twice the price). It may be a functional lower-priced alternative to the hobbyist like me, but the build is too light for professional use.

And since the company is big on influencers and affiliate programs, a built-in disclaimer: I/we don’t participate in any of that as we are not salesmen on a commission but product analysts. I just tested the set – and without any humour.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Disclaimer

The WM820 was provided unsolicited by Maono and I thank them for that.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

Gallery

The post 2-Person Wireless Mic MAONO WM820 Review – Talking Heads appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Once I “got” its purpose though I found it so usefeul, and so effective, that it became a fundamental part of my audio toolbox. Indeed I even own 2 units! In Europe they can be bought for € 59,00.

While the technical reasons behind IEMatch utility are quite tricky for a neophite, this article will try to share my experience in simple and practical terms. I will add references to some more technical material for those who feel keen (and prepared) to acquiring more in-depth information.

At-a-glance Card

Some common issues

Audible noise floor

Every audio amplifier produces some “noise”. The reasons for this are multiple but in maximum simplicity such noise mainly comes from the amp’s power circuits, and of course the higher the power the higher the noise to be tamed by the designers.

Low noise on high power amps is mainly obtained by adopting very sophisticated power circuits – which have the bad habit of being expensive and physically big. Which is why the cheaper & physically smaller an amplifier is, the more prone it fatally is to have an audible “Noise Floor”, and the more so if we long for a small and powerful amp.

The noise floor is like a sort of feeble “unwanted music” generated by the AMP itself. Not very sensible headphones will “not hear that”, that’s because the noise signal is feeble enough to not being able to move their drivers and produce sound. Sensible headphones / earphones, instead, will catch that and produce a sort of “background hiss”.

Such noise is indeed annoying but quite modest, and stays fundamentally unchanged when we raise the amp’s volume control. Unless the amp is really awfully engineered, it will in facts not amplify its base noise but only the signal received on its input. Which means that beyond a certain volume knob position our amp will make real music “loud enough” to overcome the Noise Floor level. However, the Noise Floor will stay as a background dirt polluting all notes, and will re-emerge on silent passages of course.

Excessive volume sensitivity

Suppose you own a very powerful Headphone amp, designed to muscularly feed your little-sensitive, power-hungry planar cans. Now suppose you plug your low impedance, supersensitive IEMs (a pair of CA Andromeda, for example?) onto that same amp. You’ll be forced to keep the volume knob very low, as already at 10, maybe 15% of its excursion your IEMs will start yelling unbearably loud.

And worse than that, you’ll notice that moving the volume knob by just a tiny angle makes Sound Pressure Level change quite substantially on your ears. The volume control gets “too sensitive”, in a sense.

This is of course bad for two reasons. One: you seriously risk to damage your hearing at anytime by inadvertedly turning the knob. Two: you can’t finetune SPL, as no matter how delicate you are on turning the knob, SPL varies by “too big steps” up or down.

Digital volume control quality

The overwhelming majority of the portable DAC/AMP systems out there have either no volume control, or a digital volume control. This is due to cost and size compression priorities of course.

As naming suggests, a “digital volume” control actionates upon the digital stream, i.e. on the 0’s and 1’s while and before they get into the DAC, while an “analog volume” control actionates upon the analog stream, i.e. on the result of the DAC’s job, just before it is sent to the headphones (or the speakers).

Opposite of the most common semanthics, from the sound quality standpoint “digital” volume control is in this case a “less quality” choice. You can find many online resources explaining why, at various technical depth levels. One good compromise between technicality and vulgarity is this article by iFi Audio if you wish.

Very synthetically said: the Dynamic Range is the range going from the feeblest audible note to the loudest audible note in a signal (a note). The wider the Dynamic Range, the more articulated, detailed and smoother the music is. Actionating upon a digital volume control means to move the loudest audible edge of the signal up or down. At 100% digital volume the edge is the highest allowed, so we’ll have the widest possible Dynamic Range. As we reduce the digital volume position, we lower the upper limit, consequently making the Dynamic Range smaller (“compressed”).

For completeness: an analog volume control operates on the DAC’s output, changing the signal overall amplitude, not its contents. Assuming the DAC operated at 100% digital volume, it will have carried its job out on the full available Dynamic Range, and the subsequent analog volume control is bound to operate on an “unhampered quality” analog wave. Perfect, or not? Sadly the world is not perfect, nor analog volume controls are: as any circuitry, they add noise! High quality (highly clean) analog volume controls require physically big and economically expensive components. This is why most mobile budget sources need to bend their necks on the digital volume quality compromise.

The (low) impedance riddle

I know by experience that this is a difficult topic for the non-technical amateur to grasp. There is of course a lot of ready-made resources online which you can tap to get various levels of technical information. I find this video by Hans Beekhuyzen quite nice for example.

Again, I’ll try to explain in even more vulgar terms here.

One of the electrical specifications attached to our headphones / IEMs is called “impedance”, and is measured in Ohms. 150 / 300 / 600 Ohms are “high” impedance values, typically found on overear headphones. 30 / 50 Ohm are medium impedance values, also typically found on overear headphones, often when equipped with so-called “planar” drivers. 20 / 16 / 12 / 8 are low or very low impedance values, typically found on IEM drivers.

Amplifiers (and DAC-AMPs too of course) also have an impedance feature, called “output impedance” in that case. For the sake of its output’s high quality, the lower the amp’s output impedance the better. 1 / 2 / 8 Ohm are to be considered relatively high values. 0,5 / 0,2 / 0,1 Ohm are decent values. Higher end systems carry values like 0,0[…]01 Ohm, to give you an idea.

As you may guess, designing distortion-free low output impedance amps is not a joke, it requires competence, additional physical circuitry, and more money. Which is why the mobile+lowcost devices market is flooded with non-superlow output impedance devices, and/or with devices speccing into low nominal output impedance values but delivering a sound quality which I wouldn’t write home about, and/or with devices accompanied by let’s say… not very accurate spec sheet figures.

Ok but why is this a riddle?

It is because – I won’t explain here technically why – there needs to be a certain minimum proportion between the amp’s output impedance and the headphone / IEM / speaker (called “loads”) own impedance.

By the way, when the proportion is mantioned the other way then how I just did ( load impedance divided by amp output impedance) then it goes by the name of “Damping Factor”. Just a name convention, the concept is always the same.

Some – probably the most competent and experienced – argue that the situation is not really black/white, the ideal minimum Damping Factor does not always need to be 8 according to them. They offer a range of potentially good values between 2.5 and 10, to be verified basically on a pair by pair basis.

Specific numbers apart, what’s important for us now is that when (let’s say) “a certain” minimum ratio is not respected, there will be some distortion in the frequency response of the headphones / IEMs. Typically, in the bass region (but not only).

So for example a 16ohm IEM connected to a 1ohm DAP is good (DF =16). A 12ohm IEM connected to the same DAP should be good too.

Or is it? Well… not always. (Told you it’s a riddle…)

Why? Because supplying enough current to low impedance IEMs is not a joke for mobile and/or cheap-design amplifiers – again, I won’t articulate on “why” here.

So, even when the Damping Factor is arithmetically OK, your amp may have a serious hard time “feeding” a very low impedance IEM, especially if that also carries a very low sensitivity. The very same amp would have a much less hard time getting a vivid amount of current flowing if – on equal low sensitivity – that IEM had a higher impedance. This is amongst the reasons why – in addition to output impedance – some AMP / DAC-AMP spec sheets also report a “minimum recommended / supported load impedance”.

Summarising: 1) make sure headphones / earphones have an average impedance “a few times higher” than that of the amp / dac-amp you want to connect them too; 2) make sure your IEM don’t undercut on your source’s minimum supported / recommended load impedance.

IEMatch description

IEMatch is a device aesthetically similar to one of those plug format adapters – those short cables used for example to connect a 2.5mm plugged earphone onto an amp’s 4.4mm output port. The difference is that there is some extra circuitry inside the housings.

Operatively, you plug its male connector onto the Amp, and you plug your headphones / IEMs onto the female connector.

Different versions of IEMatch are available to accomodate for 3.5 / 2.5 / 4.4mm plugs, but they also have some electrical differences. Let’s talk about those later not to lose focus on the main concepts, give me some rope here.

When it is plugged in by its male connector, IEMatch always presents the Amp with the same “load impedance” – being 16 Ohm – regardless of the actual impedance of the headphones / earphones plugged onto its female connector.

At the opposite end, IEMatch always presents the Headphones / Earphones connected onto its female connector with just two possible Output Impedance values – being either 1 or 2.5 Ohm, user-selectable by flipping the switch on the female connector barrel – regardless of the actual Output Impedance of the amp the opposite, male connector is plugged onto.

Thirdly, IEMatch also acts as an attenuator. In practice it acts as the opposite of an amplifier: it introduces a “negative gain”, it reduces (instead of enhancing) the strength of the analog signal passing through it. The attenuation is applied in the value of either 12 or 24dB, user-selectable by flipping the switch on the female connector barrel, the same used to select IEMatch’s Output Impedance.

As I mentioned above, iFi markets 3 different IEMatch versions, carrying some differences in these values but I’ll report and recap them all later on. For now let’s focus on the most common product version called IEMatch+.

The available choices on IEMatch+ are: 2.5 ohm output impedance and -12 dB attenuation (“High” setting), or 1 ohm output impedance and -24 dB attenuation (“Ultra” setting).

How it solves our problems

As it should be clear by the description here above, by plugging an IEMatch in between our AMP and our ‘Phones we get 3 fundamental “things”, at the same time:

1. “Fake” our AMP into believing our IEM has a 16 ohm impedance, whatever its real impedance is (even much lower!)
2. “Fake” our IEM into believing our AMP has either 2.5 or 1 ohm output impedance, whatever the real value at the AMP connector be
3. Again, “fake” our AMP into believeing our IEM is much less sensible then it actually is – so much so that on even power level output by the amp the resulting Sound Pressure Level onto our ears will be 12 or evel 24dB less loud

Clear until now? Good. Now let’s see how this contributes to solve or at least reduce our issues mentioned in the first section.

Noise floor cancelling

Recall: low impedance, high sensitivity IEMs are prone to make high power amp’s Noise Floor audible in form of a continued background hiss. This is because, for how feeble the noise signal is, it’s enough to move our supersensible IEM’s transducers.

Plug IEMatch in the middle. Its attenuation features practically mean that our IEMs will present a much lower sensitivity to the AMP than their real one. The feeble Noise Floor signal will basically be unable to “overcome” the extra “resistance” offered by IEMatch (even its lower -12dB setting is more than enough), and the hiss will not be audible anymore.

Smoother volume control

Recall: plugging low impedance, high sensitivity IEMs onto high powered AMPs designed to adequately cope with higher impedance and/or lower sensitivity cans results in being stuck at the lowest end of the amp’s volume excursion, and in excessive sensitivity vs volume control variations.

Plug IEMatch in the middle. Same as above, IEMatch will “present” a higher sensitivity to the amp. Unlike when the IEM is directly plugged onto the amp, now we will need to turn the amp’s volume knob quite a sweeter bit up in order to obtain “loud” sound off our IEMs. Even more importantly, now a tiny variation in the amp’s volume knob position will not result in a “big” SPL change, but we’ll have a much “smoother”, more normal control SPL control.

Reduced digital volume quality loss

Recall: digital volume controls – extremely common on mobile DAC-AMP / DAPs – can pass the original digital file full resolution along to the DAC only when set at 100% volume position. When operated at intermediate positions, as it happens during normal auditioning, they apriori cram the available Dynamic Range. Such depletion is the stronger the lower the volume is set at (i.e. the higher the pre-attenuation is applied to the digital data).

Put IEMatch in the middle. Again same as above, IEMatch will “drain” quite a lot of the power coming from the amp before it reaches our IEMs. Which means that to get the same Sound Pressure Level out (i.e. the same musical loudness into our ears) we will need to “turn the volume more up”, and being this a digital volume, the higher the volume position, the smaller quality loss we will have.

In other words: if you apply attenuation to the signal after the DAC job is done, you can afford not to apply the same attenuation to the digital signal before sending it to the DAC, thus better preserving the final result quality.

Clear till now? Good. Then let’s consider a couple of caveats.

Please note: 3dB attenuation corresponds to hearing music 50% less loud. So 12dB attenuation is a lot, and 24db is a huge lot!

So, first: there may be cases where your source has to work at 50% volume position or less when your IEM / HP is directly connected to it, but it will reveal to be not powerful enough to compensate even for IEMatch’s lower -12dB attenuation setting when we plug that in, and even pushing your source at 100% volume, you won’t have a satisfactory loudness coming out of your drivers. In such case well… too bad: IEMatch can’t help you.

Furthermore: suppose your source is not much overpowered vs your IEM / HPs, and IEMatch’s -12 dB attenuation setting makes it bring the volume control near its ideal, fullscale position, while still getting loud music and vivid dynamics out of the drivers. But… the -12dB attenuation requires the “High” setting which comes with a 2.5 ohm output impedance presented to your IEM / HPs. Should that be too high, for example because you are using a very low impedance IEM, then you might be forced to use IEMatch’s -24dB attenuation setting (“Ultra”), featuring a much lower 1 ohm output impedance. If, of course… your source doesn’t run out of juice now, like for the previous caveat case!

Impedance adaptation

Recall: you should always make sure your HP / IEM’s impedance is at least a few times (many say 8 times) bigger than your source’s output impedance – otherwise you will hear some unwanted tonal changes in the ouput. Furthermore, even when the “8X rule” is met, your HP / IEM’s impedance should not be lower than the lowest recommended impedance mentioned on the amp’s literature.

This means for example that you won’t likely get good sonic results by pairing a 12 ohm IEM with an amp offering 2 ohm output impedance. Nor by pairing the same 12 ohm IEM with an amplifier offering 0.5 ohm output impedance, but recommending loads above 16 ohm anyway.

Put IEMatch in the middle.

Firstly: the AMP from its own standpoint will “sense” 16 ohm on its output connector, and will effectively behave accordingly, even if our IEM is 12 ohm (or less). This will make the amp “work within the manufacturer’s recommended range”, which is of course a first fundamental good thing.

Secondly: whatever the actual AMP’s output impedance is, the IEM from its own standpoint will exclusively sense IEMatch’s output impedance, which is as low as 1 ohm – so perfectly viable in terms of damping factor even the IEM carries 8 ohm or less of internal impedance.

The same power-related caveat mentioned about the previous point applies of course: especially if we need to pair IEMs with 16 or less ohm impedance, we’ll need to operate IEMatch on its Ultra position, which “costs” -24dB attenuation. Our amp gotta be really powerful to be able to counter that.

IEMatch models

IEMatch is currently offered in 3 different variations.

(*) S-balanced is the name iFi assigned to a special wiring scheme which is at the same time full compliant with a single-ended connection, and with a balanced ended connection. Considering there are very few if any balanced architecture devices around equipped with 3.5mm TRRS ports, this feature in practice means that IEMatch+ can be paired with any regular Single Ended 3.5mm phone port, and that it will pass-through iFi’s S-Balanced connectivity when paired to most of iFi’s mobile AMP / DAC-AMPs.

While the difference between IEMatch+ and IEMatch 2.5 is only about Single Ended / Balanced cabling support, it’s worth noting that IEMatch 4.4 is not a mere pentaconn-plug variation of the 2.5 model, but it comes with different electrical data.

IEMatch 4.4 is intended to be used it with high(er) powered balanced-ended AMPs. The much higher (up to 50 ohm vs 16 ohm) impedance it presents to the source will force the AMP to work at a higher “volume” level, thus at a higher voltage, and ultimately at a higher power.

On the flip side IEMatch 4.4 offers a minimum output impedance of 3.6 ohm (significantly higher then its siblings’ 1 ohm)

Questions and curiosities

Won’t a much cheaper impedance adapter be enough?

Simply put: no.

An “impedance adapter” is a simple resistor, which is plugged in series between two devices – typically a dac and an amp, or a preamp and an amp.

The most evident difference between a mere “impedance adapter” and an IEMatch is that the IA will present the same impedance on both its ends.

Some may be tempted to use impedance adapters (e.g.) when plugging a low impedance IEM onto a certain phone, or budget dongle, to “trick” the source into sensing a higher impedance load (IEM) connected, and “switch to high impedance mode” delivering more output power.
Or, to “cancel” the hiss on low impedance IEMs.
Or, to help an amp better cope with the power requirements of lower-than-minimum-supported-impedance IEMs (read above).

From the amp’s (i.e. the phone / dongle) standpoint that’ll be ok: using (say) a 32ohm IA the phone will sense a 32ohm load and will behave accordingly. E.g. it will switch to high(er) output voltage swing. So far so good.

From the IEM’s standpoint though, that’s far from OK – the IEM will now sense the IA’s value (in our example: 32ohm) as the source’s “output impedance” – which is a very high value.

In more technical words, the IA will screw the pair’s damping factor (read above), and this will be very hearable in terms of frequency response, the earphone presentation will be skewed.

If you want, the adjective “adapter” applied to a common “impedance adapter” turns out to be quite deceiving in the above scenarios

Won’t IEMatch actually make my damping factor worse?

If your amp has an output impedance below 1 ohm, then a IEMatch with its 1ohm (or more) impedance will surely reduce the damping factor. But on IEMatch typical applicative scenarios this very rarely if ever will be a problem – most times it will be an improvement.

First and foremost: while you need a certain “minimum” Damping Factor to avoid FR skewing, it is conversely NOT true that the higher the damping factor the better (I omit the explanation here).

Secondly let’s consider a classic example: a Campfire Andromeda (12 ohm impedance) connected to a sub-1ohm output impedance source. DF is above 12, good. Too bad the Andros are also extremely sensitive and pick up hissing from that amp.

Plug IEMatch in between. Output impedance will now be 1 ohm, so the DF will be “just” 12, which is nevertheless absolutely OK. And, we won’t have hissing (as explained above)

Considerations and conclusions

If we consider the situations where IEMatch makes itself useful we notice they all have to do with pairing low impedance and/or high sensitivity drivers (typically: IEMs – hence, evidently, the product’s name) with sources optimised for high(er) impedance and especially (much) low(er) sensitivity.

Looking at the consumer / pro-sumer audiophile market higher quality, higher powered amplifiers are typically optimised for pairing with high impedance dynamic drivers, or low impedance planar drivers – and plugging most of IEMs on them reveal a number of shortcomings, such as the ones we talked about today.

If we want to be true to ourselves, we should serenely acknowledge that each should be given its own: big cans require a certain “type” of source, IEMs work best on a different type.

So do we have to duplicate our stacks ? Maximalistically speaking: yes. And honestly speaking, I did – with great results !

For the less purist, IEMatch helps close the gap. And, it still proves useful in a number of situations to “double stackers” like myself.

A very final note: I recently came accross iFi’s Micro iDSD Signature, a really remarkable mobile DAC-AMP which I truly appreciated as I tried to outline on my piece about it.

I reckon that today’s article about IEMatch may make it even clearer why – amongst the multiple benefits offered by Micro iDSD Signature – the one that totally stunned me is its provision for an easily user-selectable “ECO” (read: reduced power) amplification mode. Micro iDSD Signature is the sole one device I encountered to date which offers uncompromised optimal amping for both cans and IEMs in the same product.

iFi offers such feature both on Micro iDSD Signature and Diablo. That’s such a logical and winning choice for mid/high end mobile devices like those ! Wish more quality manufacturers get involved on this soon…

Our generic standard disclaimer.

The post iFi IEMatch Review – Must Have appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Executive Summary

The $59 Allo Nirvana Switching Mode Power Supply (SMPS) and $159 Allo Shanti Dual Linear Power Supply (LPS) offer audible improvements over cheaper/stock power supplies and therefore remove a critical bottleneck in our device chain at a relatively low cost.

Introduction

Allo is a company out of Toulouse, France, that has designed and manufactured electronic devices for the last 20 years. Their products range from DIY Audio to Plug’n’Play devices. Allo are particularly famous for their network audio players and USB bridges. Their R&D, engineering team, and production facilities are located in Bangalore, India.

In this article, I analyze the Nirvana and the Shanti, Allo’s two relatively inexpensive 5V low-noise power supplies. I will compare their contrasting designs against each other and against their competitors. Power supplies are a generally highly underestimated component of any audiophile device. Good power supplies can cost $$$ and may have the size of a microwave. And yes, they make a big sonic difference simply by preserving the signal quality.

The Allo Nirvana is a standard staple with Raspberry Pi users for good reasons. It is frequently sold out here in Canada.

Let’s first talk about the power-supply technology and common issues with mains power.

Noise and Power Supplies

Three kinds of noise exist that can contaminate and deteriorate the audio signal: electromagnetic interference (RMI), radio-frequency (RFI) interference, and switching noise (which is usually high frequency between 500Khz and 2Ghz). By definition, interference originates from a source external to a signal path and produces undesired artifacts in the signal. RMI and RFI may be transmitted by both USB ports and external power supplies.

The electricity that comes out of our mains contains RMI and RFI, the amount of which depends on our living environment. It will be worse in a city apartment building than in a house in the country, and it may fluctuate with time of day.

All electronic circuits work at low voltage/direct current whereas the grid provides high voltage/alternative current.

A power supply is a transformer that connects the AC grid with the low voltage circuit of a device, let’s say a DAC or amp. There are two kinds of power supplies, switching mode power supplies (SMPS) and linear power supplies (LPS). Both kinds principally work with our audio devices.

In an LPS, this AC/DC conversion is done by rectifiers and capacitors and the grid voltage is transformed to a lower voltage by a transformer. The bigger the transformer the better. A voltage regulator makes sure that the power supply provides constant voltage to the DAC’s/amp’s logic boards.

In an SMPS, the incoming AC is first converted to DC by a rectifier, followed by a filter, and then sent to a transformer. An integrated circuit switches voltage on and off at a very high frequency. An SMPS only needs a small transformer as the flow-through currents are generally small. The resulting DC is not very clean as the voltage is not as stable as with a good LPS.

An LPS is typically less noisy than an SMPS (in the same price category) as it provides constant signal and voltage power (and no switching noise). Bigger transformers are generally better than smaller ones (although they may measure the same), and they can be very expensive (and bulky). Such big LPS are probably only economic for very expensive audio gear.

The power supplies that come with our phones or notebook computers are SMPS. These are generally more compact and cheaper than LPS but noisier – unless sophisticated filtering is used. Basic SMPS will deteriorate the audio signal.

In summary, a power supply is very important for (preserving) sound.

USB Noise

Another cause of noise/signal deterioration is our streamer/computer. The various computer internals are inherently noisy. If our DAC is powered through the USB port, the computer delivers both noisy power and a poorly timed data stream (“jitter”) caused by RMI and FMI, through VBUS and data line, respectively, to the DAC.

Both jitter and noisy power contribute to the deterioration of the audio signal. And if both are transferred into the DAC via an inferior USB cable, there is additional interference between power and data lines…which exacerbates the problem. That’s why you need a well-made, well-shielded, well-isolating USB cable, too.

Using an external LPS such as the Allo Nirvana or Allo Shanti for your DAC eliminates the VBUS problem.

OK, let’s have a look at the two Allo models.

Allo Nirvana Switching Mode Power Supply (SMPS)

In the box is the power supply with with 6 adapters.

The Nirvana is relatively small, as an SMPS does not need large transformer coils. Allo pride themselves of having minimized three different kinds of noise: differential noise between power line and ground (GND) in the audio band (0-20 kHz), common mode noise, and leakage current (which creates EMI).

Features of the Allo Nirvana

• Single output at 2.85A/5V
• Standard North American plug with 120V input
• No load is 5.2V, 2.85A 4.97 to 5.03V
• Includes multiple adaptors (see below)
• Product Page/Purchase Link: https://www.allo.com/sparky/nirvana-smps.html
• Tested at: $59 (with standard North American plug with 120V input)
• Download Manual: https://bit.ly/3Gzzo1C

On the front panel, there is a fixed DC output cable and a USB port. Both constitute a single shared output…either or… 6 adapters are included to connect essentially any 5V device. The switch on the right allows to have the 5V DC side ground earthed or floating (AC side is always earthed)

On its back panel are the fixed AC-input and an earth connector.

There is no on/off switch. Once plugged in, the Nirvana is always on, as indicated by a red LED inside the case (which is well visible through the three slots in the top).

Allo Nirvana and Allo Shanti come with the same accessories.

Allo Shanti Dual Linear Power Supply (LPS)

The Allo Nirvana is a dual linear power supply that relies on a large transformer and is therefore relatively – you guessed it – big. It powers two 5V devices, one with 1.2 A and another one with up to 3 A. The Shanti contains the same adapters as the Allo Nirvana (the set is unfortunately not doubled) plus a detachable power chord.

Features of the Allo Shanti

• Dual output (galvanically isolated) 5.2V 3A and 5.2V at 1.2A
• Power multiple devices (RPI 4, 3 + DAC, Katana, BOSS, or other)
• Independent filtering on each rail
• Super capacitors on the output
• Incredible low impedance / deep reservoir of electrons at the output of the PSU
• Includes multiple adaptors (see below)
• Product Page/Purchase Link: https://www.allo.com/sparky/shanti.html
• Tested at: $159

The front panel features the dual output (galvanically isolated) with two fixed DC output cables. In the back are an AC power input, on/of switch, earth connector and 115/230 V switch.

The earth connector in both Allo power supplies removes voltage potential between devices and therefore avoids hum and ground loops.

Test Setup

For my listening test, different power supplies were connected to the Khadas Tone2 Pro DAC/amp. A music source as noise free as possible is required to isolate the power supplies (and their noise) and to test them effectively. For this purpose, I selected the Marantz SA8005 SACD player as transport, which I connected to the Khadas via S/PDIF using a Blue Jeans coaxial cable. This setup obviously avoids USB noise.

My complete test setup was:

• Different 5V power supplies: Allo Nirvana & Shanti, $99 ifi Audio iPower X, $50 BRZHifi LPS, Apple SMPS (from 2012 iPad), generic $14 Baseus charger SMPS
• Source: Marantz SA8005 CD player
• Uncompressed signal from audio CD
• Integrated dac/amp 1: Khadas Tone2 Pro [S/PDIF input used]
• Receiving end: Sennheiser HD 600

I had already compared the iPower X with the BRZHiFi, Baseus, and Apple SMPS in the iPower review.

Test Results

Spoiler alert (jump over the rest of this paragraph if you don’t want to know the result yet): the Shanti contributes to the best sound in my test chain, followed closely by the Nirvana fighting for 2nd position with the iPower X. As already tested, the BRZHiFi cannot compete with the top trio and the Apple and Baseus are several leagues below the rest.

I started my test with the Apple as reference. I found the sound a bit congested, particularly at the low end (which was also muddy), and it lacked impact.

Switching to the apparent favourite (according to price), the Allo Shanti, I had this “Wow” experience. Holy macro was there a difference – and a huge one. No measurements required. If you cannot hear that, get the Apple one.

The overall image improved substantially with the Shanti, it became much cleaner and clearer. Separation improved dramatically and so did dynamics and impact. The bass was tightened up and the vocals became more alive and intimate. Everything was much better defined, controlled, organized, and dosed.

The Apple sounded muddled and uninspiring in comparison. The Shanti clearly added life to the Khadas. It was like the cleaners went through my house, polished things up and put everything back into place. Hey, this would be a nice present…

The Allo Nirvana kept up well with the Shanti. The sound may have slightly less impact and intimacy, but everything is equally well defined. The Shanti may have slightly better rounded edges and the Nirvana may deliver a slightly leaner and sharper image than the Shanti (with my particular setup). The overall differences between the two are small.

The Nirvana’s real competitor is the ifi Audio iPower X as both are SMPS. In my previous test, the iPower X had clearly beaten the BRZHiFi, Apple, and Baseus. And to my surprise, the iPower X is a bit muddier in the bass (and bassier) compared to the Nirvana’s better defined low end. Both have comparable dynamics and are “even steven” in the other departments…with my test setup. So, yes, you may prefer the “drier” sounding Nirvana over the iPower X – or not. Overall, there is barely a piece of paper between them.

As said, I had tested the BRZHiFi before. It is not bad but has less dynamics than the iPower X, and also lags in separation. The iPower X (and the two Allos) are more “engaging”. There is a big step between the top trio and this one.

I then switched to the Shanti again to confirm my perceptions…and yes, I instantly wanted to return the BRZHiFi to the dealer.

Last but not least, there is the generic Baseus. Its “sound” remained as thin, dull, uninspiring, and lifeless as in my previous test. If you want to save a buck, you save it on the wrong end here, as it affects the overall sound of your device chain – and rather negatively.

In conclusion of this test, Allo Shanti, Allo Nirvana, and iPower X are all decent, recommendable power supplies in my opinion. Whilst the differences between them are small with my test setup, they may be more substantial with “bigger” systems.

Quick Comparison between Allo Nirvana and Allo Shanti

Value

As to which ones to get. The Shanti offers the best “sound quality” by a hair, and is the one recommended for powering two devices. For a single device, you have the choice between the Nirvana and iPower X. Here it comes down to personal preference: light, small, plastic “wall wart” at $99 (travels better to your hotel room) or a larger but sturdier metal box at $59 (hides better under your desk). The iPower X lacks the Nirvana’s ground switch. Any of the three are superior over the $49 iPower wall wart and the BRZHiFi – and more than decent.

Concluding Remarks

Quality power supplies such as the Nirvana and Shanti keep what they promise – they do make an audible difference compared to a cheap one and remove critical bottlenecks in our audio chains. Results may vary with setup, location, and time of day (load on the local power grid). Allo are offering a couple of very useful and established niché products at fair prices.

Bottom line: the Allo Nirvana is the best bang for your buck. Period. And…yes, power supplies can be fun!

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

Disclaimer

The Allo Nirvana and Shanti power supplies were provided by Allo upon my request – and I thank them for that. The iPower X is on loan, and the others I have purchased myself. I also thank my co-bloggers and William “Wiljen Audiofool” Jennings for intense discussion of this topic.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

You find an INDEX of our most relevant technical articles HERE.

The post Allo Nirvana SMPS & Shanti LPS Review – Messieurs Propres appeared first on Audio Reviews.

This article has had over 40,000 views as of January 2022

The eartips are listed in alphabetical order.

Latest Additions

May 2022 additions: Acoustune AEX07, Acoustune AEX50, Azla SednaEarFit Vivid Edition.

Mar 2022 additions: Simphonio Diamond Earfit, Softears Liquid Silicone Ear Tips.

Feb 2022 additions: Canyon Silikon-Eartips ET400 (Bass), ALPEX Hi-Unit HSE-A1000.

Testing Parameters and Disclaimer

The following tests of silicone eartips are based on my evaluations and listening observations. All test are conducted in a quiet listening environment. Fit is ensured such that eartips are properly inserted and seated into the ear canal with good seal. I have to elaborate, your experiences may vary.

Associated equipment list: Sources – JWD JWM-115, Shanling M0, Zishan DSD and Topping DX3 Pro.IEMs – Tin Hifi T2, KBEAR Diamond, TRI I4 and Moondrop Kanas Pro

Disclaimer: All scores are subjected to change without notice. I may update or add new scores every few months when I acquire new eartips.

NOTE: I don’t have favorite eartips but if I want neutrality, SpinFits CP-145 is my first pick usually. For IEM tuning, I always use reversed KZ Starline, follow by stock eartips from the manufacturer. 

A

Acoustune AEX07

Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: sturdy and firm
Bass: 3.50
Midrange: 5.00
Treble: 4.25
Soundstage: 3.75
Vocal presence: 4.00

For neutral tonality with emphasis in midrange. The AEX07 sounds closer to AET07a than AET07. Improved overall tonal texture and clarity over the latter. Note weight is is denser than AET07a however it sounds less congested than AET07. A good middle-ground between its two predecessors. My new favorite Acoustune eartip.

Purchased from MTMT Audio, Hong Kong.

Acoustune AEX50

Bore size: wide
Stem length: regular 
Feel: soft and sturdy
Bass: 1.50
Midrange: 2.50
Treble: 4.25
Soundstage: 3.75
Vocal presence: 3.50

What was Acoustune thinking when they came out these?! 

These eartips are “directional” (meaning you must wear them in a certain way) and a pain in the butt to put on. You need lots of patience and time to get them to sit well inside the ears. Getting the proper “ear seal” is nearly impossible. There is literally zero isolation. The design adopts a WW2 helmet-like umbrella shape with double “wings” design. The wide wing is to face the inner-part of the entrance to the ear canal, and the narrow wing facing out (see attached photos). 

Unfortunately, I couldn’t get them to fit in my ears properly not matter how hard I tried. Although made of soft memory polymer, they become uncomfortable, irritating and warm inside my ears after a while.

Sound-wise, these eartips thin the sound so much that they make your TOTL IEMs sound like 1950s transistor radio. Everything sounds distant, lean and sibilance. 

Purchased from MTMT Audio, Hong Kong.

Acoustune AET06
Bore size: double flange, regular
Stem length: extremely short
Feel: firm and sturdy
Bass: 5.0
Midrange: 5
Treble: 4
Soundstage: 3.75
Vocal presence: 5
Similar to AET08 in many ways but with an even tighter bass punch. Vocal is bodied and three-dimensional
Purchased from MTMT Audio, Hong Kong.

Acoustune AET06a (Enhanced comfort)
Bore size: double flange, regular
Stem length: extremely short
Feel: firm and pliable (slightly softer than AET06a)
Bass: 4.75
Midrange: 5
Treble: 4.25
Soundstage: 3.75
Vocal presence: 5
Virtually identical to AET06 with a hair bit cleaner and more sparkling upper-midrange and treble. Feels softer than AET06 thus less pressure inside the ears.
Purchased from MTMT Audio, Hong Kong.

Acoustune AET07
Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: sturdy and firm
Bass: 3.75
Midrange: 5
Treble: 4
Soundstage: 3.5
Vocal presence: 4
For neutral tonality with emphasis in midrange. Similar to SpinFit CP-145 in many ways but with better bass texture and vocal presence.
Purchased from Japan through a friend

Acoustune AET07a
Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: sturdy and firm
Bass: 3.75
Midrange: 5
Treble: 4
Soundstage: 3.5
Vocal presence: 4.25
Slight improvement over Acoustune AET07 in texture, detail, tonal purity and vocal clarity.
Purchased from MTMT Audio, Hong Kong

Acoustune AET08
Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: firm and sturdy
Bass: 4.5
Midrange: 5
Treble: 3.5
Soundstage: 3.5
Vocal presence: 5
For vocal, midrange and solid bass
Purchased from Japan through a friend

Acoustune AEX07

Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: sturdy and firm
Bass: 3.50
Midrange: 5.00
Treble: 4.25
Soundstage: 3.75
Vocal presence: 4.00

For neutral tonality with emphasis in midrange. The AEX07 sounds closer to AET07a than AET07. Improved overall tonal texture and clarity over the latter. Note weight is is denser than AET07a however it sounds less congested than AET07. A good middle-ground between its two predecessors. My new favorite Acoustune eartip.

Purchased from MTMT Audio, Hong Kong.

Acoustune AEX50

Bore size: wide
Stem length: regular 
Feel: soft and sturdy
Bass: 1.50
Midrange: 2.50
Treble: 4.25
Soundstage: 3.75
Vocal presence: 3.50

What was Acoustune thinking when they came out these?! 

These eartips are “directional” (meaning you must wear them in a certain way) and a pain in the butt to put on. You need lots of patience and time to get them to sit well inside the ears. Getting the proper “ear seal” is nearly impossible. There is literally zero isolation. The design adopts a WW2 helmet-like umbrella shape with double “wings” design. The wide wing is to face the inner-part of the entrance to the ear canal, and the narrow wing facing out (see attached photos). 

Unfortunately, I couldn’t get them to fit in my ears properly not matter how hard I tried. Although made of soft memory polymer, they become uncomfortable, irritating and warm inside my ears after a while.

Sound-wise, these eartips thin the sound so much that they make your TOTL IEMs sound like 1950s transistor radio. Everything sounds distant, lean and sibilance. 

Purchased from MTMT Audio, Hong Kong.

ADV Eartune Fidelity U Elliptical Silicone Eartips (horizontal fit)
Bore size: small (4mm)
Stem length: short
Feel: flexible, soft and pliable
Bass: 3.5
Midrange: 4
Treble: 3.5
Soundstage: 2.5
Vocal presence: 3.5
An interesting elliptical eartip which fits two ways and can affect sound. The not so interesting part is it projects a smaller soundstage and vocals get thrown backwards. In both fittings, I experienced quite significant treble roll-off and details lost. Isolation is NOT GOOD!
Sample from ADVSound, courtesy of co-blogger Baskingshark.

ADV Eartune Fidelity U Elliptical Silicone Eartips (vertical fit)
Bore size: small (4mm)
Stem length: short
Feel: flexible, soft and pliable
Bass: 3.0
Midrange: 3.5
Treble: 3.5
Soundstage: 2.5
Vocal presence: 3.5
An interesting elliptical eartip which fits two ways and can affect sound. The not so interesting part is it projects a smaller soundstage and vocals get thrown backwards. In both fittings, I experienced quite significant treble roll-off and details lost. Isolation is NOT GOOD!
Sample from ADVSound, courtesy of co-blogger Baskingshark.

AKG Anti-allergenic Sleeves for K3003
Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: soft and firm
Bass: 4.25
Midrange: 5.0
Treble: 4
Soundstage: 3.75
Vocal presence: 5.0
Yes, it is called “anti-allergenic sleeves”. If you can find these at your local earphone stores, GET IT! These sound extremely close to Azla SednaEarFit XELASTEC but at half the cost. If you are not used to the grippiness or tackiness of the XELASTEC, AKG is the best alternative. Vocal is forward with very good dimension and ambience. 3D. Best of all it doesn’t affect bass and treble.
Purchase from a friend who bought from AKG outlet in Germany

ALPEX Hi-Unit HSE-A1000
Bore size: wide
Stem length: short
Feel: soft and pliable
Bass: 4.25
Midrange: 4.25
Treble: 4.50
Soundstage: 4.0
Vocal presence: 4.25
These wide bore eartips bear an uncanny resemblance to JVC Spiral Dot in look but they don’t sound alike. The HSE-A1000 is brighter, more open and livelier. Midrange has more sparkle and life. The bass is cleaner, tighter and more textured. Best of all, they cost only a fraction of the JVC. I am surprised how good these are. What a hidden gem!
Purchased from Amazon Japan

Audiosense S400 Soft Silicone Eartips
Bore size: regular
Stem length: short
Feel: flexible and firm
Bass: 4.25
Midrange: 5.0
Treble: 4.0
Soundstage: 4.0
Vocal presence: 4.5
Both Baskingshark and Vannak Pech are fans of this eartip. It adds “round-meatiness” (a.k.a smoothness and body) to the music without clouding the low-mids. Vocals can be a tad forward but still very pleasant. I would rank its sonic signatures between SpinFit CP-145 and Final Audio Type E eartips. Similar to SpinFits, it has a pivoting cap design.
Purchased from Audiosense Official Store on AliExpress

Audio-Technica FineFit ER-CKM55M
Bore size: small
Stem length: regular
Feel: soft and flrm
Bass: 4
Midrange: 4.5
Treble: 3.5
Soundstage: 3
Vocal presence: 4
Bassy eartips that accentuates on vocal. Soundstage is smaller than most tips.
Purchased from Stereo Electronics (Singapore)

Azla SednaEarFit Crystal (Standard)

Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: soft, grippy and sticky
Bass: 3.5
Midrange: 5.0
Treble: 4.25
Soundstage: 4.0
Vocal presence: 5.0

Another pricey eartip offering from Azla. Feels just like XELASTEC. Both XELASTEC and Crystal excel in the midrange and vocals. Their most obvious differences are in the upper-mids and mid-bass range where Crystal adds a touch more instrument presence, separation and space. Mid-bass is cleaner and clearer than XELASTEC yet doesn’t sacrifice warmth and body. It is good to note that Crystal does not have the upper-midrange “ringing” that plagues XELASTEC.
Purchased from Amazon Japan

Azla SednaEarfit Crystal (for TWS)
Bore size: regular
Stem length: short
Feel: soft, grippy and sticky
Bass: 3.5
Midrange: 5.0
Treble: 4.25
Soundstage: 4.0
Vocal presence: 5.0

Another pricey eartip offering from Azla. Feels similar to XELASTEC but with a shallower in-ear fit. Both XELASTEC and Crystal excel in the midrange and vocals. Their most obvious differences are in the upper-mids and mid-bass range where Crystal adds a touch more instrument presence, separation and space. Mid-bass is cleaner and clearer than XELASTEC yet doesn’t sacrifice warmth and body. It is good to note that Crystal does not have the upper-midrange “ringing” that plagues XELASTEC. Can be used for both IEM and TWS.

Purchased from MTMT Audio, Hong Kong

Azla Sedna EarFit (Regular)
Bore size: wide
Stem length: long
Feel: sturdy and very firm
Bass: 4
Midrange: 4.5
Treble: 4
Soundstage: 3.75
Vocal presence: 4.5
For long nozzle good midrange
Purchased from Amazon Japan

Azla Sedna EarFit (Light)
Bore size: wide
Stem length: long
Feel: sturdy and very firm
Bass: 3.75
Midrange: 4
Treble: 3.5
Soundstage: 3.75
Vocal presence: 4.25
A “lighter” version of the regular Sedna EarFit. More balanced-sounding overall.
Purchased from Amazon Japan

Azla SednaEarFit (Light) Short
Bore size: wide
Stem length: regular
Feel: sturdy and very firm
Bass: 3.75
Midrange: 4.25
Treble: 3.75
Soundstage: 3.75
Vocal presence: 4.5
A “short-stem” version of SednaEarFitLight. Both nozzles are brought closer to the eardrums thus enhancement in overall clarity and vocal presence, which means stereo image and presentation are slightly more forward.
Purchased from MTMT Audio, Hong Kong

Azla SednaEarFit Vivid Edition

Bore size: narrow 
Stem length: regular
Feel: sturdy and very firm
Bass: 4.25
Midrange: 4.50
Treble: 4.25
Soundstage: 3.75
Vocal presence: 4.75

At first glance, these look like colourful version of SednaEarFitLight Short. Upon close examination, they are very different in looks, feel and sound. SednaEarFit Vivid Edition feels softer and plusher. It has a narrower bore and sounds livelier than SednaEarFit Light Short. Bass is punchier, better texture and definition. Vocals sound cleaner, clearer and slightly forward. Upper-registers are brighter and slightly more extended than SednaEarFitLight Short. This eartips definitely deserve the “Vivid Edition” title. Not suitable for bright or shouty IEMs. 

Purchased from MTMT Audio, Hong Kong

Azla SednaEarFit XELASTEC
Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: soft, grippy and sticky
Bass: 4.0
Midrange: 5.0
Treble: 3.75
Soundstage: 3.50
Vocal presence: 5.0

The most expensive eartip in my collection. Isolation is impeccable. If you love vocals, THIS IS IT! Vocal presence is extremely 3D. Best of all it doesn’t affect bass and treble. Projects soundstage a bit narrower than regular SednaEarFit.

B

BGVP A07 Eartips
Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: sturdy and firm
Bass: 3.75
Midrange: 5
Treble: 4
Soundstage: 3.5
Vocal presence: 4.25
Suspiciously similar to Acoustune AET07. Heck… It sounds closer to AET07a than AET07. Neutral tonality with emphasis in midrange and top-end sparkle. I find this eartip to have better bass texture, dynamics and vocal presence than SpinFit CP100 and CP145. The A07 is often labeled as “vocal” eartip for most stock tips offering.Purchased from BGVP Taobao store

BGVP A08 Eartips
Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: firm and sturdy
Bass: 4.5
Midrange: 5
Treble: 3.5
Soundstage: 3.5
Vocal presence: 5
Suspiciously similar to Acoustune AET08, this eartip adds thickness to bass and midrange. However, unlike Acoustune AET08, I find it a speck bright. The A08 is often labeled as “bass” eartip for most stock tips offering.Purchased from BGVP Taobao store

BGVP Electric Blue “ArtMagic VG4” Silicone Vocal Eartip
Bore size: regular 
Stem length: regular
Feel: soft and flexible
Bass: 3.5
Midrange: 5.0
Treble: 4.25
Soundstage: 4.0
Vocal presence: 4.0This eartip comes stock with BGVP ArtMagic VG4, ArtMagic V12 and DH3, labeled under “vocal” eartip. Highly-praised by Singaporean audiophile Reza Emmanuel as his standard reference, I must say this eartip is extremely comfortable, literally fatigue-free for long listening sessions.

Sound is clean, tight and very well-textured. Bass and low-mids are detailed, punchy and dynamic. Midrange is clear with excellent separation. Upper-mids and treble are smooth and extended with good amount of air and spacial cues. Vocal position is ‘just nice” – that is neither too forward nor too laid-back. Soundstage is realistically wide without sounding too spread-out. Similar to SpinFit, this eartip comes with a pivoting umbrella/cap.
Specially-ordered from BGVP Taobao Official Store as they do not sell this eartip individually. 

BGVP E01 Eartips
Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: soft and sturdy
Bass: 4
Midrange: 5
Treble: 3.75
Soundstage: 4
Vocal presence: 4
Looks identical to Final Audio Type E eartips it has a balanced sound that tames harshness. I find it lacks the smoothness of original Final Audio Type E eartips. This style of eartip is often labeled as “balance” eartip for most stock tips offering.Purchased from BGVP Taobao store

BGVP S01 Eartips
Bore size: Very wide with narrow opening
Stem length: regular
Feel: firm and sturdy
Bass: 3.25
Midrange: 5
Treble: 5
Soundstage: 3.0
Vocal presence: 3.0
A very interesting eartip with an exceptionally wide nozzle and narrow opening. Treble is vastly emphasize with a hint of bass and midrange. Works very well for dull-sounding earphones but make sure you can fit it 6.5mm diameter bore.
Purchased from BGVP Taobao store

BVGP W01 Eartips
Bore size: wide
Stem length: short and stubby
Feel: short and flexible
Bass: 4.0
Midrange: 4.25
Treble: 3.75
Soundstage: 3.75
Vocal presence: 4.5Short stem and wide bore brings nozzle closer to the eardrums thus enhancement in overall clarity and vocal presence, which means stereo image and presentation are slightly more forward. A slight boost in mid-bass is noticeable. 
Purchased from BGVP Taobao store

BGVP Y01 Eartips
Bore size: Very wide with narrow opening
Stem length: regular
Feel: firm and sturdy
Bass: 3.75
Midrange: 5
Treble: 5
Soundstage: 3.0
Vocal presence: 3.0
A very interesting eartip with an exceptionally wide nozzle and narrow opening. Similar to BGVP S01 but with a smidgen more bass. Works well for dull-sounding earphones but make sure you can fit it 6.5mm diameter bore.
Purchased from BGVP Taobao store

C

Canal Works CW Dual Nozzle (CWU-DECM)
Bore size: wide / short cap
Stem length: short
Feel: soft and pliable
Bass: 3.25
Midrange: 4.5
Treble: 4
Soundstage: 3.5
Vocal presence: 3.75
For neutral tonality with slight bass reduction and laid-back vocal compared to SpinFit CP-145. Otherwise both sound quite similar.
Purchased from Japan through a friend

Canal Works CW Single Nozzle (CWU-ECM)
Bore size: small
Stem length: short
Feel: sturdy and firm
Bass: 4.25
Midrange: 5
Treble: 5
Soundstage: 4
Vocal presence: 4.25
Eerily similar to Radius Deep Mount but with slightly less vocal presence and less transparent. Not suitable for bright earphones.
Purchased from Japan through a friend

Canyon Silikon-Eartips ET400 (Bass)
Bore size: wide
Stem length: short
Feel: soft and firm
Bass: 3.50
Midrange: 3.25
Treble: 4.0
Soundstage: 4.50
Vocal presence: 3.0
Canyon is a German company however these eartips are made in China. Interestingly, I find these eartips very pleasing, especially in staging. The ET400 is laid back yet retains imaging scale and focus very well. Although the packaging says “bass”, the ET400 isn’t bassy or rumbly. I would classify it as balanced with a touch of midrange warmth.
Purchased from Canyon Official Taobao Store.

CleanPiece Anti-bacteria Silicone Eartip
Bore size: narrow
Stem length: short
Feel: soft and flexible
Bass: 4.25
Midrange: 4.0
Treble: 3.0
Soundstage: 3.75
Vocal presence: 3.0
An interesting audiophile’s “sanitary” product from Japan, and made in Japan. How true is the anti-bacteria, anti-microbial and anti-virus properties I don’t know (it comes in a plastic “petri dish”) but I do know these eartips roll-off treble and thicken bass and mid-bass. You lose clarity but gain body and smoothness. Recommended for bright and harsh sounding IEMs.
Purchased from Amazon.jp

E

EarrBond Barreleye Blue 
Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: soft with sturdy core
Bass: 3.5
Midrange: 4.25
Treble: 4.5
Soundstage: 4.5
Vocal presence: 4.0
Different from EarrBond New Hybrid series, Barreleye eartips use a sturdy silicone core which give an surprisingly good seal without the squishy feel of foam. Similar to the New Hybrid series, sound is laid back. Barreleye Blue has better clarity, instrument separation, treble extension, stage depth and layering than Barreleye Green and New Hybrid.

However due to its emphasis in the upper-midrange and treble regions, Barreleye Blue isn’t suitable for bright, sibilant or harsh sounding earphones. Group member Vannak Pech described the sound as if “when you apply contrast filter to your image…”.
Purchased from MTMT Audio (Hong Kong)

EarrBond Barreleye Green
Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: soft with firm core
Bass: 4.0
Midrange: 4.0
Treble: 4.25
Soundstage: 4
Vocal presence: 4.5
Different from EarrBond New Hybrid series, Barreleye eartips use a firm silicone core which gives an surprisingly good seal without the squishy feel of foam. Similar to the New Hybrid series, sound is laid back. Barreleye Green adds body and bass punch but it lacks the clarity, instrument separation, treble extension, stage depth and layering of Barreleye Blue. 
Purchased from MTMT Audio (Hong Kong)

EarrBond New Hybrid Design
Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: soft and spongy
Bass: 3.5
Midrange: 4.25
Treble: 4
Soundstage: 4
Vocal presence: 3.25
EarrBond is softer and more squishy compared to other hybrid eartips, thus more comfortable for long-listening sessions. The moment you put them on, they simply disappear into your ear canals. Furthermore, they isolate well too. Sound-wise these are a bit too laid back for my taste. Also, I could detect some sibilance on a some female vocal tracks. In term of wearing comfort and isolation, this win hands down.
Purchased from MTMT Audio (Hong Kong)

Elecom Spare Ear Cap (EHP-CAP10)
Bore size: wide
Stem length: short
Feel: soft and flexible
Bass: 4
Midrange: 4.5
Treble: 4.5
Soundstage: 4.25
Vocal presence: 4.25
The brand Elecom is relatively unknown outside of Asia. These eartips surprised me with their exceptionally good sound and budget-friendly price. For ￥250 or US$2.50, you’ll get 4 pairs of eartips consist of X-Small, Small, Medium and Large sizes. Sound-wise, it is neutral tonality with emphasis in upper-bass and midrange regions (which adds body) as well as in vocals. I rank these higher than SpinFit CP-145 and on-par with Final Audio Type-E (black) eartips. Everybody should get these eartips if they ever come across it.
Purchased from Amazon.jp

Epro Horn-shaped Tips
Bore size: cone-shaped, tempered (4mm nozzle end, 5mm bell end)
Stem length: regular
Feel: soft and flexible
Bass: 4 25
Midrange: 4.5
Treble: 4
Soundstage: 3.75
Vocal presence: 4.25
Made of graphene and unlike most eartips, Epro has a cone-shaped tempered bore of 4mm at nozzle end to 5mm at the bell. It adds warmth, body and texture to vocals It tames harsh and peaky treble exceptionally well too. It DOESN’T roll-off highs and kills the air and ambient like some other foam tips. What I really enjoy about the Epro is that it adds a buttery smooth to the overall sound which make harsh-sounding earphones, such as the KZ ZS6, listenable again.
Purchased from Treoo Singapore

Epro Truly Wireless Horn-shaped Tips
Bore size: cone-shaped, tempered (4mm nozzle end, 5mm bell end)
Stem length: short
Feel: soft and flexible
Bass: 4.25
Midrange: 4.5
Treble: 4
Soundstage: 3.75
Vocal presence: 4.25
Made of graphene and unlike most eartips, Epro truly wireless horn-shaped eartips have a cone-shaped tempered bore of 4mm at nozzle end to 5mm at the bell. It adds warmth, body and texture to vocals. It tames harsh and peaky treble exceptionally well too. Not suitable for bass-heavy earphones.
Purchased from MTMT Audio, Hong Kong

F

FAudio “Vocal” Premium Silicone Earphone Tips
Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: soft and firm
Bass: 3.25
Midrange: 4.75
Treble: 4
Soundstage: 4
Vocal presence: 5
Accentuates on vocal and midrange but it also makes sibilance more noticeable. My favorite vocal eartip is still the SednaEarFit XELASTEC.
Purchased from MTMT Audio, Hong Kong

FAudio “Instrument” Premium Silicone Earphone Tips
Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: soft and firm
Bass: 5
Midrange: 4.75
Treble: 3.5
Soundstage: 4
Vocal presence: 4.25
Very punchy, fun, musical-sounding eartips. Sub-bass is exceptional. Vocal and mids are laid-back. Soundstage is average.
Purchased from MTMT Audio, Hong Kong

Fender SureSeal Tips
Bore size: tapered widebore
Stem length: short
Feel: soft, grippy and sticky
Bass: 4.25
Midrange: 4.0
Treble: 3.75
Soundstage: 3.75
Vocal presence: 4.5
Vastly similar to Azla SednaEarFit XELASTEC, Fender SureSeal offers a more laid-back presentation with balanced sound. Mid-bass is a tad fuller. Soundstage slightly wider than XELASTEC but imaging is less precise. SureSeal does not suffer from the upper-midrange ring that plagues XELASTEC especially with DD-based earphones. Expect dust-magnet. All thermoplastic elastomer eartips require regular washing and sanitizing to prevent ears infection.
Purchased from Amazon.jp.

FiiO Silicone (Balanced Ear tips)
Stem length: regular
Feel: soft and flexible
Bass: 3.25
Midrange: 4
Treble: 3.5
Soundstage: 4
Vocal presence: 3.25
Nice sounding eartips with a toned down bass and treble.
Purchased from FiiO store on Taobao (Mainland China)

FiiO Silicone (Bass Eartips)
Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: soft and firm
Bass: 4
Midrange: 3.5
Treble: 3.5
Soundstage: 3.5
Vocal presence: 4
This is similar to many stock tips like those from TRN.
Purchased from FiiO store on Taobao (Mainland China)

FiiO Silicone (Vocal Eartips)
Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: soft and firm
Bass: 2.5
Midrange: 4.25
Treble: 4.25
Soundstage: 4.25
Vocal presence: 5
These tips cut bass drastically!
Purchased from FiiO store on Taobao (Mainland China)

Filter H270 TPE Eartips
Bore size: regular with grille
Stem length: short
Feel: soft and firm
Bass: 4.0
Midrange: 5.0
Treble: 4.5
Soundstage: 4.0
Vocal presence: 5.0

Is this US$7 per pair Chinese-made TPE eartip comparable to Azla SednaEarFits XELASTEC and Fender SureSeal? I am sorry to say the H270 eartip doesn’t feel and wear like a TPE eartip. Thus, I do suspect it isn’t made of TPE at all. Probably made of silicone at best. Nonetheless, H270 is a very lively-sounding eartip. Bass is quite punchy.

Sub-bass rumble is good. Midrange is crisp and clear. Treble extension is very good. Soundstage and imaging are good. If you can overlook the fact that this isn’t made of TPE like they claimed, this is a pretty decent eartip. In terms of sound, it is closer to SureSeal than XELASTEC. Both eartips have accentuated upper-mids and treble.
Purchased from Filter Taobao official store

Filter H370 Latex Eartips
Bore size: elliptical-shaped, regular with grille
Stem length: short
Feel: soft and firm
Bass: 2.0
Midrange: 3.75
Treble: 3.0
Soundstage: 3.0
Vocal presence: 3.5

This Chinese Filter H370 does remind me a bit of ADV Eartune Fidelity U Elliptical eartip but performs far worse… Yup, in my encyclopedia of eartips this one is pretty bad. First thing you will notice is how boomy and wooly the bass is. It is so bad that it bleeds into the mids. Upper treble is rolled-off, thus lacking a sense of space and openness. All-in-all, the H370 is a dark-sounding eartip with poor technicalities. Comfort-wise is quite good though. What a pity!
Purchased from Filter Taobao official store

Final Audio Type A
Bore size: narrow
Stem length: regular
Feel: soft and firm
Bass: 3.75
Midrange: 5
Treble: 4.0
Soundstage: 4. 8
Vocal presence: 4
Less common than Type E. Let’s call this Type E with a slightly boosted treble and thus lesser bass. As a whole it gives better clarity. The overall tonality remains quite balanced.
Purchased from Amazon.jp.

Final Audio Type B
Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: soft and plush
Bass: 4.25
Midrange: 5
Treble: 3.75
Soundstage: 4
Vocal presence: 4
Less common than Type E. Let’s call this Type E with a slightly boosted bass. Overall sound is more round robust as well. My favorite eartips for diffused-field oriented earphones
Purchased from Amazon.jp

Final Audio Type E
Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: soft and sturdy
Bass: 4
Midrange: 5
Treble: 3.75
Soundstage: 4
Vocal presence: 4
For balance sound. Tame harsh earphones
Purchased from ConnectIT (Singapore)

Final Audio Type E (Clear, Clear/Red) 2020 Edition)
Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: soft and sturdy
Bass: 4
Midrange: 5
Treble: 4.25
Soundstage: 4 25
Vocal presence: 4.5
Sounds cleaner, clearer, brighter and tighter bass than conventional black Final Audio Type E eartip. Improved vocal lucidity. Tonally more accurate as well.
Purchased from Amazon Japan

Final Type E Silicon Eartips for True Wireless (black)
Bore size: regular
Stem length: short
Feel: soft and pliable
Bass: 3.5
Midrange: 5
Treble: 5
Soundstage: 5
Vocal presence: 4
Probably my favorite eartips for true wireless earpieces. These eartips really open-up the sound without adding sibilance or harshness. Bass is tight, controlled, distinct with great texture and clarity. Vocal is neither too forward or backward… Just nice! Currently, my reference to gauge against other TWS eartips.
Purchased from MTMT Audio, Hong Kong

Final Type E Silicon Eartips for True Wireless (clear)
Bore size: regular
Stem length: short
Feel: soft and pliable
Bass: 3.25
Midrange: 5
Treble: 5
Soundstage: 5
Vocal presence: 4
Overall, similar to Final Type E True Wireless (black) but with slightly less bass.
Purchased from MTMT Audio, Hong Kong

J

JVC Spiral Dot (Regular)
Bore size: wide
Stem length: short
Feel: soft and pliable
Bass: 4
Midrange: 4
Treble: 3
Soundstage: 3.5
Vocal presence: 4
For balance sound. Tame harsh earphones
Purchased from Japan through a friend

JVC Spiral Dot SF (Short Flange / Shallow Fit)
Bore size: regular
Stem length: short (shallow fit)
Feel: soft and flexible
Bass: 3.5
Midrange: 5
Treble: 4.5
Soundstage: 4.5
Vocal presence: 4.25
These eartips are meant for true wireless earpieces. These have more bass and vocal presence than SpinFit CP-350 and CP-360. Comparable to Final Type E True Wireless (black) but sound less open and less treble extension.
Purchased from Amazon.jp

JVC Spiral Dot++ (EP-FX10)
Bore size: wide
Stem length: short
Feel: supple and grippy
Bass: 3.5
Midrange: 3.75
Treble: 3
Soundstage: 3.5
Vocal presence: 4
For balance sound. Tames harsh earphones. Cleaner but lesser bass and midrange compared to regular Spiral Dot. Very comfortable for long listening sessions.
Purchased from Amazon Japan

JVC/Victor EP-FX2 (Poor men’s Spiral Dot)
Bore size: wide
Stem length: short
Feel: soft and grippy
Bass: 3.5
Midrange: 4
Treble: 3
Soundstage: 3.5
Vocal presence: 4.25
You get 80% performance of Spiral Dot at 30% of its price. Comfortable for long listening. Good value for money.
Purchased from Amazon Japan

K

KB EAR 10 Silicone Eartips
Bore size: wide
Stem length: short
Feel: soft and flexible
Bass: 3.5
Midrange: 3.75
Treble: 3 5
Soundstage: 3.75
Vocal presence: 4
For balance sound. Tames bass-heavy earphones. Smooth tonality suitable for long listening sessions.Purchased from KB EAR Taobao store

KB EAR A07 Eartips
Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: sturdy and firm
Bass: 3.75
Midrange: 5
Treble: 4
Soundstage: 3.5
Vocal presence: 4.25
Suspiciously similar to Acoustune AET07. Heck… It sounds closer to AET07a than AET07. Neutral tonality with emphasis in midrange and top-end sparkle. I find this eartip to have better bass texture, dynamics and vocal presence than SpinFit CP100 and CP145. The A07 is often labeled as “vocal” eartip for most stock tips offering.Purchased from BGVP Taobao storePurchased from KB EAR Taobao store

KB EAR A08 Eartips
Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: firm and sturdy
Bass: 4.5
Midrange: 5
Treble: 3.5
Soundstage: 3.5
Vocal presence: 5
Suspiciously similar to Acoustune AET08, this eartip adds thickness to bass and midrange. However, unlike Acoustune AET08, I find it a speck bright. The A08 is often labeled as “bass” eartip for most stock tips offering.
Purchased from KB EAR Taobao store

KB EAR “Columbia” Eartips
Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: soft and sturdy
Bass: 4
Midrange: 5
Treble: 3.75
Soundstage: 4
Vocal presence: 4.5
This eartip is worthy of the title “Sony clone”. Sounds virtually identical to Sony EP-EX11M eartip, which my sensitive ears couldn’t tell them apart. For neutral tonality with slight treble roll-off.
Purchased from KB EAR Taobao store

KZ Starline
Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: sturdy and firm
Bass: 3.5
Midrange: 3.5
Treble: 4
Soundstage: 3
Vocal presence: 2.75
Purchased from KZ store on Taobao (Mainland China)

These stock KZ eartips come in two versions. The older version was included with KZ ZS3 and KZ ZS5, etc, were no longer available. They are softer and more pliable compare to current ones. Sound-wise, co-blogger Slater prefers the former. They give smoother midrange and cleaner treble. The ones tested here are the current/ new version.

KZ Starline (reverse)
Bore size: wide
Stem length: long
Feel: soft and grippy
Bass: 3.25
Midrange: 3.5
Treble: 5
Soundstage: 4*
Vocal presence: 3
For bright, clear and crisp sound
*soundstage has more depth and height than width
Purchased from KZ store on Taobao (Mainland China)

KZ Whirlwind Silicone Eartips
Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: sturdy and firm
Bass: 2.0
Midrange: 4.50
Treble: 4.25
Soundstage: 4.0
Vocal presence: 4.50
Similar to Tennmak Whirlwind, these eartips reduce bass and mid-bass significantly. Projects vocals forward with good presence.
Purchased from KZ Official Store on Taobao

M

Marunana 七福神 silicone eartips
Bore size: narrow
Stem length: regular
Feel: soft and pliable
Bass: 4.25
Midrange: 5
Treble: 4
Soundstage: 4Vocal presence: 4.25
Marunana eartips is recommended by a friend who discovered it from a native Japanese audio enthusiast. These eartips are surprisingly affordable (880¥ for 12 pairs!). Great midrange texture and vocal presence. My only nitpick is they tend to cloud the mid-bass a little but it adds body to lean earphones.
Purchased from Amazon Japan

Moondrop Spring Tips
Bore size: wide
Stem length: short
Feel: soft with pliable stem
Bass: 2.50
Midrange: 5.0
Treble: 3.75
Soundstage: 3.50
Vocal presence: 5.0
These originally come stock with Moondrop KATO. First impression is how suppressed the bass and mid-bass are, which thins the overall note-weight and body. Midrange is textured with good details. Vocal is forward with very good presence.

Treble has good sparkle and crisp, however it lacks that last bit of extension and airiness. Great match for earphones with too much mid-bass or has bleeding mid-bass. The caps are too soft in my opinion. They flap over every time I remove them from my ears, which is very annoying.
Purchased from Moondrop Taobao Official Store

O

Ostry OS100 Tuning Eartips (Blue)
Bore size: regular
Stem length: short
Feel: firm and sturdy
Bass: 3.75
Midrange: 5
Treble: 4
Soundstage: 3.25
Vocal presence: 3.5
Sounds 90% identical to SpinFit CP145 but with a touch more bass and narrower soundstage.
Purchased from Ostry Official Store on Taobao (Mainland China)

Ostry OS200 Tuning Eartips (Red)
Bore size: regular
Stem length: short
Feel: firm and sturdy
Bass: 4
Midrange: 5
Treble: 3.25
Soundstage: 3
Vocal presence: 3.5
Similar to Ostry OS100 but with a tad more bass and less crisp in the treble. Quite a balance-sounding eartip. Narrows soundstage.
Purchased from Ostry Official Store on Taobao (Mainland China)

Ostry OS300 Tuning Eartips (Black)
Bore size: regular
Stem length: short
Feel: firm and sturdy
Bass: 5
Midrange: 4.75
Treble: 2.5
Soundstage: 2.5
Vocal presence: 3.5
The most bass-heavy Ostry tuning eartips of all. Also rolls-off treble the most. It adds tightness and punchiness to the overall sound. However, I find them a bit too forward for my taste.
Purchased from Ostry Official Store on Taobao (Mainland China)

Ortofon silicone eartips
Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: very soft and pliable
Bass: 2.5
Midrange: 5
Treble: 5
Soundstage: 4.5
Vocal presence: 4.25
For good midrange, best female vocal, tames bass and brightens treble
Purchased from Ortofon direct (Denmark)

Q

Queen Lab Hybrid Silicone Memory
Bore size: wide
Stem length: short
Feel: sturdy and very firm
Bass: 3.5
Midrange: 5 
Treble: 4.25
Soundstage: 4
Vocal presence: 4 5
Exceptionally good vocal presentations for hybrid. Tighter bass and clearer midrange compared to Symbio W. My favorite hybrid eartip. 
Purchased from MTMT Audio (Hong Kong)

R

Radius Deep Mount
Bore size: small
Stem length: regular
Feel: sturdy and firm
Bass: 4.25
Midrange: 5
Treble: 5
Soundstage: 4
Vocal presence: 4.5
Just like the company’s slogan – Pure Comes True, Deep Mount is the most transparent of all eartips I have tested. Not suitable if your earphone is already bright.
Purchased from Bic Camera (Osaka, Japan)

RHA dual density silicone eartips
Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: sturdy and firm
Bass: 3.5
Midrange: 5
Treble: 4.5
Soundstage: 3.75
Vocal presence: 4.5
These eartips enhance details and stereo imaging extremely well. Tighten bass. Projects midrange and treble frequencies more than some eartips. Not recommended for bright earphones.
Purchased from RHA in UK

S

Sennheiser Momentum Eartips
Bore size: regular with “sound beam”
Stem length: very short
Feel: soft and flexible
Bass: 4.5
Midrange: 5
Treble: 4.0
Soundstage: 3. 5
Vocal presence: 3.5
This is the stock eartip from Sennheiser Momentum series of earphones. It has a bold, thick and robust sound signature with buttery-smoooth upper-midrange and treble. Can sound overly warm and muddy when used on dark-sound earphones. Clarity, soundstage, imaging, and details are average.
Purchased from Sennheiser Singapore

Simphonio Diamond Earfit
Bore size: wide
Stem length: regular
Feel: soft and flexible
Bass: 2.50
Midrange: 5.0
Treble: 4.50
Soundstage: 5.0
Vocal presence: 5.0
This eartip has rhombus patterns stamped around the cap (or umbrella) thus the name “diamond” Earfit. This eartip bears some resemblance to Moondrop Spring Tip, however Diamond Earfit is a bit shorter height-wise. Vocal is forward with very good presence. Midrange and treble feels more open and livelier than Spring Tips. Just like Spring Tips, Diamond Earfit thins bass and mid-bass, reduces note-weight. Skip if you prefer bassier eartip.
Purchased from RoadRunner Taobao Store

Softears Liquid Silicone Ear TipsBore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: soft and grippy
Bass: 3.0Midrange: 5.0Treble: 4.50Soundstage: 5.0Vocal presence: 5.0
Very pricey eartips from Softears. Appearance and texture feel just like SednaEarfit XELASTEC, although it says “Liquid Silicone”. Frankly, I have no clue what liquid silicone is other than those used in aesthetics surgery.

However, I find these eartips sound very much cleaner, clearer and airier than both XELASTEC and Crystal. Midrange and vocal presentation are outstanding. Softears Liquid Silicone does not have the upper-midrange “ringing” that plagues the original XELASTEC eartips. Unfortunately, these eartips attracts dirt and dust just like XELASTEC, so clean them regularly if you decide to try.
Purchased from Softears Taobao Official Store

SonicMemory Cup Tips
Bore size: cone-shaped, tempered (4mm nozzle end, 5mm bell end)
Stem length: short
Feel: medium soft and pliable
Bass: 3.5
Midrange: 4.25
Treble: 4.25
Soundstage: 4.0
Vocal presence: 3.75
An alternative to Epro Horn-shaped Tips. It has an overall softer yet balanced tonality. Bass not as impactful and robust. Vocals don’t stand out as much. Nonetheless, I do enjoy the “air” it gives to the sound. Also, these eartips present slightly wider soundstage and more spacious than Epro. Comes with antibacterial properties added, which is a good thing if you don’t have sensitive skin.
Purchased from SonicMemory Taobao Official Store

SonicMemory Fungus Tips
Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: soft with a sturdy stem
Bass: 4.0
Midrange: 4.0
Treble: 4.0
Soundstage: 3.50
Vocal presence: 3.50
These eartips look like little pink champignon mushrooms thus the name “fungus” tips. A balanced-sounding eartip with emphasis in bass and low-midrange. Vocals sound slightly nasally and laid-back. Treble lacks air and extension. Soundstage is of average width. If you prefer an open and airy sound with wide-staging, do consider its sibling the SonicMemory Cup Tips. Infused with antibacterial properties.
Purchased from SonicMemory Official Store on Taobao

Sony Clear White
Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: pliable and soft
Bass: 4.0
Midrange: 5.0
Treble: 3.5
Soundstage: 4.0
Vocal presence: 4.5
I consider the Clear White an improvement over Sony Triple Comfort. This enhances overall clarity and vocal presence without sounding overly bright or harsh. Top-end sounds more airy. Bass texture improved as well. My only gripe is it isn’t as smooth as I would prefer but this is a small trade off in my opinion.
Purchased from Amazon.jp

Sony EP-NI1000M Noise Isolation Earbud Tips

Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: spongy and sturdy
Bass: 5.0
Midrange: 4. 5
Treble: 3.75
Soundstage: 4
Vocal presence: 5.0

This is the most expensive eartips in my collection as of October 2021. These tips retail for US$20 A PAIR! Yes, you hear that right… Two Hamiltons for a pair of eartips!

Deemed to be a replacement for Sony Triple Comfort (EP-TC50), these are eartips with an attitude. They sound like silicone but seal and isolate like a good pair of foam tips. Extremely comfortable and stable fit.

Are they better than XELASTEC? All I can say is both are very different. If you are always a “foam person”, the EP-NI1000 sounds more lively and open than, say, Comply or Dekoni.

Heard from a friend that these eartips don’t last long, so it is better to keep them dry and away from heat. Purchased from Amazon, Japan

Sony Spare Earbuds EP-EX10A / EP-EX11

Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: soft and sturdy
Bass: 4
Midrange: 5
Treble: 3.75
Soundstage: 4
Vocal presence: 4.5

Neutral tonality with warm mid-bass and slight treble roll-off. Midrange is smooth and laid-back. Ideal choice for bright and lean sounding earphones.
Purchased from ConnectIT (Singapore)

Sony Triple Comfort
Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: spongy and sturdy
Bass: 5
Midrange: 4
Treble: 3.25
Soundstage: 4
Vocal presence: 4.25
For similar to Sony Hybrids but with boosted bass
Purchased from Bic Camera (Osaka, Japan)

Sony Hybrid (discontinued)
Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: soft and sturdy
Bass: 4
Midrange: 5
Treble: 3.75
Soundstage: 4
Vocal presence: 4.5
For neutral tonality with treble roll-off
Purchased from ConnectIT (Singapore)

SPEAR Labs nFORM XTR SERIES 500
Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: spongy and sturdy
Bass: 4.5
Midrange: 4.5
Treble: 3.25
Soundstage: 3.75
Vocal presence: 4.25
An alternative to Sony Hybrids (EP-TC50M). Compared to the Sony, nFORM has a clearer and tighter bass, with forward midrange. Human voice can sound nasally (a common problem with foam-based eartips). Soundstage is narrow and stereo imaging less distinctive and precise. Nonetheless, nFORM is extremely comfortable for long listening sessions. Suitable for bright and lean sounding earphones.
Purchased from MTMT Audio, Hong Kong

SpinFit CP100
Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: soft and flexible
Bass: 3.5
Midrange: 5
Treble: 4
Soundstage: 4
Vocal presence: 3.25
For neutral tonality with emphasis in midrange.
Purchased from Stereo Electronics (Singapore)

SpinFit CP100+
Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: soft and flexible
Bass: 3.5
Midrange: 5.0
Treble: 3.75
Soundstage: 4.0
Vocal presence: 3.75
Slight improvement over the original CP-100 especially in the midrange and upper-midrange. However, I feel the top-end is less airy than CP-100. Bass also lacks a bit of punch and dynamics. The “plus” addendum probably comes from the better portrayal of the human voice. True enough, vocals sound slightly more forward and crispier.

Imaging, focusing, instrument and vocal separation definitely improved over its predecessor. Personally, CP-145 is still my most favourite SpinFit.
Purchased from Amazon.sg (Singapore)

SpinFit CP145
Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: soft and flexible
Bass: 3.5
Midrange: 5
Treble: 4
Soundstage: 4
Vocal presence: 3.5
For neutral tonality with emphasis in midrange and vocal
Purchased from ConnectIT (Singapore)

SpinFit CP155
Bore size: regular
Stem length: long
Feel: soft and flexible
Bass: 4
Midrange: 5
Treble: 4
Soundstage: 3.5
Vocal presence: 4.25
1 mm longer than CP-100 and CP-145, the additional length and bullet-shaped caps of the CP-155 allow deeper insertion to bring more bass and fuller vocal. 
Purchased from ConnectIT (Singapore)

SpinFit CP220
Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular (double flange)
Feel: sturdy and firm
Bass: 4
Midrange: 5
Treble: 4.5
Soundstage: 4
Vocal presence: 4
For neutral tonality with emphasis in bass, midrange and vocal. For clarity and bigger soundstage, choose CP-240.
Purchased from ConnectIT (Singapore)

SpinFit CP240
Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular (double flange)
Feel: soft and sturdy
Bass: 3.75
Midrange: 5
Treble: 5
Soundstage: 4.5
Vocal presence: 4
Exceptional clarity with good treble extension. Soundstage is one of the biggest I have heard. Vocal presentation is forward. Can get sibilant when matched with bright earphones.
Purchased from Stereo Electronics (Singapore)

SpinFit CP350
Bore size: regular
Stem length: short (shallow fit)
Feel: soft and flexible
Bass: 2.0
Midrange: 5
Treble: 5
Soundstage: 4
Vocal presence: 3.5
These eartips are originally meant for TWS wireless earpieces but a friend of mine suggested they are very good at cutting down bass and midbass. Indeed, these are the “Diffuse Field Target-equivalent” of eartips. They clean up the bass.

Reduces mid-bass bloat or muddiness. Upper-midrange is sparkly and treble extension is one of the best I have heard among universal eartips. Vocal is forward with good clarity. NOTE: SpinFit CP-350 has a very shallow fit. Make sure the earphone nozzle length is at least 5mm in order to fit securely.
Purchased from Stereo Electronics (Singapore)

SpinFit CP360
Bore size: regular
Stem length: short
Feel: soft and flexible
Bass: 3.0
Midrange: 5
Treble: 4.75
Soundstage: 4
Vocal presence’ 5
These eartips are meant for true wireless earpieces. If you find SpinFit CP-350 too short, this one fits between regular CP-145 and CP-350. Bass and low-mids are stronger than CP-350. Vocal is forward with good clarity.
Purchased from ConnectIT (Singapore)

SpinFit CP500
Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: soft and flexible
Bass: 4.25
Midrange: 5
Treble: 4
Soundstage: 4
Vocal presence: 4.0
A lesser known SpinFit model. CP-500 gives tighter, punchier bass, better vocal presentation than the popular (and common) CP-100 and CP-145. May add sibilance and harshness to bright-sounding earphonesPurchased from MTMT Audio (Hong Kong)

Symbio W
Bore size: regular
Stem length: short
Feel: sturdy and very firm
Bass: 3.25
Midrange: 4.75
Treble: 3 75
Soundstage: 4
Vocal presence: 3.5
For good midrange, slight treble roll-off
Purchased from Symbio direct (Hungary)

Symbio Orange Peel
Bore size: regular
Stem length: short
Feel: sturdy and very firm
Bass: 4
Midrange: 3
Treble: 4.25
Soundstage: 4.25
Vocal presence: 3.5
Good midrange. Punchier bass, better treble extension and more open-sounding compare to Symbio W.
Purchased from Symbio direct (Hungary)

T

Tanchjim T-APB Air Pressure Balance Silicone Eartips T300T (Treble Enhancing)
Bore size: wide
Stem length: regular
Feel: sturdy and firm
Bass: 4.5
Midrange: 4.5
Treble: 4.5 
Soundstage: 3.75
Vocal presence: 4What’s is T-APB? Simply put it, a hexagonal-shaped internal wall of the nozzle that Tanchjim claims “enhance the comfortness (is there such a word?) by evenly balancing the air pressure inside the ear canal, thus to prevent swelling of the ear canal caused by prolonged use of earphone”

… Marketing aside, the T300T (Treble Enhancing) eartip does pushes some high frequency through but it causes the entire bass spectrum and low-mids to “muddle up”, resulting in a loss of texture and low-end details. Does not go well with “thick-sounding” IEMs but good match for leaner-sounding ones BUT be very careful as it might brighten sound too much. 
Purchased from Hifigo

Tanchjim T-APB Air Pressure Balance Silicone Eartips T300B (Bass Enhancing)
Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: sturdy and firm
Bass: 4.0
Midrange: 4.5
Treble: 4
Soundstage: 4
Vocal presence: 3.75What’s is T-APB? Simply put it, a hexagonal-shaped internal wall of the nozzle that Tanchjim claims “enhance the comfortness (is there such a word?) by evenly balancing the air pressure inside the ear canal, thus to prevent swelling of the ear canal caused by prolonged use of earphone”

… Marketing aside, the T300T (Treble Enhancing) eartip is surprisingly neutral despite the “Treble Enhancing” name tag. I find the vocal slightly laid-back and lower-mids a tad muffled. Otherwise, a good choice for IEMs with diffused-field tuning, such as those from Tanchjim and Moondrop.
Purchased from Hifigo

Tennmak Whirlwind
Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: sturdy and firm
Bass: 2
Midrange: 4.5
Treble: 4.25
Soundstage: 4
Vocal presence: 4.5
Reduces bass and mid-bass significantly. Let vocal shines through.
Purchased from Tennmak Store on AliExpress

TRN Silicone Eartips
Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: flexible with firm stem
Bass: 3.5
Midrange: 3.25
Treble: 3.0
Soundstage: 2.50
Vocal presence: 3.0
Listening to these eartips is like having a thick veil covers the entire frequency spectrum. They simply muffle sound! Bass is clumpy, lacks texture and details. Midrange and upper-registers cover by a layer of haze. Vocal is lackluster and lifeless. Staging is flat and narrow. Imagining is fuzzy. One of the worst eartips I have tested so far.
Purchased from TRN Official Store on AliExpress

W

Whizzer Easytips ET100 (natural)

Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: soft and firm
Bass: 3.75
Midrange: 4.0
Treble: 4.0
Soundstage: 4.5
Vocal presence: 3.5

A very interesting eartip that looks like a toilet plunger. The shape may be odd but the sound isn’t. Balanced, clean and clear tonality that is neither too bright nor too bassy. Seals and isolates well too.
Purchased from OperaFactory Taobao Official Store

Whizzer Easytips SS20 (soundstage)

Bore size: wide
Stem length: regular
Feel: soft and pliable
Bass: 3.5
Midrange: 4.25
Treble: 4.25
Soundstage: 5.0
Vocal presence: 3.5

As the title implies, this eartip improves soundstage, and this isn’t a gimmick. It really adds dimension to sound, giving it a more spacious presentation.
Purchased from OperaFactory Taobao Official Store

Whizzer Easytips VC20 (vocal)

Bore size: regular
Stem length: regular
Feel: soft and firm
Bass: 4.0
Midrange: 3.75
Treble: 4.0
Soundstage: 2.5
Vocal presence: 2.5

Not very good. This eartip clouds midrange and boosts low-mid a bit too much for my taste. Resolution is poor as well. Everything just sounds stuffy and dull. Perfect for bright-sounding IEMs though.
Purchased from OperaFactory Taobao Official Store

Contact us!

RELATED…

The Iconic AZLA SednaEarfit Silicon Tips – Is Their Price Justified? by Jürgen Kraus (2019-12-22)

Announcing The Premium Eartips Project by Jürgen Kraus (2019-10-01)

The Flip Tip: Creating Big Widebore Tips From Reversing Starlines by Slater (2019-09-16)

The post Tweaking Tips – A Simplified Guide To IEM Silicone Eartips UPDATED 2022-05-27 appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Final Sonorous-II and Sonorous-III are in my opinion the absolute best closed back headphones you can buy for less than 500$ (either costing much less than that actually). You can find them stuck on our Wall of Excellence, and reviewed here.

At-a-glance Card

Why and how

Ear pads – their internal structure, size, thickness, and external fabric – do change headphones sound even more than what eartips do to IEMs. And final Sonorous Earpads are no exceptio.

First and foremost, the distance between the actual sound transducers and the ear modulate low frequency sound pressure, which obviously significantly influences the presentation. Based on this fact, final Sonorous earpads are filled with sponges of different thickness and consistency. Their external material is synthetic leather featuring equal horizontal and vertical flexibility. Finally,

Another important aspect when it comes to closed-back earphones is avoiding sound appearing “muffled” due to lack of backside venting. Final accomodates for this by carving small apertures on the inside and the outside of the pads “donuts”, achieving superb results in terms of sound clarity.

Lastly, final Sonorous Earpads feature a quite ingenious system to facilitate swapping. By direct experience it does work. You may want to take a look at the final’s official quick tutorial video to get an idea.

The range

As I mentioned, final Sonorous Earpads are avaialble in 7 different variations. Here are the lineup specs, directly taken from final’s website.

Model	Surface Material	Sponge	Filter	Stock on	Picture
Type A	synthetic leather	thick, strong standard type sponge	single layer	SONOROUS VI, IV
Type B	synthetic leather	thinner/softer sponge compared to Type A	single layer	SONOROUS VI
Type C	synthetic leather	W-shaped sponge combining Type A and Type B types	3 layer	SONOROUS X, VIII
Type D	synthetic leather	thick, strong sponge	3 layer	SONOROUS III
Type E	synthetic leather	thick, strong sponge	single layer	SONOROUS II
Type F	Polyurethane	expanded foam body with superior breathability and special polyurethane fibers	n/d	D8000
G	Polyurethane + Toray Ultrasuede	expanded foam body with superior breathability and special polyurethane fibers	n/d	D8000 Pro

My direct experience

Final of course issues a number of pairing recommendation for each of such models. You can find the entire story here.

That said, I only directly tested the 4 models which are recommended for my 2 Sonorous headphone models (II and III). Here is a recap of my opinions.

So the aftermath is… I could have saved the money for Type C and B, and just swap stock pads between Sonorous-II and Sonorous-III to reach my preferred configuration on both. But how could I have known it without trying?

Conclusions

final Sonorous Earpads significantly contribute to alter and finetune Sonorous headphones.

They are not inexpensive – retailing from ¥ 5810 / € 44 to ¥ 9300 / € 70 a pair – but their build quality is ace and they are a more than solid recommendation for any Sonorous user.

Disclaimer

All the earpads I tested are my own property, they did not come from the manufacturer or a distributor on review/loan basis.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

The post final Sonorous Earpads Review – Easy Rec appeared first on Audio Reviews.

At-a-glance Card

Structure and materials

Already at the very first tactile experience, Yaxi ESP950 Comfort pads present an obvious better aspect compared to the original pads.  Koss’s original pads are covered in cheap-looking (although quite resistant) velour, stuffed with ordinary foam.  Yaxi ESP950 Comfort’s front cover is in Alcantara, and protein leather is used for the outer profile. They are evidently “better” in terms of manufacture, materials selection, softness and haptics. Their size is almost but not precisely identical to the originals, with the latter being a tad (maybe 1mm) vertically thinner, and an even smaller tad thicker in terms of horizontal width.

Installation

There’s I’m afraid little to improve on the installation procedure as far as the Koss ESP/950 goes. Taking away the previous pads is very easy, while installing them requires some patience as the user is supposed to help the pad’s backside outer lip into the housing’s perimetral groove, which does not offer any facilitation for that. Anyhow, it’s not an Everest climb either.

Comfort

Yaxi ESP950 Comfort offer an obviously better wearing experience compared to stock pads. The difference is very significant, not a small upgrade at all. Skin contact is much more pleasing, and suppleness is way superior offering a much more “convincing” feeling of adherance, including when wearing spectacles like I do.

Sound impact

While pyisical comfort is already a definite improvement, the main reason why one may want a pair of Yaxi ESP950 Comfort is no-doubt due to how they make sound quite evidently better.

On stock pads Koss ESP/950 offers clean-ish and lean-ish timber, with an obviously mid-centric presentation, pushing vocals often even too much forward, quite nice unfatiguing but not very detailed trebles and (oppositely) quite disappointing bass: unextended, early rolled off actually, and with an evident mid-bass bump trying (without succeeding) to compensate for that.

On Yaxi ESP950 Comfort the music (literally) changes.

What they technically do is recall mids a bit back from the too forward, unnatural position they take on stock pads, and most of all make midbass faster, and louder.

Talking in less analythical and more horizontal terms, this first of all means that the heaphone’s general tonality instantly swaps to “neutral-balaced”, offering an evidently more pleasing presentation overall.

Thanks to the faster and more bodied bass, and the not anymore “too forward” mids, the general timbre ceases to appear “lean-ish” and gets into clear-natural territory. 

Also, and equally importantly, the achieved superior tonal balance makes soundstage drawing way more “credible”, especially thanks to the evident improvement in depth sensation.

Yaxi ESP950 Comfort do hot have the power to un-roll ESP/950’s sub-bass up, of course, but the entire bass line is I would say enormously much more organic, acoustically natural.

Mids as I mentioned are not “unnaturally ahead of the pack” as before, and in their mid and low part they also greatly benefit from the evidently increased bass weight, resulting in improved mid note weight.

Trebles are also somewhat improved in terms of note weight and organicity, especially the presence segment. While still staying short of getting hot or fatiguing, they do come out “less relaxed” then with stock pads, contributing to the overall obvious improvement in terms of horizontal presentation coherence.

Conclusions

Quite rarely I find accessory products offering such an evident improvement as to fall into “no brainer” territory. Yaxi ESP950 Comfort pads are no doubt one of such uncommon cases. The positive impact they bring onto Koss ESP/950 sound is nothing short of remarkable. This, paired with their very convincing construction quality, and a quick look at the cost of the HPs they apply onto, make their purchase cost an absolute bargain.

Disclaimer

I received the Yaxi ESP950 Comfort earpads courtesy of the manufacturer. As previous mentioned, you can purchase them directly from their website. Very interestingly, their prices do include worldwide FedX shipping.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

The post Yaxi ESP950 Comfort Pads Review – No Brainer appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Cons — Results may vary.

Executive Summary

The JitterBug FMJ (“Full Metal Jacket”) is a small USB-noise filter. It is the better shielded version of the original 2016 device and improves sound quality in most (but not all) situations.

Introduction

Do you know which class of insects the jitterbug belongs to? No? Well, none at all as the jitterbug is a generic term to describe swing dancing, as featured in the 1939 movie “The Wizard of Oz“.

In USB-Audio, “jitter” refers to time delays in the signal that causes packet errors, which degrade sound quality. Solution is that the DAC reclocks the incoming USB signal...to eliminate these time delays.

Unfortunately, the JitterBug FMJ (and its predecessor JitterBug) does NOT reclock (and therefore not remove jitter) as it is a merely passive device that does not draw electric current (it does not remove bugs either). JitterBug designer Gordon Rankin was a consultant to AudioQuest and did not name the device. This name choice has caused a lot of discussions in the past.

I purchased the original JitterBug upon its release in 2016 together with the DragonFly Black 1.5. At the time, I ran the original Schiit Fulla with my MacBook Air – the JitterBug lowered the noise floor and improved the sonic image.

USB Noise

So what is behind the JitterBug idea? It is noise filtering. Goal is to preserve the signal (and therefore sound quality) along the lines.

Noise in computer’s VBUS and data line causes sound deterioration. Three kinds of noise exist, “Electromagentic Interference” (EMI), “Radio-Frequency Interference” (RFI), and switching noise which is usually high frequency (500Khz -> 2Ghz). They may contribute considerable pollution on the signal path and may increase jitter and packet errors. Running both lines through a single USB cable can cause additional interference and exacerbate the issue (so it is best to separate the two).

If the data line is not effectively shielded, nearby electrical components (e.g. switching power supplies, other fluctuating electrical/magnetic fields from computer circuitry) can contribute to EMI that might pollute the USB data.

AC noise is typically audible as added brightness to the music, glare that rides on the sound. The image lacks body and appears somewhat flat. This noise needs to be filtered out. Jitter causes distortion and packet errors that, in the worst case, may be audible as chopped up sound, like a tonearm jumping on the vinyl record.

Many dacs can be powered by the connected computer, but some also have a dedicated power input. This separation of power line and data line eliminates possible interference inside the USB cable now assigned to data flow only.

The remaining data noise is either little relevant and/or can be more easily filtered out, for example with an AudioQuest JitterBug FMJ or the iFi Nano iUSB3.0.

But, for the JitterBug FMJ to make an audible difference requires a “clean” power supply. A “dirty” power source would possibly mask the JitterBug’s positive effects on the data line.

If the dac is powered by the computer such as an AudioQuest DragonFly Cobalt or Red, the JitterBug FMJ has to tackle both tasks, which is not optimal.

A similar situation arises when the DragonFly/JitterBug FMJ combination is connected to a phone. A phone has a lot more EMI as the components are cramped much tighter into a small enclosure compared to a computer. Turning the WiFi and phone functions off will already likely improve sound quality.

The AudioQuest DragonFly Cobalt has JitterBug functionality integrated in its circuit and it was believed that adding an additional JitterBug FMJ would compromise the audio signal. Latest considerations suggest that adding a JitterBug FMJ may actually be beneficial in some combinations. You may want to play with them in all combinations.

What this tells us is that the JitterBug FMJ is not a device that works black and white on the push of a button. It requires some TLC and is therefore not for everyone, favouring the experimentally inclined.

What does the JitterBug FMJ do?

JitterBug designer Gordon Rankin wrote me:

a) It realigns and removes noise from the D+/D- line, so the receiving side sees a much cleaner and more refined data stream.

b) It removes high-frequency noise from the VBUS/GND power supply. Any endpoint, be it a DAC or whatever, already has a low-frequency filter. Those are huge in size, and what really affects a DAC chip’s linearity is high-frequency noise — not low.

c) I put the JitterBug at the host side because I want all that EMI/RFI and other pollution that the computer is spitting out to stay there and not get to the endpoint.

The FMJ furthers (c) into making that work.

Differential noises on a data stream can cause error in reception of fans positive and negative pulses. Reducing or eliminating these by the JitterBug FMJ’s circuitry produces a cleaner differential signal, which in turn avoids catastrophic data-level events that looks like jitter to an analyzer.

What is new in JitterBug FMJ?

The original JitterBug circuitry has not changed but shielding against external noise was added for more efficiency (“Full Metal Jacket”). And AudioQuest added an integrated carbon-loaded USB plug to further protect against external noise. Old and new JitterBug models can be used in combination.

My sonic Impressions

I tested the JitterBug FMJ with dongles (source-operated thumbdrive-sized DAC/amps connected to my iPhone SE,1st gen.), numerous iems, and my MacBook Air, between March and September. The logic behind my setups was the small form factor dongles and JitterBug FMJ – and therefore portability – have in common.

I did not experiment with desktop stacks as there are bulkier, more thorough, and (much) more expensive options that address additional USB issues.

The JitterBug FMJ worked well with most dongles in my testing. It added body/depth and rounded the top end off. The difference is obvious and skeptics should at least acknowledge that the device changes the sound.

The DragonFly Red shows great synergy with the JitterBug FMJ. Without it, the stage is much shallower and the top end is more aggressive. There is less note weight and the sound is leaner. Plugging the FMJ in adds body and depth, and it adds sweetness to the top end so that the sound is less bright. This also reduces the widescreen effect, which is very much outweighed by the benefits.

The JitterBug FMJ also works well with the Earstudio HUD 100, EarMen Eagle, Hidizs S9 Pro, Shanling UA2, and Apogee Groove – and the basic tenor remains the same: reducing brightness and adding body and refinement to the presentation. Without it, the presentation is shallower and edgier.

The FMJ did not do much to the shrillness of the Shanling UA1, which points to this device’s design issue: the glare may be unrelated to noise and may be caused by lack of the device’s digital filtering.

What also did not work for me is getting improvement from a 2nd JitterBug FMJ plugged into the other USB port of my MacBook Air. Maybe, my SSD and the rather modest computer design render a 2nd device superfluous. But I wonder whether it worked if I had an old-fashioned spinning hard drive.

Why does JitterBug FMJ not work for you?

The JitterBug FMJ may not improve sound with a dac/amp with an independent power supply that introduces its own noise. A cleaned-up USB signal competes with the power-supply pollution – which may neutralize the gains.

There may be no benefit when additional interference is introduced from nearby electrical components.

Or the device has such filtering circuitry already built in, such as the ifi Audio Nano BL DAC/amp. And since the Nano can be battery operated, the power is rather a priori.

Or the audio quality is poor to begin with. Or, the JitterBug FMJ works but we do not register the improvement, be it because of our generally poor auditory memory (mine is particularly bad) or out of prejudice.

Experiment for Yourself

The DragonFly Cobalt has some of JitterBug’s filtering technology built in. Until recently, AudioQuest had advised against using both together in series as it could have unpredictable results.

But some users find that JitterBug FMJ and Cobalt used in series creates an improvement in performance.

I tested with my iPhone SE (first gen.), and after endless A/B-ing, if there was a difference, it was insignificant to my ears. And I can report the same for repeating the experiment with my MacBook Air. But there were also no adverse effects. The JitterBug FMJ made a huge difference with the DragonFly Red, in comparison.

Up to you to find out for yourself whether it works with your devices.

Concluding Remarks

JittterBug FMJ removes EMI, RFI, and switching noises – which helps maintain better low level detail because the DAC chip can reproduce information better. It does not remove audio bandwidth noise as that is better left to the DAC.

JitterBug FMJ is not the perfect solution but a handy and affordable one. It does not work black and white on the push of a button as it deals with issues adherent to the specific devices it is paired with.

It is also no miraculous sound enhancer as it does not add to the signal, it just helps minimizing its degradation.

As a net result, it improved sound quality in most of my applications to the point I don’t want to miss it. You can read co-blogger’s KopiOkaya’s take on the JitterBug FMJ here.

I have had lots of fun using and experimenting with JitterBugs since 2016.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

Disclaimer

Two JitterBugs FMJ were provided for my testing by AudioQuest – and I thank them for that. You find the product page here.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

Gallery

The post AudioQuest JitterBug FMJ Review – Quiet Riot? appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Cons — Not cheap; easy to lose.

Executive Summary

The Dekoni EARPLUGZ aim to attenuate ambient noise near-evenly across the frequency spectrum by 21 dB while not completely eliminating it. This is designed for situations where one still wants to stay aware of their surroundings at a reduced volume, such as in (heavy metal) concerts or simply on the bus/train on their daily commute or on the job.

Introduction

Noise is unwanted sound. We are sometimes in situations where ambient noise is getting unbearable. Some of us are sensitive towards low-frequency hums emitted from industrial installations, others cannot handle aggressive high-pitched noise from chainsaws and leaf blowers.

In this article, we are not talking about a device that produces sound but rather one that removes some of it. Noise annoys.

The easiest solution would be to eliminate most of the noise with either noise-cancelling headphones, or, much easier, with industrial-grade foam earplugs. This may work as long as we do not have to be aware to our surroundings, let’s say on the job, or when waiting for grandma’s phone call at home. Conventional earplugs also compromise our sense of balance considerably. I speak of experience as I live on a steep hill that ices up in the winter. Try descending with plugged ears…

Dekoni have teamed up with Lucid Audio and hearing-aid/hearing-protection manufacturer Etymotic Research to offer relief in such situations. The idea was to design small, light, and comfortable $30 “EARPLUGZ” that do not switch the sonic world around us completely off, but rather attenuate ambient noise by 21 dB. The user can still hear their surroundings in full sonic context but at a reduced level. The Dekoni EARPLUGZ are not designed as total noise eliminators, let’s say on airplanes or in bed at night.

Sound pressure level in dB is plotted on the logarithmic scale so that sound pressure doubles every 10 dB. If I calculate this correcetly, the Earplugz remove 75% of ambient noise, and this is claimed to happen nearly evenly across the frequency spectrum. This, if true, is amazing, as the majority of noise attenuating materials fail at very low frequencies.

Applications

The idea is noise attenuation while not losing contact to the surrounding environment, and also to protect our hearing from damage. Find a few applications for the EARPLUGZ that came to my mind. I am sure you can add a few more.

Protection from your own Activities

• Lawn mowing, vaccum cleaning
• Drilling, sawing, sanding, grinding, and other handymen chores

Protection from Activities by Others

• rock concert, movie theatres
• office noise, noisy libraries
• traffic noise, on the bus/train/airplane, at railway stations and airports
• car and motorbike races
• neighbour’s leaf/snow blower, hot tub, air conditioner, parties, barking dogs
• construction noise
• visiting mother-in-law

Physical Things

EARPLUGZ are tiny polycarbonate devices that work with the Gemini line of Dekoni’s BULLETZ foams. In the box, you find 3 pairs of Gemini foams (S/M/L), the pair of clear plastic shells, a somewhat waterproof aluminum case, a carabiner, and a lanyard. The Gemini are slow rebound foams with 3 mm bores that also fit a large number of earphones [BULLETZ fit chart]. They can be rinsed to remove earwax but need replacement every 3-6 weeks, depending on use.

The EARPLUGZ are featherlight and tiny that I do not really feel them at all. I doubt that they are easy to see by bystanders. Little handles allow to pull them out of the ear canals easily.

You find more details on the EARPLUGZ product page.

Testing

I had applied to test this product because I have several uses for it.

First, there is the crazy neighbour on the opposite site of the street who has the most aggressive sounding, high revving, 2-stroke weed whacker. When he cuts his grass, the offensive pitch travels right through our house walls.

Second, the neighbour in the attached home has an annoying air conditioner right by my driveway with a low-frequency hum and an aggressive compressor pitch in the higher frequencies,

And she also has a hot tub on her back deck that causes my (attached) house’s plastic siding to resonate, which results in a low-frequency hum inside my office.

Absolutely horrible after a while when sitting on my desk, as emitter and receiver are stationary, and the monotonous noise is excavating my sanity in the hot tub’s 2-3 hour heating cycles.

So when the first-mentioned neighbour whacked his weeds, recently, I stepped up with the EARPLUGZ. And it rounded the sharp, aggressive corners nicely off. The noise become somewhat tolerable, even at a short distance.

Similar with the air conditioner: the noice became less substantial and the nuisance essentially disappeared….at least for the time being.

The problematic low frequencies of the hot tub (120 Hz) were also not a problem as the noise was not very loud to begin with.

BUT, coincidentally, construction took place in the neighbourhood, ca 100 m away, and the ground was compacted by heavy machinery after water and electricity lines had been connected to a new house. This caused a small earthquake, and the EARPLUGZ struggled with those low-frequency seismic waves…and so did my picture frames…they moved.

On the city bus, I like to sit in the back, no the larger, more comfortable benches… right above the vibrating motor. And yes, it calmed the noise, down, too, although, in “real life”, I am using earphones on the commute.

Concluding Remarks

The Dekoni EARPLUGZ perform as intended in that they round the corners of ambient noise off. They even attenuate the low frequencies on buses and the low-frequency hum at my neighbour’s air conditioner to a tolerable level, and they really took the bite out of my other neighbour’s aggressive 2-stroke weed whacker.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

The EARPLUGZ were provided by Dekoni for my review. And I thank them for that.

Get the EAPLUGZ from Dekoni.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

You find an INDEX of our most relevant technical articles HERE.

The post Dekoni Earplugz Noise Attenuators Review – 2 Efficient Volume Knobs For Your Ears appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Comfortable, light, good build.
Neutralish sound – doesn’t colour frequencies, and potrays the connected IEM as it is.
Excellent sound quality.
Good battery life.
Modular system to allow MMCX and 2 pin options for IEMs.
Strong and easy BT connectivity and range. No dropouts for BT.
Has a mic to take calls.
Volume controller.

Cons:

No LDAC or aptX LL/HD
No charging case.
Hisses with highly sensitive IEMs.
No water proofing.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The NiceHCK HB2 is a bluetooth wireless adapter that has a modular MMCX/2 pin connector, this increases pairing options for detachable IEMs. It has great sound quality, good battery life and excellent connectivity.

SPECIFICATIONS

• Bluetooth version: Bluetooth 5.2 (Qualcomm QCC3040)
• Bluetooth coding: SBC, AAC, aptX
• Wireless range: 10 meters
• SNR: 59 dB
• Playtime: 13 hours
• Charging time: 1.5 hours
• Tested at $79 USD

ACCESSORIES

In addition to the BT adapter, it comes with:

1) Modular MMCX, 0.78mm 2 Pin and NX7 2 Pin types.

• This is the selling point of the NiceHCK HB2! It comes with a unique 3 types of detachable modules, where one can disconnect the module from the BT adapter, so one can use various IEM connector type housing with it – MMCX, 0.78mm 2 Pin and NX7 2 Pin types.
• The modular design is also good in that usually the connector area is the first point to fail after repeated wear and tear, so no biggie buying the detachable modules, rather than replacing the entire device.

2) USB-C charging cable

BUILD/COMFORT

The NiceHCK HB2 is very comfortable, light and ergonomic. I’ve even used it for 10 hour sessions and forgot it’s in use. The wire guides are flexible and they don’t impinge on the ears, even with a mask and spectacles on. The build quality is rather sturdy too.

The NiceHCK HB2 has no waterproofing mentioned in the specs unfortunately. But FWIW, I’ve used it in some slightly rainy conditions and even with gym and exercise for the past 3 weeks and there are no issues thus far, fingers crossed.

FUNCTION/CONNECTIVITY

Holding a long press on the back of the device turns it on. The left and right sides pair up automatically when turned on, and I had no issues with pairing it with multiple BT devices, all devices recognized the NiceHCK HB2 on the spot. Pressing the power button for 5 seconds conversely turns it off.

The buttons for the NiceHCK HB2 work as advertised:

Interestingly, only one side of the NiceHCK HB2 can be used independently without the need to turn on the other side. This can be an option for some who only want one side in the ear for calls, or say if the other side is being charged. One thing to nitpick is that the buttons are quite sensitive, and are located at the rear of the device, so they can be accidentally touched sometimes.

The NiceHCK HB2 has a mic and can take calls, with good sound quality for calls. I’ve tried it on a few online meetings with no complaints from the others in the conferences with regards to voice quality.

I also liked the volume controller on the NiceHCK HB2. In contrast, some BT adapters like the iBasso CF01 have no volume control on it, so if say one is far away from the BT device used to pair with it, one has to physically go over to the device to change the volume, unlike the NiceHCK HB2, which just requires a tap on the housing.

Connectivity is excellent on the NiceHCK HB2, I have not a single drop out whatsoever in the past 3 weeks that I’ve been using them. The BT range is about 10 meters or so, assuming no walls/obstructions are in the path.

The NiceHCK HB2 doesn’t come with a charging case unfortunately, but it takes around 1.5 hours to reach a full charge. Battery life is advertised at 13 hours, I think it is thereabouts ballpark from my testing, but as per most BT/wireless devices, that is expected to go down with repeated charging cycles, and it also depends on the volume one listens at and perhaps the file type (lossless versus lossy).

TECHNICAL ASPECTS

The NiceHCK HB2 uses the Qualcomm QCC3040 TWS chipset. It has BT 5.2 with support for aptX, SBC and AAC, but unfortunately doesn’t support LDAC or aptX LL/HD.

For the purposes of this review, I paired the NiceHCK HB2 with a range of 15 IEMs. From more power hungry sets like the TRI I3 (contains planars) and the KBEAR BElieve (low sensitivity beryllium driver), to some fussier low impedance/high sensitivity multi driver sets like the Audiosense T800 and TRI Starsea.

Pairings:

• Audiosense T800
• BLON BL-03
• BLON Cardinal
• iBasso CF01
• KBEAR BElieve
• Kinera BD005 Pro
• LZ A7
• Oriveti New Primacy
• Tanchjim Oxygen
• TFZ Tequila
• TRI I3
• TRI Starsea
• Westone 3 (MMCX modded)
• Westone W30
• Whizzer HE01

This device packs quite a lot of juice, and it could power the KBEAR BElieve and TRI I3 with headroom to spare. One thing I would have to nitpick, is that there is some hiss noted with high sensitivity type multi BA IEMs like those mentioned above.

One can mitigate the hiss to some extent by lowering the volume on the NiceHCK HB2, and just jacking up the volume from the BT device you are connected to. Generally the hiss also is not perceived when one is outdoors or when music starts playing anyway.

Dynamics are good on the NiceHCK HB2, there isn’t much loss of the subbass, which is a common occurance in TWS/BT sets. There is some loss of the higher treble, but when one uses BT and wireless stuff on the go and outside,

I think it is quite hard to really notice this. I really liked that the NiceHCK HB2 doesn’t colour the sound much, it just faithfully transmits the sound signature of the attached IEM. So far of the IEMs I’ve paired with it, they all sound the same in terms of general FR as the wired version of these IEMs, though of course wired gear in general tends to have better dynamics, microdetails and technical performance.

COMPARISONS

Even among wireless gear, I generally prefer BT adapters (like the TRN BT20S and TRN BT20), rather than TWS stuff, as I’d like to use my favourite detachable IEMs (with famililar sound signatures) on the go, and hence these BT adapters allow me to reuse the IEM. Plus I think that TWS buds are limited sooner or later by the BT tech or battery life (with repeat charges), so at least the IEM can be kept even if the TWS bud dies/gets outdated.

I’ve the TRN BT20 and TRN BT20S and the iBasso CF01 for these BT adapters. The NiceHCK HB2 sound better than these 3 in terms of sound quality/dynamics and also in terms of connectivity. The iBasso CF01 is more expensive, but comes with a charging case.

I’ve had a few drop outs with the iBasso CF01s and there is a shorter connection distance than the NiceHCK HB2. The iBasso CF01 also only features a MMCX non detachable connector, so that limits the IEM types that can be used with it. The iBasso CF01 has no volume controller as mentioned prior.

CONCLUSIONS

The NiceHCK HB2 is a bluetooth wireless adapter that has a modular MMCX/2 pin connector, this increases pairing options for detachable IEMs. It has great sound quality, good battery life and excellent connectivity.

If a charging case was added, this BT adapter would have been perfect, but as it is, I would recommend this set for those that want the convenience of a wireless connection on the go!

Contact us!

You find an INDEX of all our earphone reviews HERE.

DISCLAIMER

I bought the NiceHCK HB2 with a discount from the NiceHCK Aliexpress shop: https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005002848089532.html.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

You find an INDEX of our most relevant technical articles HERE.

The post NiceHCK HB2 Review – Nice, As Per Namesake! appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Of course, there are other solutions, such as USB galvanic isolators (either electrical or optical) and analog devices such as ADUM-chip based isolators but we are not going there… we shall focus on both iSilencer+ and JitterBug FMJ in this discussion. 

DISCLAIMER: I bought both devices AT FULL RETAIL PRICE with my own money. Thus, my verdicts are not affected or influenced by their manufacturers in any way.

Many folks approach this type of accessory with utmost skepticism. There are a few technical forums that have tested these devices with precision audio analysers proving they do nothing, thus labeling them “snake oil”… We are not going to debate that either.

To me, without actual listening, measurements, diagrams, and graphs tell us nothing about sound. Superior technical performance does not equate to musicality.

Both devices do what they advertised… That is to clean up noise and improve sound.

We shall focus mainly on their SONIC PERFORMANCE. 

Equipment used:

• AudioQuest DragonFly Cobalt
• AudioQuest DragonFly Red
• E1DA 9038S G3
• Asus Xonar Essence STU DAC
• Topping E30/L30 stack
• KBEAR BElieve
• Etymotic ER4SR
• TRN MT1 (modded)
• Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon + Foobar2000
• Self-assembled Intel i7/Asus-based desktop PC + Foobar2000
• Redmi Note 9 Pro + UAPP
• Raspberry Pi 4 Model B + Volumio

Both devices are connected at the host end. As Gordon Rankin, designer of JitterBug FMJ, puts it:

“I put the JitterBug at the host side because I want all that EMI/RFI and other BS that the computer is spitting out to stay there and not get to the endpoint.” 

iFi iSilencer+

When I bought the iSilencer+, it was US$10 cheaper than JitterBug FMJ but this has changed since July 2021. Both are priced at US$59.95 now.

iSilencer+ has a plastic housing with a layer of soft rubber-coating. During installation and removal, this housing slides back and forth, which some folks may find annoying.

Compared to JitterBug FMJ, iSilencer+:

• sounds crisp with upper-midrange glare
• more open and airy
• mid-forward but rest of the frequency spectrum are thrown backward
• less bass impact, drab dynamics
• soundstage is one-dimensional
• USB noise reduction not as thorough (just a bit)

AudioQuest JitterBug FMJ

FMJ is the latest JitterBug from AudioQuest. The original had the same circuitry but no shielded enclosure. JitterBug FMJ housing is made of aluminium, feels solid and sturdy. Nothing is loose or wobbly. Size-wise, JitterBug FMJ is thicker and a slightly longer than iSilencer+.

Compared to iSilencer, JitterBug FMJ:

• overall sounds fuller and more 3D
• better dynamics and bass punch
• better depth and instrument separation
• better sense of PRAT
• cleaner, darker background

Out of curiosity and fun, I piggybacked both devices to create the “ultimate USB decrapifier”…

Host > (iSilencer+ / JitterBug FMJ) > Endpoint

Guess what happened? It actually made the sound worse. Everything sounded constricted and bone dry. I also detected slightly lowered volume gain.

So which one do I choose? Well, it depends. Ultimately, it all boils down to synergy. If your equipment is bright and cool-neutral, I suggest you go for JitterBug FMJ. If you own iFi gears, iSilencer+ does improve clarity and make the “iFi sound” less warm (or wooly).

JitterBug FMJ sounds more 3D in comparison, thus instruments and vocals are more distinctive and bodied. iSliencer+ sounds flatter in comparison. Ironically, AudioQuest DragonFly Cobalt matches the iSilencer+ better to me. Both devices filter USB VBUS/GND noise. JitterBug FMJ does it more thoroughly than iSilencer+.

Verdict

Since both devices are priced the same, it depends on availability. To many of us living in Southeast Asia, iFi products are more common and widely available. Those living in North America may find AudioQuest products easier to access.

If I have to rate both devices, I will give iFi iSilencer+ a 7 out of 10 and JitterBug FMJ an 8 out of 10. I prefer the synergy JitterBug FMJ gives to my audio gears.

USB filters are nothing new. Both iFi and AudioQuest have been making them for years. Some may find this kind of accessory unnecessary… To me, these are good to have… They DO affect sound and enhance music enjoyment to some extent. Whether or not you believe in their effects, I will leave it up to you to decide.

Contact us!

You find an INDEX of our most relevant technical articles HERE.

The post iSilencer+ And JitterBug FMJ Review/Comparison – Silence Of The Jitterbug appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Cons — None.

Executive Summary

The ddHiFi Carrying Case C-2020 is a well-made textile-leather carrying case for personal audio gear. It is roomy enough to hold a couple of daps or portable headphone amplifiers plus accessories.

Introduction

I started this blog over 2 years ago, focusing on earphone reviews. This didn’t change much even when we became more authors. But we eventually diversified into esoteric things such as earpads, eartips, earphone cables, even microphones and after-market strain reliefs. We found ways to separate the good from the bad in every possible genre.

When I first talked to Lily at ddHifi, we could not find an item to review. I simply did not see any application for their products. This changed rapidly when I needed an adapter for connecting 2.5 mm balanced cables to a single-ended 3.5 mm socket. I ended up ordering three different ones and was so happy with them that I finally reviewed these two adapters for ddHifi.

And I started liking their stuff. Very much so. Everything by ddHiFi I have touched has turned out to be superb in terms of both functionality and quality. The C-2020 case is no different.

I see the C-2020 carrying case as a challenge for me as a reviewer. Not so much for the written account – other than perhaps conveying the message as compact as the case itself is. No, I was really keen on doing a video on something as exciting as a case – and make the video actually really exciting. You can see the result here:

YouTube Video

Specifications

• Dimensions: 24*17*8 cm
• Weight: 410 g (excluding strap)
• Outer Material: bifilar fabric and Italian cowhide leather
• Inner Lining: polyester and elastics
• Zippers: dual, 2-way
• Straps: 2 (hand and shoulder)
• Tested at: $57
• Product Page: ddHiFi
• Purchase Link: dd Official Store

Physicalities and Functionality

Workmanship is top notch: outer shell material is sturdy and appears to be water repellent, and it is nicely alternating with leather pieces that make the whole case smell good. Really good.

The double zippers appear to be rugged and sturdy. And the inner polyester lining is standard quality. The case can be worn over the shoulder or on the wrist. Wrist strap and shoulder strap are included.

There are two main compartments, a deeper upper one and a slimmer lower one. See images below. From now on I recommend watching the accompanying video as writing the obvious can become a boring read.

UPPER “DEEP” COMPARTMENT: for two bulkier items such as daps/headphone amplifiers and 2 iPod classic shaped devices/phones. The compartment can be subdivided by two dividers attached by velcro to fit any device. Rubber straps attached to the bottom offer additional hold.

LOWER “SHALLOW” COMPARTMENT: for SD cards, cables, dongles, adapters, earphones.

You see the case in action in the Gallery at the bottom of this article.

What My Wife Says

That’s the real test. Somebody hanging out at the Coach outlet store in Las Vegas should know. My wife says about the C-2020 case: attractive; good quality, great stitching, good leather, nice compartments, practical…if this was from Fossil, it would be way above $100. Well, she does not see a reason for carrying strap.

ddHifi C-2020 Case Compared

Oh, these silly comparisons. Louis Vuitton does not offer an audio gear case. And if he, did, we could not afford it. But let’s face it, the amazon basics polyester-padded cardboard box I had before was a piece of junk.

Concluding Remarks

Whatever ddHiFi releases appears to be well thought out, beautifully designed, functional, and built well. The C-2020 carrying case fits this bill. I have been using it to store my portable amps since the day of arrival. For the price of yet another Chi-Fi earphone, I’d rather treat myself to a nice case.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Disclaimer

I thank ddHifi very much for providing this case for the sole purpose of making a funny video – which nobody watches. Thank you very much indeed.

Get the C-2020 carrying case from ddHifi

Our generic standard disclaimer.

You find an INDEX of our most relevant technical articles HERE.

Contact us!

Gallery: Practical Applications

The post ddHiFi Carrying Case C-2020 – Smells Like Teen Spirit appeared first on Audio Reviews.

As I am going deeper and deeper into my audio passion, one of my most “interesting” discoveries has undoubtedly been that an apparently high end, high efficiency IT system (e.g. an hi-tier Laptop) can be quite far from being an ideal platform for an apparently “light” data transfer activity such as streaming digital audio from where its passive containers (the FLAC or WAV files) are, up to a USB-connected DAC.

The first and simplest perplexity an IT enthusiast, or specialist, comes up with when confronted with the above situation is typically a variation of:

“Cmon… A bit is a bit! The PC just has to transfer a digital file to a digital device, via a digital interface. Don’t tell me you ‘hear’ deterioration in the process as there can’t obviously be – data will not deteriorate!”.

Of course it’s exactly like that. A bit is a bit, and the very same bits stored into (say) a FLAC file onto the PC’s hard disk will reach the externally connected USB DAC once sent over. No doubt. No error. Too bad that this is not the point.

Cables as trojan horses

DACs are devices supposed to take such digital data (FLAC or whatever files) and convert their contents “on the fly” (i.e., while still receiving them one little chunk at a time) into analog data (i.e. the music we all want to enjoy). So far so logic. The problem is that a few unobvious caveats apply.

First of all it’s important to understand that while EMI (Electro Magnetic Interference) and RFI (Radio Frequency Interference) investing, say, a laser printer while printing a Word page on paper is not going to significantly (or at all) change the quality of a 600 dpi printed text, DAC chips and the rest of the circuitry around them will greatly change their behaviour, and ultimately reproduce “different sounding music”, when subject to EM/RF (and other) perturbance.

And no, it’s not enough to protect (“shield”) the DAC against perturbances in the human audible frequency ranges (20-20.000 Herz give or take) because this is not “only” about preserving the DAC’s job result after it obtained it, rather it’s about making sure the DAC is not “disturbed” while it’s doing its job.

The bad news is in facts that DAC chips, and the electronics “around” them inside their box are sensible to frequencies up to a few Giga herz (!), sadly coming from a virtually infinite spectrum of possible origins.

“Well then this is mostly about properly shielding the physical DAC box, so any possible “waves” polluting the environment near my DAC will not get in, no? Is this why I often read that a desktop device will most often be better than a mobile one?“

Sadly, no.

Or yes, of course you would want a “nicely shielded dac box”. That’s quite logical. But that’s not enough.

Seriously pernicious interference (“noise”) can first of all come from the DAC’s power supply itself. Converting from Alternate Current (supplied by the wall outlet) to Continuous Current (required by the DAC electronics to work) creates in general (let me simplify here) a lot of “side effects”, which are nasty for our DAC, and are transported into it by the very electrical cable which is needed to feed it with the “good part” of its required power.

Ideally, we would want:

1. a “side effect free” Power Transformer, to generate an as apriori-pure CC as possibile, and
2. shielded power transport cables to avoid “collecting noise on the go”.

Furthermore: the USB cable is another trojan horse for noise – and the more so if the same cable is used to carry both data and power into those DACs that do not have a separate input port for an independent power supply.

A PC 99.9% of the times has not been designed with audio-grade EMI/RFI prevention in mind, for the simple reason that it won’t be required by 99.9% of its uses. All sorts of “bad waves” (I’m again vulgarising here) do happen inside the PC, and do indeed propalate out via any connected electrical conductor – there surely included the USB cable, the same on which our “a bit is a bit is a bit” data is unawarely travelling.

Timing is vital

Should the above (vulgarised) scenario be not enough, there’s even more to take care of. Again, I’ll make this a bit simplistic but give me some rope here, or wordage gets too complicated it all’d get even worse

Data communication between a PC and another PC, or between a PC and a HD for example, are designed to be “as quick as possible”, while not necessarily “as time-regular as possible”.

While saving your Word file from your PC memory to your HD the actual writing speed might vary during the process as a consequence of many factors (your PC doing something else at the same time, the HD receiving other files at the same time, the HD speed recalibrating following thermal variations, etc etc etc). When that happens, your file will save like one tenth of a second faster or slower. Who cares.

In a very bad case a peak of interference will force a data packet retransmission: a full second might be lost in the process (how bad!…). What really matters though is that no quality difference will be there at the end: our file will be “perfectly intact” on the HD.

Not the same applies when the “receipient” is a DAC.

Audio devices require to receive digital data on a perfectly timed schedule. Otherwise (guess what?) the DAC being unable to autonomously correct such schedule, it will convert data at the “irregular” pace with which it receives them, and the result will be “different music” than expected.

Data flow into the DAC must follow a sort of atomic-clock-precision “metronome”.

Now guess what else: when you connect an external DAC to a PC via USB, the default choice is using the PC’s internal “metronome” (called “Clock”), which – you know that by now – is sub-par for our audio purposes as it never was designed with the level of accuracy, and never equipped with those pace-granting gimmicks a DAC desperately needs.

Furtherly, even when the PC and the DAC “somehow manage” to adopt an adequately reliable clock to keep data flow pacing as regularly as the DAC wants, internal PC EMI/RFI can – and will – screw timing up every now and then anyway. And, DAC chips in general don’t come with built-in “circuitry” capable to correct such “hiccups” on the fly.

Lastly: as pacing is so important each DAC has its own independent metronome clock generator inside, used to master the timing of all its internal operations. A similar little device (“oscillator”) than the one used inside the PC generates that, just a more precise (and expensive) one. Too bad that such device is an electrical device like all the rest inside there, so should inbound power supply be not perfectly clean… yes, you guessed it

What a mess. What can we do?

Well very simply put what I just tried to say until now tells us that first and foremost a “generic” IT system (a PC, a Laptop…) is for a number of reasons far from being an ideal choice as an “audio player” when audiophile-grade results are wanted.

To solve the problem there are three possible conceptual approaches

1. Adopt more “audio-adequate” systems as digital players, and/or
2. Adopt “higher tier” audio devices (DACs) equipped with appropriate “noise countering” circuitry, and/or
3. Adopt additional devices, stacked “in between” the digital player and the DAC to “correct issues” on the go

A super-simple example of type-1 approach is using a battery powered device as digital player: it will infacts apriori have less power-originating noise as it will not require a power transformer (although careful here: batteries are not totally noise-free either… but let’s not overcomplicate the story now).

Always in the type-1 area: stay away from general purpose PCs, even more so if they are beefed-up gaming rigs. Every single chip on the motherboard is a potential (and effective!) source of EMI/RFI and of time-pacing perturbance.

Even on “simpler hw” machines then gaming rigs the more different stuff the operating system is asking the hw to do while sending data out, the worse for our case. Using an appropriate SBC (Single Board Computer) class device driven by a stripped-down OS where only the essential processes to our special case are kept alive is a technically much healtier – if technically steeper – path to follow for best results given the situation.

A DAC offering the possibility to get power from an independent, audio-quality Power Supply instead of sucking it from the host via the same USB cable used for data is then the first and simplest example of type-2 approach.

DACs capable of inverting the default master-slave USB protocol, and play the “host” role themselves while receiving USB data from the host are another. And so on.

An example of a type-3 approach is an iFi device I purchased a few months ago, called Nano iUSB3.0

Nano iUSB 3.0

Nano iUSB3.0 is an apparently unassuming silver “box” to be installed “along” the USB line, right in between the Digital Player (my Laptop, in my case) and the DAC.

As the name suggests, Nano iUSB3.0 support is limited to DACs getting their input data from a USB cable, and can’t be used on SPDIF inputs instead. It comes with its own power supply too. And, it serves 3 main purposes

1 – Nano iUSB3.0 provides clean(er) power

Let’s consider a DAC receiving both data and power from the USB cable. In such case I’ll connect the DAC to Nano iUSB3.0’s “Data+Power” output port. Nano iUSB3.0 injects the clean(er) power coming from its own clean(er) power supply in there, while at the same time cutting the link with the dirty(er) power coming from the host.

Alternatively, if our DAC can be separately fed USB data and 5V DC power from 2 separate ports, I’ll connect the DAC’s power port into Nano iUSB3.0’s “Power only” output port. Nano iUSB3.0 will deliver my DAC the power coming from its clean(er) power supply, furtherly “cleansed” by its own internals.

iUSB3.0 comes bundled with iFi’s iPower, a decent-entry-level audio-grade SMPS (Switched-Mode Power Supply). It can of course be furtherly upgraded by “simply” adopting further quality power supplies, such as iFi’s own iPowerX, or any suitable (9V) third party SMPS or Linear PS.

Mind you: a higher quality PS may, that alone, cost a few times the price of a full stack…

2 – Nano iUSB3.0 actively cancels (a lot of) incoming electrical noise

The concept is quite similar to Balanced analog lines: a second signal is generated identical to that of the incoming electrical noise, but in the opposite phase; the two signals are then “summed” together, which cancels the noise leaving the “good” part intact. iFi Audio calles the technology Active Noise Cancellation+^(R).

According to better engineers than myself iFi’s approach is significantly better than cheaper “passive filtering” alternatives, which act on mid + hi freqency interference only. Active filtering acts on lower frequencies too. 

According to iFi, this technology only inside Nano iUSB3.0 is responsible of reducing output noise floor by > 40dB (> 100x).

To give some indicative numbers, a standalone SMPS like iFi iPowerX has a declared DC noise floor of 1uV, same league as the direct competitor Allo Nirvana SMPS. Nano iUSB3.0’s DC output features 0,5uV noise floor instead.

3 – Nano iUSB3.0 “fixes” the USB data stream

Nano iUSB3.0 re-clocks, re-generates and re-balances the USB data signal. What does that mean?

As mentioned above, precise timing is a relevant factor when digital audio data (e.g. a FLAC song file) is streamed between a “host” (a PC) and a digital audio device “client” (our DAC), and sadly the host’s clock is not adequate to properly take care of this.

Nano iUSB3.0 reverses the Host/Client clock relation : it uses its own internal clock – Re-Clock^(R) – to “pace” the stream incoming from the PC removing undesidered frequency variations (“jitter”) and other stuff.

Secondly: the presence of possible DC offsets between the two ends of an USB communication channel – e.g. due to ground loops, or to EMI – is another potential source of inconsistencies. Nano iUSB3.0 corrects – Re-Balance^(R) – DC level differences at the two ends of the USB line to prevent these issues.

Finally, again as mentioned above, if there is “noise” (interference) down a USB line then some digital data packets will get disrupted, and a retransmission of those packets takes place between the devices. If the receiving device is a digital audio device a retransmission for error correction screws timing up (much, much more than “simple” clock jitter of course!). Accurate data will still reach the destination, but not “on time”.

Nano iUSB3.0 rebuilds – Re-Generate^(R) – the entire USB data stream from scratch, “cutting the rope” with inbound packet noise and providing the DAC with a “full-renewed”, correctly timed stream of digital data.

Last but not least: Nano iUSB3.0 does all this at USB3 speed (5 Gbps), which means it can process on-the-fly digital data streams up to the maximum resolutions currently supported by TOTL DACs.

So much for the technology. But does it actually work?

Hell yeah !

I put Nano iUSB 3.0 up in between my laptop and two totally different level USB-powered “dongles”: Meizu HIFI DAC Pro and Apogee Groove.

The improvement when listening to the cheap Meizu HDP is nothing less than huge.

The difference is very apparent on Apogee Groove too, although percentually lesser. Groove already incorporates high-end (for its class and size) dejittering technology, so Nano iUSB3.0’s impact is “mainly” about USB data stream “fixing”, and power cleansing.

At a higher or more modest level, depending on how much of its tech is already incorporated into the DAC the overall sound quality output induced by plugging Nano iUSB3.0 into the chain is evident.

Low tones are where the effect is more perceivable: back instruments and vocals suddenly gain better readability. The sound fuller, but at the same time more controlled, punchier and structured.

On the extreme, listening via Meizu to a well mastered song with “silent moments” on one channel I would normally say such silence is “quite silent”. Then I connect it through Nano iUSB3.0… and I find out that such supposed “silence” did in fact have “some sound” – as in “pressure felt on the timpanus” – before, which is now gone.

On Groove, sans Nano iUSB3.0 the same “silent moments” are nearly on par with those reproduced by Meizu + Nano iUSB3.0, while stacking Nano iUSB3.0 behind Groove I perceive further de-pressure, and some very faint sounds (e.g. a performer moving) get audible, or more audible, which were covered before.

Powering Groove via Nano iUSB3.0 generates a whiff higher SPL accross all frequencies (music comes out a bit louder), whilst perceivably reducing the high/low tones gap. In more vulgar words this means that without Nano iUSB3.0 a song lead vocals and instruments are presented by Groove at (say) SPL=10, and back guitars at SPL=5, while by adding Nano iUSB3.0 I will have front lines at 10.5 and back lines at 6. Everything is a little bit louder, but low tones gain more than high ones. This of course grants further clarity and detail to back-line voices.

As I mentioned already, effect on bass frequencies is better control and texture. Again, on Meizu the difference is literally from night to day. On Groove, which is already making masterful bass control a main cipher of its art, this equates into further bass texture – of which I’ll always be thirsty anyway.

On trebles significant more crystallinity is offered. On some tracks, and on bright-leaning drivers, this is even more apparent and may lapse into somewhat unforgiving output (the IEM tuner’s art will show here… if some has been applied, that is…).

Soundstage: improves not much in term of size rather in terms spatiality. Final E3000, for example, being already a blessed IEM on that respect, now allows me to better guess the room size / shape. Sound is more “coherently around me”.

Imaging: not only instrument positioning is furtherly palatable in a “more clearly lit” stage, as it sounds logical, but some instruments also appear better reciprocally spaced.

OK, it works. But…

Do I really need it ?

That’s a significant question and – in less then a thousand words – it depends on the current stack status.

By direct expericence Nano iUSB3.0, or “part of it”, is needed if

1. The DAC is host-powered only (i.e., it gets powered via the VBUS bit within the USB cable connecting it to the host, and cannot accept power from a separate port), and/or
2. The DAC is non-pro class (not even low-end-pro-class), and lacks all or most USB-noise prevention / suppression features, and/or
3. The host (i.e. the device from which the digital stream is coming) structurally generates a lot of USB noise in the first place. Simply put the more hw&sw-complex the system is, the more “noisy” it will be.

Again, let’s take my specific case as a practical example. At home I have two “stable audition positions”: my desk, and my nightstand.

On my desk the host is represented by my Laptop, and my reference DAC is an Apogee Groove. This ticks #1 and #3 in the list above. Due to Groove internals #2 is a lesser priority, although still significant.

On my nightstand the host is represented by a Raspberry PI model 3B+, powered by an iFi iPower PS, and the DAC is (another) Apogee Groove. There, #3 is in a much better situation vs the desk PC alternative: Raspberry 3B+ is an enormously simpler system compared to a laptop, hw circuitry on the motherboard is much less, and less noisy; its operating system can be (and in my case indeed is) stripped down to the sole parts needed for the specific task its going to cover; it’s indeed powered by an entry-level nevertheless audio-grade PS like iPower; and a few other minorities.

If I connect Groove natively onto the Raspberry first, and I subsequently try via the Nano iUSB3.0, I can indeed hear improvement but to an evidently lesser extent compared to the desktop host case.

Correspondingly, I didn’t expect much, if any, benefit from interposing Nano iUSB3.0 between a battery driven transport e.g. a DAP’s USB-DAC-out and the Groove, or even the Meizu HD Pro dongle. And in facts that’s precisely that happens. Yes there is some improvement but a battery driven DAP doesnt generate big USB noise in the first place, and provides a much more “clean” VBUS power… you just cant fix what aint (totally) broke can you. A little (little!) bit more of difference is (maybe) there when the host is an android phone but still…

…All of it ?

The good with multipurpose multifunction devices is that with just one cost and one item you “do it all” or most of it. On the flip side these devices are not cheap in general – and Nano iUSB3.0 is no exception! – so a situation where only one of its features would really be “needed” may be a problem.

To make things even more difficult the device I got is called “Nano iUSB3.0” and has been discontinued last year, iFi replacing it with its “doubled-up” sibling called Micro iUSB3.0. Very similar internal features, just 2 of each outputs: 2 clean USB data & power out, 2 extra USB power-only out, and one other more feature. All for a quite sensible €500-ish pricetag. Not a bag of chips…

So, do I (we) really need “all or nothing” ?

Indeed the market offers the various features inside iUSB3.0 in form of “unbundled” devices. Again, the unbundled approach will be more money efficient when just one or two features are required, less efficient when you need them all.

Let’s make some examples.

ifi Micro iUSB 3.0 is actually Nano iUSB3.0 bigger brother. “Bigger”, first of all, in the sense of “double”: it features dual power+data and dual power-only output ports, instead of 1+1 as offered by the Nano. In addition to that, Micro iUSB is even more effective on clean DC power delivery: it’s output noise floor specs on 0.1uV instead of 0.5uV as the Nano does. Finally, Micro iUSB3.0 offers one more important feature which is Ground Loop killing.

iFi iPurifier3 is the name of iFi’s “standalone” device doing “just” USB rebalance/reclock/regen and Active Noise Cancellation on the VBUS pin. This may be a good choice for example if the DAC features a separate power supply port, and it is already equipped with a high end power supply – in such case it’s the data line that needs to be taken care of “only”. Attention: iPurifier3 only supports output rates up to USB2 High Speed (480Mbps), which means it will top out at 24bit 192KHz digital resolution (or maybe a bit more: some better assessment would be worth on this one).

iFi SPDIF iPurifier2 is the name of a similar device to iPurifier3, taking care of SPDIF coax connections instead of USB ones.

iFi iDefender+ is iFi’s smart USB “passthrough” adapter, with 2 inputs and 1 output. Put it in between the host and the DAC and it will kill ground loops by implementing the same trick included into Nano iUSB3.0. Additionally, feed iDefender+’s side-USB port with power coming from a better PS (e.g. iFi iPower, iPowerX or iPower Elite, Allo Nirvana, Shanti, or even a super lownoise battery pack!) and iDefender+ will pass that cleaner power to the DAC instead of the power stream coming from the host VBUS bit.

Unlike Nano iUSB3.0, iDefender+ will not furtherly filter the power coming from the side-PS cleaner, though. So no Active Noise Cancellation in there. Finally, iDefender+ supports USB3 Super Speed rates (5 Gbps).

iFi iSilencer+ is a sort of “simpler iPurifier3”. It applies REbalance to the USB data stream (but no REclock nor REgen), thus already reducing jitter quite a lot, and Active Noise Cancellation onto the VBUS power bit. Probably due to not getting involved into REclok/REgen, unlike iPurifier3, iSilencer+ supports USB3 Super Speed rates. I guess it can be considered a very interesting entry-level option, and I would be curious to assess how it pairs with an iDefender+ upstream.

Audioquest Jitterbug is supposed to be a furtherly simpler iSilencer. It does passive EMI/RFI filtering and jitter suppression. No Active Noise Cancelling on the power line.

Uptone ISO Regen is supposed to be a “similar” competitive alternative to iUSB3.0, with the one major additional built-in feature (galvanic isolation) on one end, and some lacking differences on another.

And finally iFi Nano iGalvanic 3.0 is in its turn supposed to be ISO Regen’s direct competitor, featuring galvanic isolation, USB reclock/reblance/regen executed both before and after the isolation, USB3 Super Speed (5 Gbps) support, and an internal high end power transformer – but unlike Nano iUSB3.0 no Active Noise Cancellation nor an input for a higher-tier Power Supply.

I didn’t personally test any of such alternative devices (yet), I’m just mentioning them here to give a quick idea of the possibilities to be assessed. Talking about iFi ones, based on them incorporating the same technology found inside my Nano iUSB3.0 I am let’s say reasonably confident about them being equally effective, each for its own bit of course.

My reference DAC (Apogee Groove) is very well equipped for USB noise filtering, but – also given its very small physical size – simply can’t possibly do much in terms of power filtering. So if I were to restart from scratch, in terms of investment min-maxing I’d probably bet on taking care of the powering part first (e.g. by means of an iDefender+ paired with an Allo Nirvana, or even a Shanti PS). Subsequently, I might want to add an iSilencer or a more expensive (and complete) iPurifier3 to help Groove on USB data line “upstream correction” too – also helped by the fact the Groove itself is limited to USB2 High Speed rates.

So why did I get a Nano iUSB3.0 instead? Honest: just luck. The Nano package having recently been discountinued by iFi in favour of the dual-sized (and dual-priced!!) Micro package, this triggered a stock clearance sale from my local disty last year whereby I could harpoon a Nano iUSB3.0 for less than the regular price of an iDefender + iPower… How could I have left it there?

Our generic standard disclaimer.

Contact us!

The post iFi Nano iUSB3.0 Review – Clean The Stream Up appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Cons — Effect depending on individual system setup: requires trial and error; additional USB line-cleaning may be needed to show positive effects; inconsistently priced (cost prohibitive in Canada); fixed cable; no on-off switch.

Executive Summary

The $49 iPower and the $99 iPower X are low-noise switching mode power (SMPS) supplies that filter out electromagnetic and radio-frequency noise which deteriorate sound quality. In my rigorous tests, the ifi Power X delivered better sonic results than the iPower, which was approximately on par with my budget linear power supply; and all of them were far superior over two generic power supplies.

Introduction

You are in for an interesting read. When I signed up for this experiment, that is testing these “audiophile” power supplies against snake oil claims by others, I didn’t know what I was getting into. At the time, I was not considering that the audio signal can be deteriorated by SEVERAL noise sources, including power supply and computer USB. I had to isolate the effect of the power supply. Improving the digital-audio signal through the power supply alone is insufficient.

Before offering fixes, we will have to talk about the noise sources individually.

Kinds Of Power Supplies

A power supply is a transformer that connects the AC grid with the low voltage circuit of a device, let’s say a dac or an amp. The electricity coming out of your mains contains electromagnetic interference (RMI) and radio-frequency (RFI) interference, the amount of which depends on where you live. It will be worse in a city apartment building than in a house in the country.

There are two kinds of power supplies, switching more power supplies (SMPS) and linear power supplies (LPS). Both kinds principally work with your audio device.

The power supplies that come with your phone or notebook computer are SMPS. These are generally cheaper and (be it directly or indirectly) “noisier” than LPS in that they switch on and off very fast, which causes serious noise in the audio band – unless sophisticated filtering is used. Basic SPS will deteriorate the audio signal.

An LPS is typically less noisy as it provides constant signal and voltage power. However, bigger transformers are better than smaller ones (although they may measure the same), and they can be very expensive (and bulky). Such big LPS are probably only economic for very expensive gear.

That said, not all LPS are better than an SMPS. A “Maserati” SPS will be performing better than a “Fiat” LPS. ifi Audio claims to have produced “low noise” SMPS in their $49 iPower and their even “quieter” $99 iPower X. Although these devices appear expensive, their pricing is small compared to a big LPS, and they are a relatively cheap solution for power-line noise. Sonic improvements depend on the connected audio device. It appears that quality improvements are also correlated with price. And you can spend $$$$ on a good LPS.

USB Noise Explained

Let’s assume for a moment, your dac is powered by your computer’s USB port. The computer delivers “noisy power” and a poorly timed data stream (“jitter”; a dac wants well-timed data stream) caused by EMI and RFI through its VBUS and data line, respectively. A computer’s power supply is not designed with noise reduction in mind and the various computer internals are noisy, for example a hard drive (SSD is quieter).

Both jitter and noisy power contribute to the deterioration of the audio signal. And if both are transferred into the dac via an inferior USB cable, there is additional interference between power and data lines…which exacerbates the problem. That’s why you need a well-made, well-shielded, well-isolating USB cable, too.

A dongle dac-amp is exposed to all these noises whereas most designated dacs have the option of a separate power supply. Separating power and data lines improve dac behaviour and there is no need to clean the computer’s VBUS noise.

In any case should be dac’s power cable be as far away from interconnects as possible. Because of its relative high voltage, it creates a stray electromagnetic field that is picked up by the lower-voltage interconnects and audio cables, which can also effect sound adversely.

The data line can be cleaned by using an asynchronous audio transport: the data packets from the computer are timed/clocked in the dac. As a rule of thumb, the more powerful a computer is (that is the more internal components is has) the more noise it will make. Simpler computers will be quieter. On the other hand, if you already have a clean LPS, you only have to clean the USB data line. For this purpose, I have the Audioquest Jitterbug. Co-blogger Alberto Pittaluga uses the ifi Audio nano iUSB 3.0 and reports good success.

In the end, the amount to noise and therefore the amount of required cleaning depends on the device. Some may not need much cleaning at all.

What Improvements Are Expected?

As a rule of thumb – call it a hypothesis for us to test: a headphone amplifier is more affected by the power supply (some claim 70% of sound quality depends on it) and a dac more by the data-line quality. Consequently, an amp benefits from a good PS whereas a dac benefits more from a clean USB source (but clean power is also important for proper clock detection). The effects of a high-quality power supply can be “overwritten” by a dac’s distortion (poor dejittering/resyncing/rebalancing).

This is a bit unfortunate for my testing as the borrowed iPower/iPower X supplies are laid out for 5 V and therefore for my dacs (integrated dac-amps), whereas my dedicated headphone amps need 12V.

Testimonies of the benefits of power supplies range from a “cleaner signal, better details, better transients” to improved stereo image and bass, better vocals quality” on the blogosphere. Co-blogger Biodegraded, reports better textured and more extended bass and a quieter background throughout in his headphone amp. Co-blogger KopiOkaya owns and tested several LPS and also reports differences in dynamics. Some cheap PS sound “uninspired”. Co-Blogger Kazi Mahbub Mutakabbir tested the ifi Audio Zen can and had to purchase an iPower X to get the sonic results he expected from it.

The credibility of real listening experience [I believe my co-bloggers] is unfortunately contaminated by “expectation bias” and the usual bla bla by some YouTube “reviewers”, as well as by some “objectivists” who dismiss such devices on the grounds of measurements that are unrelated to sonic performance. Some people even report sound deterioration using clean-power supplies. Others describe dc leakage contamination when the iPower X shares mains with other devices – or perceive the sound change, but not necessarily to the better.

In summary, you really need to have patience and apply trial and error. If you are a black-and-white kind of person, dabbling in power supplies and usb cleaners is not for you.

Physicalities Of The ifi Audio Power Supplies

Both supplies are wall warts, the iPower more so an ordinary looking one than the fancier, illuminated iPower X. The Power X comes with all possible accessories (including worldwide adapters), as you see on the photo, whereas you have to purchase some of these for the iPower X. In both cases, the connecting cable is fixed to the body – and cannot be replaced.

What ifi Audio Claims

ifi Audio give little details on the technology of their two power supplies. It is claimed that the iPower X cancels all EMI and FMI coming in from the mains. Mid- to low-frequency noise is removed in the fashion of a noise cancelling headphone: it is countered with out-of-phase electrical noise so that both cancel each other out. High frequency noise is removed with passive filters.

The iPower is considered to be 20 times quieter than audiophile linear power supplies.

You may want to visit the respective product pages for further information:

Test Setup

In order to test the iPower and iPower X supplies effectively, the power supply noise has to be isolated from other noise sources. For this purpose a music source without significant or no USB noise is used. This can be a CD player (through the S/PDIF output), and to a lesser extent, my computer with a rudimentary USB data-line cleaner. My test setup was:

• Different 5V power supplies: iPower, iPower X, BRZHifi LPS, Apple 12V SMPS (from 2012 iPad), generic Baseus charger SMPS, Tzumi power bank (battery)
• Source NAD CD player with S/PDF connection
• Integrated dac/amp 1: Kadhas Tone2 Pro [S/PDIF input used]
• Receiving end: Moondrop Blessing 2 Dusk:crinacle and Anew X One

This setup delivered uncompressed CD data and, obviously, zero USB noise.

Test Results

To take it away, the iPower X delivered the best results by far. Differences to the other power supplies were not only just audible or nuances, no the iPower X was way ahead of the pack.

I started with the Apple SMPS, a 12 V charger for my 2012 iPad. Apple power supplies have a very good reputation, but they do not regulate mains noise, but, to my knowledge there’s some filter inside – Apple are tight lipped about the details. After all, it is designed to charge and power gear. In terms of sound, there was lots of harshness and lack of coordination in the Moondrop. Spatial organization was all over the place. It sounded unruly and edgy and the sound did not do justice to the Khadas T2P and Crinacle’s impeccable tuning of the Moondrop.

The iPower X, in comparison, provided a true eye/ear-opening experience…and the difference to the Apple PS was BIIIIIG. The sonic image was much more organized, more balanced, not sharp anymore. The corners were rounded, the sound was smoother, more relaxed, more contained and rather homogenous. Bass kick was better, too, and so was spatial cues. Holistically speaking, the listening experience was much nicer and rounder sounding. Much nicer…

I then tested the BRZHiFi, a $40 LPS I had bought from China. The edges were not as round anymore as with the iPower X and homogeneity was not quite as good. But the listening experience was still decent and more than acceptable. And it beat the Apple SPS.

Moving to the regular iPower, there was not much difference to the BRZHifi, but it was not even close to the iPower X in terms of control and organization. Well, half price…iPower is a compromise.

I then connected a generic $14 Baseus “Frankenstein” charger, and it did full justice to this attribute. The sound was thin, dark, dull, and lifeless. Can’t help it. No filtering…you pay the price for not paying the price.

Last but not least, I ran the Khadas on the Tzumi 10,000 mAh powerbank – and it sounded quite good. I’d put it quality wise on one level with the iPower and BRZHifi. So, if you are on a budget, use your powerbank. It supplies constant linear power and does not suffer from RMI/RFI. Try it!

In summary, the iPower X helped generate the best sound by far in this test.

But…No Audible Difference Found With A Computer…

In my recent analysis of the Khadas Tone2 Pro, I used my MacBook Air as music source (instead of the CD player). I reported no sonic differences between the Apple and the two ifi power supplies, and the computer’s USB power source. Why? Well the simplest explanation is that the computer’s USB data noise was masking the benefits of the power supplies.

Generally, there are a plethora of reasons why one may not hear a difference with the iPower and iPower X supplies, principally because other sources cause even bigger pollution.

• The improvement of the PS of the low- noise power is masked by poor data quality (jitter)
• The equipment is not of the highest quality
• The test setup was not optimal (use sensible iems and high-quality headphones)

In this case, the whole setup needs improving.

Value

A contentious topic. In our internal blog discussion round, some found the ifi Power X totally overpriced, whereas others pointed to the fact that a decent LPS can offset you by hundreds of dollars. So the iPower X is probably worth its $99. The $49 iPower is a bit of a half-baked compromise with the advantage that it comes with all thinkable accessories, and it compares price wise with my cheap LPS.

I would generally assign a better value to the iPower X but also note the difference in pricing between US and Canada (way more expensive north of 64), which makes it cost prohibitive for me. ifi Audio should reconsider their local pricing variations, especially when it comes for free with the $229 drop.com version of their Zen Can.

Am I A Snake-Oil Merchant?

Going into this test, I was very skeptical of the sonic benefits of “audiophile” power supplies, galvanic isolators, line cleaners etc. After all, the Audio Science Forum keeps telling us that there cannot be any improvements because they would crystallize out in their measurements. This is a reverse argument and there is no reason whatsoever refusing to listen to the gear that’s right there on the measurement rig – and without expectation bias.

The question is whether these measurements are capable of characterizing perceived sound. As far as I know, there is no physical relationship (“formula”) between them. “Objectivists” equate quantity with quality, and not only that: their quantity of one thing (“some measurement”) is directly correlated with the quality of another (“sound”). So, in order to match them up, religious beliefs are required. Beliefs are handy as they don’t have to be proven. And that’s what objectivists refer to as science.

As to selling you snake oil, I only borrowed these two ifi power supplies – and would be extremely happy, if my own BRZHiFi LPS was better. It is not, unfortunately.

One point of this exercise is that my results are not 1:1 transferable to you as they apply only to my testing parameters. But you get the message. You have to find sonic progress by trial and error when dealing with so many unknowns simultaneously. And if you are not prepared to do so, then better leave your fingers of it.

Concluding Remarks

“Audiophile” power supplies such as the iPower and iPower X are no snake oil, although results vary with setup. I experienced major sonic improvements in my testing, particularly with the iPower X, against unfiltered power from generic supplies. This, unfortunately, opens a can of worms, as I would like to now tackle USB data-line noise with devices such as the iUSB 3.0, which can be expensive. I put a lot of effort into this exercise and learnt a lot by doing.

If the world should blow itself up, the last audible voice would be that of an expert saying it can’t be done – PETER USTINOV

The stubborn claims of self-acclaimed “objectivists” that there cannot be a sonic difference because the measurements do not indicate it, make as much sense as dismissing the necessity of elections on the grounds that we already have democracy.

In the end, you have to trust your ears.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

Disclaimer

The two power supplies were loaned to me for 60 days by ifi Audio upon my request. I thank them for that. I also thank my co-bloggers for intense discussion of this topic.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

You find an INDEX of our most relevant technical articles HERE.

The post ifi Audio iPower & iPower X Review – Noise Annoys appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Not only in absolute terms – it is nothing short of an absolutely out-dash-standing device – but in relative ones too: it taught me personally so much for such a low price and effort that even when I outgrow it I will forever stay in debt of a smile and a hug.

And times for back-condescending reminiscence are not even on the horizon at the moment. For the simple reason that I reckon it will take quite some more time for me to have the budget – which I would assess in approximately 1K€ – to invest in a real stack upgrade, vs yet another step in the sidegrade carousel which is what Groove teleported me out of really.

A quick TOC before we start, for those who wouldn’t bother reading “all” my bla-bla (yeah, you’re forgiven):

What’s that?

Apogee Groove is a USB DAC-AMP device.

I’m pretty sure a wide portion of the budget audiophile community have never heard about this, in spite of it being on the market since 2015. Chances are many have never heard of Apogee Electronics Corp. in the first place, indeed.

Apogee is a US-based professional audio equipment designer and manufacturer in business since 1985. They earned their glory (and money) from audio professionals thanks to their patents and products: initially analog filters which would retrofit Sony and other high-end analog devices significantly upgrading their quality, later followed by breakthrough-innovative Digital Audio interfaces. Their target market is musicians, producers, and sound engineers – it’s therefore quite normal their brand is totally off the usual chifi marketing hype circus.

Groove is Apogee’s “entry level” portable DAC-AMP aimed at providing audio pros with an easy-going tool they can carry with them and plug onto their laptops while on the go, delivering a quality which needs to be in-line with Apogee’s higher-end equiment the same customer is supposed to regularly use in their studio. E.g. Apogee Symphony, to name something.

I’m not here for marketing but I find this storytelling video from Apogee’s web site explains superclearly what their intendend positioning is about Groove. (TL;DW: “[Dad, an affirmed musician,] is listening to super-high quality stuff all day every day […] so I bring the Groove, plug it into the laptop, and it feels and sounds as if it was in the studio”)

Getting closer to the actual device: no internal battery, Apogee Groove needs to be connected to a USB host (a PC for example) to even turn on. The USB channel is its only input – both for power and digital data.

“Cmon, cut it. It’s just a dongle!”

Yes and no. Structurally it’s a dongle yes. But it’s bigger, heavier and most of all it absorbs 340mA from the host, which is a lot. It’s therefore technically possible but practically unviable to use a phone, or a tablet, or even a lower end DAP as an easy host / transport. For on-the-go usage a Laptop is reasonably required, or some DIY creativity with a nice battery bank and a tool like iFi iDefender+. But let’s not deviate – for the sake of this article let’s say this is a “hi-power demanding dongle”.

It’s got a single output: 3.5mm single ended phone out. It supports PCM up to 24 bit / 192 KHz, and does not support DSD, nor MQA. Specifications are available here. Some numbers might seem odd at first glance.

“LOL! No MQA, no balanced output. My dongle’s specs are 3 times better, and I can use it for hours on my phone !…”

… Keep reading

As a DAC: just phenomenal

Die-hard measurement freaks may want to take a look here. No, it’s no ASR.

The reconstruction filter is very good, but by far the most important of all those graphs is the frequency response one, which is wonderfuly linear well into the 60KHz range, and that’s why when playing FLACs sampled at 96KHz Apogee Groove delivers clarity and space reconstruction audibly even superior to what it delivers from 44.1KHz data – where performance is nonetheless already a full pair of steps above the usual budget suspects.

Compared to Groove, some other systems (often coming with the not too secondary “feature” of a 10X price tag…) may arguably be even more precisely optimised for 44.1KHz data, but their response drops dramatically rapidly immediately after 20KHz (e.g., Hugo).

Enough graphs. Let’s audition.

Starting from the most evident part: Apogee Groove draws on space in a totally stunning way. Yes, already at 44.1KHz – and even more mesmerisingly at higher sampling rates.

Never heard something like that before, and I yet have to hear anything really similar let alone better. Spatial reconstruction is nothing less than phenomenal out of the box, and that, and imaging, are easily better than what I can hear from Chord Mojo, iFi nano iDSD BL, iFi Micro iDSD Signature, as well as Questyle QP1R, Lotoo Paw 6000 and Gold Touch – when considering their DAC performances. Groove is really one class above. At least one.

Apogee Groove’s DAC also delivers high end detail, texture, openness and intonation. All other DACs I heard as of yet barred none offer a paler representation of instrument textures. Some may have a blacker background (e.g. Micro iDSD Sig), or can offer higher sharpness on high end details (e.g. Mojo), but most if not all the alternatives I heard are fundamentally duller (in comparison) and/or smear on detail and/or miss out on that unique, incredibly well calibrated “suspense factor” Groove puts in transients.

Summarising: Apogee Groove delivers a totally unique dimensional feel to the sonic images. It’s technical, but musical. Controlled, but emotional.

Compared to mid-tier competition Apogee Groove’s DAC wins easy, and big. By just casually plugging it in and listening the difference it totally obvious.

Its DAC tuning quality taken per se is actually at an even higher level than its price would suggest when compared to professional tier alternatives, but in that case Apogee Groove’s small physical size starts to represent an issue as it makes it technically impossible to pack high level of power filtering inside, or a separate, cleaner powering line, like it can be found on superior systems (Holo May, Schiit Yggdrasil…).

The little kid can be belped a bit though, and per my experience it’s big time worth doing it, as its performances furtherly improve and significantly so:

• privilege a Linux distro + a technical, lightweight music player, or an Android box + UAPP, over a generic Windows or Mac system;
• filter out and/or divert the VBUS power line into a cleaner source;
• manage grounding issues and rebalance DC;
• reclock / regen the USB signal;
• etc

On my #1 desktop stack Apogee Groove is USB-connected to the laptop host and powered via an iFi Nano iUSB3.0 (my take on that here) + an Uptone USPCB. The difference vs plugging directly onto the host is totally evident: voicing is furtherly open, detailed, imaged. I’ll soon finalise my switch from the laptop onto a Linux based box to furtherly improve the upstream quality (iUSB3 is a nice filter, but it’s always better having less dirt to filter out in the first place isn’t it).

Surely, additional infrastructural elements as a better PS, some competent USB reclocker etc will add to the total cost. Again, if the comparison reference is mainstream chifi DAC or DAC-AMP none of that is needed: Apogee Groove will run circles around those “as-is”. Integrating Apogee Groove with additional infrastructural elements serves the purpose of making it “clinge to” much upper-tier (i.e. way more expensive alternatives).

As an AMP: here’s where it gets tricky

First time I plugged my E4000 into Groove I had a sort of jaw-dropping reaction. That was unlike any other source I ever tried. Most of this was surely coming from Groove’s DAC capacities, but how much did the AMP part contribute on that?

What I did was of course trying to plug all amps I had, or I could get (on loaner for reviews, from friends… I won’t make a list here) downstream and try and find differences. Basically: not a single sub 200$ amplifier I tried on there made Groove’s native output into E4000 better. Most of them (as a matter of facts: all of them except just one) reduced dynamics, made stage smaller or flatter, or compressed the range – read: they are less clean.

My amp sensei taught me that “amps don’t add to dacs – they can only take away, if they are not clean enough”.

The key amp job is leaving a DAC’s voice unmodified while properly feeding the load the odd way it sometimes requires – otherwise it will be the load i.e. the headphone/IEM to ruin the DAC’s work in its turn.

My first E4000-based test was simply telling me that Groove’s built-in amp stage is (sometimes dramatically) cleaner than all external amps I have at hand, while at the same time capable enough to optimally bias its transducers.

Why did this happen? And will this be “always” the case?

Apogee Groove’s amp stage uses a current gain IC in its main circuit and according to Apogee the whole amp shapes the current waveform, aiming at keeping that stable, unlike what traditional amps do, which is shaping the voltage waveform instead.

They call it Constant Current Drive^tm technology, and – to paraphrase Steve Jobs – “boy did they patent it !”. They are not even keen on talking or explaining its details – it’s indeed “not so clear” how exactly Apogee Groove does what it actually does.

Be as it may, Groove’s output promises to sound very coherent in virtually all supported situations, no matter how “restless” the load impedance is.

Another quite surprising feature is Apogee Groove’s uncommonly high output impedance: 20 Ohm.

Such is welcome of course when plugging high impedance cans, while it is in general a serious hurdle when pairing lower impedance earphones or IEMs, which would “sound bad” in such situation. Groove offers you to forget the “8X impedance rule”.

Summarising: Apogee Groove won’t incur into FR-skewing effect when driving low impedance loads, or higher impedance ones featuring wild impedance swings (HD800, anyone?).

“Wow. So… Groove is the ultimate amp, all good, all fantastic?”

No. Groove’s amp stage has two quite significant limitations, and a third partial one.

First: depending on load requirements Apogee Groove may, and will, lack power.

Apogee Groove takes power from the USB2 line (supports USB3 if need be), and more precisely absorbs a maximum of 340mA from there, while on the output side it delivers 40mW and a bit more than 5V (!!) into 600 Ohm.

With that, beasts like HD800 (300 Ohm 102 dB), or HD650 (300 Ohm, 103 dB) will be perfectly supported as they welcome / require as high voltage as possible – and 5V starts to be “a pretty bit” – but absorb very little current, and Apogee Groove’s unique capability to cope with wide load impedance swings does the rest.

On the flip side, Groove falls short when paired with the like of Shure SRH1540. That’s because relatively low impedance & low sensitivity headphones require little voltage but a lot of current, and Groove simply won’t have enough (like all of its direct competitors by the way, but that’s another story).

Second: Apogee Groove won’t support all crossover setups.

In Apogee’s own words: “Apogee does not recommend the Apogee Groove for use with multi-driver balanced armature in-ear monitors. Due to the design of the balanced armature drivers and crossover networks used in this type of headphone, the Groove’s Constant Current Drive amplifier technology may result in uneven frequency response when used with certain models.”

Apogee Groove’s very technology aimed at automatically compensating for impedance mismatches and misalignments is at the origin of this (a crossover filter is working on capacitive components!…).

No harm to the circuits will happen when trying, they will just sound “bad”, not coherent. Shuoer Tape, Oriveti OH500 are examples.

Luckily, not all multidriver IEMs include filters: final B1 and B3 for example do not – and in facts are perfectly supported by Apogee Groove, as the disclaimer does not even apply to them in the first place really.

And even more luckily, to my direct experience a few crossover-equipped multidrivers do nonetheless work properly even on Apogee Groove’s unique amp stage: Ikko OH10, KBear Lark, Intime Sora 2 are all examples of this.

However the main message stands: for multidriver IEMs we can’t rely on Groove’s internal amp stage. Apogee told us crystal clear their technology doesn’t take responsibility for this.

The main way around the issue in employing a separate downstream amplifier of course. Again, be ready to spend some money for it to avoid depleting on other aspects of the output.

What also in some case works is adding an impedance adapter on Groove’s output. I am not 100% sure as to “why” exactly this works but it does. I suspect in such case Groove “sees” a stable full-resistive load, and does not engage in trying to compensate impedance variations.

Third and last: odd limitations on some (few) specific drivers.

Groove’s technology allowing for “8X rule disregard” does work like magic… almost always.

To just toss some examples, I auditioned final E3000, A3000 and E4000, or Tanchjim Oxygen on “quite a few” (!) sources.

If I consider mobile / transportable devices (DAPs, DAC/AMPs), Apogee Groove beats them all on DAC performance grounds, and is the best overall source (i.e., including the AMP stage) with the sole possible exception of Lotoo Paw Gold Touch (but it’s debateable, really). Which is twice as suriprising if I consider Groove’s native output impedance. Virtually impossible is also to find a better alternative looking amongst desktop class devices, but that’s logical as those are primarily designed for overears – typically requiring optimal voltage vs current modulation.

On the other hand, drivers like Koss KPH30i (60 Ohm 101 dB) paired to Apogee Groove present a very modest yet audible mid-bass bump – typical of an impedance mismatch situation. And in facts applying an impedance adapter (e.g. an iFi iEMatch, or equivalent) solves the problem.

Why exactly Apogee Groove can “perfectly manage” even lower impedance drivers, and doesn’t entirely support KPH30i is frankly still obscure to me. May be some specialty on KPH30i tuning? Difficult for me to say.

I might mention another “imperfect support” example, which is final E5000. But my extended experience with those taught me it’s them to be enigmatic. It’s simply not honest to take them as a benchmark for a source “normality” – if something, the other way around indeed!

At-a-glance Card

Conclusion

Besides simply “sounding incredibly better” than anything I had tried before, from the day I got it Apogee Groove has been extremely educational for me as it represented my affordable opportunity to hear and understand superior-tier sound quality.

There’s no going back for me: lower quality reconstruction filters, lack of spatial depth, and fuzzy or at best approximate imaging and layering are something I just don’t have a single reason to bear anymore.

As I tried to describe, there ain’t such thing as a Graal. Apogee Groove, too, has its limits. No direct DSD support is one, and USB2 (24 bit 192 KHz) maximum PCM resolution is another. It also lacks MQA support but that’s never been nor will be any of my concern. Also, the need to “help out” its built-in amp stage to cope with some specific loads turned out to be less of an issue for me than it appeared initially (ymmv).

Anyhow, Groove is so good that not only I adopted it as my core infrastructure on both my home stacks (yes, I bought a second unit after the first) but I even started modulating the rest of my gear relative to it, instead of the other way around. This is fundamentally due to budget restrictions: an headphone amplifier which is “clean enough” to hold true to Groove’s output, while offering appropriate power modulation for this or that driver which is not perfectly biased by Groove directly is no toy.

So I started to reason as follows: does a driver I like work perfectly on Groove? Does it even scale up with Groove? It’s a keeper! Does it not? Better be a really outstanding piece of gear! E.g.: SRH1540 – those are so good as to justify an adequate amp stage just for them, even if it’ll end up costing no way less than 350$ (eyeing a Jotunheim 2 as a minimum acceptable quality stadard at the moment).

That’s what I mean for “game change”: Apogee Groove flipped my perspective.

This is actually a general concept indeed, and a general recommendation. Who is keen on getting the best sound quality into his ears often gives priority to drivers (headphones / IEMs – it seems logical as they are the bits producing the actual sound, right?), then AMPs (as they are those supposed to “feed” the drivers well), keeping DACs last, and not even considering where does digital music come from (the player, a.k.a. “transport”).

The above paradigm is totally wrong. DAC first. Always. The DAC is the voice. Amping me as I sing totally off-key is pointless believe me. Same with a crappy DAC. Get a good DAC. The best your budget can buy. At the same time, make sure the DAC isn’t sent too much crap (i.e. spend money on the transport). Only then you are ready to define your budget for an AMP, and finally you will know which drivers you can choose.

I didn’t mention Groove’s price. Guess. Then open the last spoiler.

Even factoring the extra cost in for an iEMatch to keep at hand and use for this or that odd-behaving IEM – which I learnt is needed with just about any desktop-class amp anyway – I solidly put Groove’s price in no-brainer territory for the quality it delivers.

Final disclaimer: My Groove devices are my own property since day one, have not been supplied as loaners or any other sampling form.

This article also appears on my personal audio site, here.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

You find an INDEX of our most relevant technical articles HERE.

The post Apogee Groove Review – Changing The Budget Game For Good (since 2015) appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Cons — None.

INTRODUCTION

I love adapters. Yes, you are reading correctly. I have boxes of them…see photo at the bottom. But when I recently received a couple of German premium earphone review loaners with a combined worth exceeding $5000, they came with an adapter. And guess wh

at, it was a ddHifi branded one. A Chinese adapter on a German premium earphone cable? Must be of good quality. And it was. In fact it worked so well that I purchased three versions of it way before I received the actual two units for this review.

One of them, the ddHifi TC25i let’s one connect a 2.5 mm mm balanced cable to an iPhone’s lightning port. The other one, ddHifi TCI28i, turns the iPhone’s lightning adapter into a USB-C port. I will explain the practicality of these devices in the following – also get some idea from the images throughout and at the bottom of this article.

SPECIFICATIONS TC25i

• ddHiFi 
• Apple Lightning to 2.5 mm headphone jack adapter
• Material: CNC-machined 316 stainless steel unibody shell
• Supports in-line control on CTIA standard earphones
• Supports full functionality for Apple earphones
• Supports iPhone, iPad, and iPod Touch models running iOS 10.0 or later
• THD+N: < -92 db
• DNR: > 110 db
• SNR: > 120 db
• Dimensions: 0.74 x 0.44 x 0.4 in (18.8 x 11.2 x 10.2 mm)
• Weight: 0.2 oz (6 g)
• Tested at: $40
• Product page: ddHifi

SPECIFICATIONS TC28i

• Input: Lighting
• Output: USB-C
• Material: Aluminum alloy
• Dimensions: 0.7 x 0.4 x 0.5 in (18.5 x 9.5 x 13.5 mm)
• Tested at: $30
• Product page: ddHifi

PHYSICAL THINGS AND USABILITY/FEATURES

The TC25i and TC28i are robust, sturdy, small, and light – and made of metal. Build and haptic are excellent.

What do these adapter do? I’ll discuss this as follows. Note: the reviewed versions will only work with iPhones and iPads, even if these devices are mantled with the thickest possible cases. And – in order to give you some idea what these adapters can be used for, I appended a set of images of my own applications below.

TC25i Lightning to 2.5mm Headphone Adapter: is essentially the equivalent to the Apple lightning audio adapter (which I reviewed in great detail), but with a 2.5 mm output. Although all 2.5 mm cables are “balanced”, the TCi25 is not. Its sister adapter TC35i features a 3.5 mm adapter and serves the same purpose as the Apple lightning adapter.

The TCi25i/TC35i have a lot of technology packed into that small enclosure: a microscopic stereo digital-to-analog converter (DAC), a stereo headphone amplifier, a microphone preamplifier, and monophonic analog-to-digital converter (ADC) – and power converters to run this all.

Considering that any connector is a sonic bottleneck and that the wire in the Apple Audio adapter is the limiting factor for any premium cable, cable aficionados are better off with the TCi25.

TC28i Lightning to USB Type C Adapter: is simply a connector for dongles. It essentially serves the purpose of the Apple lightning camera adapter. When connecting your iPhone to a dongle via the Apple adapter, you create a rather long chain. The TC28i shortens this “snake” and makes it more portable.

There is a big difference, however, between Apple and ddHifi in that the former has the traditional USB-A connector whereas the ddHifi TC28i features the smaller USB-C connector.

This is no problem as most dongles come with either connectivity. And if everything fails, there are cheap USB-C to USB-A connectors.

TONALITY AND TECHNICALITIES OF THE TCI25i

First test of the ddHifi TC25i lightning to 2.5 mm adapter against the iPhone 5S’s internal dac/amp (which is essentially identical to the Apple audio adapter for later iPhones).

The iPhone 5S is a formidable audio player: https://www.kenrockwell.com/…/iphone-5s-audio-quality.htm. Result: no noticeable difference found in terms of sound quality and amplification power.

So what does the TC25i sound like? I agree with the Headphone Collector also analyzed the Apple audio adapter [here]…as said, the ddHifi TC25i sounds essentially identical . He writes: “…Neutral, clear, clean and very precise. Basically as audibly transparent, good-sounding and clean-sounding to my ears as it gets. Precise and tight bass reproduction with sensitive multi-BA in-ears.

VALUE

TC25i Lightning to 2.5mm Headphone Adapter, although identical sounding as the Apple Lightning Adapter, may appear expensive at four times the price.

But: Apple does not offer a 2.5 mm adapter and their dongle is plastic/rubber with a cable that is prone to fray. The TC25i is made of metal (and has therefore the much better haptic and durability), is much less conspicuous because of its smaller size, and is extremely practical as you don’t have to earphone change cables when switching between devices.

It is also classy compared to the Apple. And it is particularly useful when deploying cables with the unreliable MMCX connectors. It may save you money in the long run by not ripping your MMCX connectors apart.

The TC28i Lightning to Type C Adapter costs about the same as the Apple camera adapter. Again, the ddHifi product is smaller, more rugged, and has the better haptic. The difference between the two – that is USB-A for the Apples and USB-C for the ddHifi – is somewhat unimportant as most peripherals come with both-type cables – and if not, there are cheap quality adapters, the best from UGREEN.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

I love adapters and the ddHifi adapters are on top of my list. They are high-quality and therefore good enough to be used with the most premium equipment, they look and feel good, they are priced right, and they are extremely practical.

While these two units had been provided by dHifi, I purchased other ddHifi adapters for my pleasure so impressed was I. You will see ddHifi adapters all over this blog. Check it out for yourself:

https://www.audioreviews.org/?s=ddHifi

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

These ddHifi adapters were provided by ddHifi – and I thank them for that.

Get them from ddHifi.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

EXAMPLES OF APPLICATIONS…

The post ddHiFi TC25i Lightning to 2.5mm Headphone Adapter And TC28i Lightning to USB-C Adapter Review – Connect Your iPhone appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Pros — Fantastic Build and material choices
– Very comfortable
– Not as sweaty as the materials would suggest
– V-shaped tuning can be an interesting change from stock pads

Cons — Changes stock tuning too much, not for purists
– Price is higher than stock pads (due to material choices)
– Worse instrument separation/more congestion vs the stock pads

INTRODUCTION

Dekoni Audio is pretty well known for aftermarket earpads. They provide a range of options across a variety of price ranges and offer replacement earpads for popular models such as the Sennheiser HD6X0 lineup, Audeze LCD lineup, Denon/Beyerdynamic and so on. 

Their Elite series is basically as the name suggests: premium earpads made with premium materials. I received the Dekoni Elite Fenestrated Sheepskin and the Dekoni Elite Hybrid earpads (HD650 variant) for this review. Let’s see how things change between them and the stock pads.

Note: the ratings given will be subjective to the price tier. Dekoni Audio was kind enough to send the Elite pads for review. Disclaimer.

Price, while reviewed: $80. Can be purchased from Dekoni website.

PHYSICAL THINGS AND USABILITY

IN THE BOX…

The earpads and some stickers. That’s about it.

APPEARANCE, HAPTIC, AND BUILD QUALITY

The Elite pads are built exceptionally well. The seams are well put together and fit and finish is top-notch. The stock Sennheiser pads look cheap and janky in comparison. The plastic mounts are glued to the back and didn’t seem to budge even with some force applied. 

For the Elite Hybrid pad you get a velour front (the part that touches your skin), leather sides, and fenestrated sheepskin on the inside. It’s an interesting choice of materials but the combination doesn’t look out of place. 

The Elite Fenestrated Sheepskin pad, on the other hand, has fenestrated sheepskin layers all around. Both earpads utilize memory foams inside though the foam on the Hybrid pad is softer/less dense.

One thing you should note is that these pads don’t come with the dampening foam (there is a foam between the drivers and the earpads on the HD600 series headphones). So you should probably keep the old foams handy (or get a replacement of those foams elsewhere). 
5/5

ERGONOMICS, COMFORT

The Elite Hybrid and the Elite Fenestrated Sheepskin pads are both very comfortable but there are some differences between them. Due to the softer foam, the Elite Hybrid pad has a more supple fit. I personally find it more comfortable of the two though again: both are a substantial improvement over the stock earpads on the comfort front. In terms of feel the Fenestrated Shipskeen is smoother vs the coarser Elite Hybrid pad. I prefer the Shipskeen pads in terms of feel. 
4.5/5

SOUND

The sound changes are quite interesting to say the least. You can look at the graphs on Dekoni’s website here. The following images are courtesy of Dekoni:

First up: the Dekoni Elite Fenestrated Sheepskin pads. Compared to the stock pads, they boost the bass noticeably and some of it even slightly spills into the lower mids. As a result you lose some separation of instruments and imaging takes a hit to my ears (center-imaging esp). On the other hands, dynamics improve and the resulting sound signature is a pretty fun one and definitely suits Pop, hip-hop, RnB and such genres more than the stock pads. One thing that I noticed was how the lower-treble became peakier with the Elite Fenestrated Sheepskin pads. Compared to the stock pads, these are definitely a more V-shaped offering. 

The Dekoni Elite Hybrid earpads on the other hand provide less mid-bass and upper-bass emphasis vs the Elite Fenestrated Sheepskin pads. They do have more sub-bass but given the limitations of the HD600 series driver (cannot reproduce sub-bass notes that well) it’s not that noticeable in most cases. I personally prefer the presentation of the Elite Hybrid pads over the Elite Fenestrated Sheepskin pads as they sound less cluttered in the midrange and the treble response is slightly more even-handed. It’s still not as smooth and laid-back as the stock pads but then again: the Dekoni pads are for those who are looking for a different signature. Comapred to the Elite Fenestrated Sheepskin pads, the Elite Hybrid pads also offer better instrument separation, though both pale in comparison to the stock pads in that regard. 

CONCLUDING REMARKS

In the end, if you are looking for the stock Sennheiser sound with a different/more comfortable earpad material — such an earpad does not exist to my knowledge. Sennheiser surely knew what they were doing (and they knew it very well) so the one-to-one replacement of the stock Sennheiser pads are… stock Sennheiser pads.

However, if you want to taste a different flavor of sound to the stock HD650 tuning, or perhaps you like to switch things up from time-to-time — try the Dekoni Elite series pads. They are superbly comfortable, has great feel and finish, and are suitable for modern genres along with movies/gaming since those usually benefit from bass emphasis. 

MY VERDICT

Overall Rating: 4/5 for Elite Hybrid Pads

Recommended (if you want a V-shaped flavor of the stock HD650 sound)

Overall Rating: 3.75/5 for Elite Fenestrated Sheepskin Pads

I prefer the Elite Hybrid pads more overall so these are gonna get a pass

Contact us!

Product Pages

Dekoni Audio Fenestrated Sheepskin Replacement Ear Pads for Sennheiser HD 600 Series Headphones

Dekoni Audio Elite Hybrid Replacement Ear Pads for Sennheiser HD 600 Series Headphones

The post Dekoni Elite Pads for Sennheiser HD600 Series Review – Something Different appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Cons — Non-serviceable battery.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Comica CVM-VM20 is a great-sounding shotgun microphone with useful features that works very well for my vlogging purposes. A personal favourite.

INTRODUCTION

I have been into vlogging since Q2 2020. My start was treacherous, but – since we are an audio blog – I have always favoured sound over images. My 2016 iPhone SE produces good video but unacceptable audio. A friend recommended a certain lavalier microphone, which was a step up. I then played with a few more lavaliers before I tried my first an on-camera microphone. The price range of my selection was $20-$100. I still could not produce a sound nearly as good as these YouTube influencers with their large mics in front of their mouths. But these microphones are expensive and they need an additional $200 device to supply them with 48 V “phantom power”. Sure, I could massage the thin sound of my lavaliers to some extent through specialized software, which would demand much work for every video. But, in my books, a sound has to be decent even raw in a live stream. So what to do?

Coincidentally, the opportunity of reviewing the Comica CVM-VM20 microphone came at the right moment. It was ranked in the top 10 microphones by the Microphone Geeks recently. This is surprising considering that their closest competition range from twice to ten times the price. Is the Comica CVM-VM20 a bargain?

If the Comica CVM-VM20 was good enough for pros, should it be good enough for a casual vlogger like me? The good thing about reviewing a microphone is that you can provide sound samples – nothing to sugar coat. So let’s find out how the Comica CVM-VM20 works for me.

SPECIFICATIONS

• Polar Pattern: super cardioid
• Frequency Response: 20 -20,000 Hz
• Low-Cut: 75Hz/150 Hz
• Sensitivity Range: -43 dBto -23 dB
• S/N: >75 dB
• Maximum SPL: >105 dB
• Output Form: 3,6 mm TRS
• Power: Li-ion battery 3.7 V 300 mac
• Size: 22 mm * 177 mm
• Net Weight: 84 g
• Operating Temperature: 0-50C
• Storage Temperature: -10C to 60 C
• Tested at: $129
• Product Page: Comica Professional Audio Equipment
• Purchase Link: PERGEAR

PHYSICAL THINGS

The Comica CVM-VM20 comes as a complete set with all required accessories: the actual mic with built-in rechargeable Li-ion battery, shock mount, foam cover and furry wind muff, TRS to TRRS cable (connecting to phones), TRS to TRS cable (connecting to a camera), USB-C to USB-A charge cable, and the obligatory paperwork. And the whole lots is nicely stowed in the large included, padded case. There is no charger included, but the Comica CVM-VM20 can be connected to any USB outlet.

The microphone’s body is made of metal; build and haptic are excellent.

HOW THE COMICA CVM-VM20 WORKS

The Comica CVM-VM20 microphone is a condenser microphone with a strongly directional super-cardioid polar pickup pattern. It is most sensitive to on-axis sounds (where the mic “points”) with null points at 127° and 233° and a rear lobe of sensitivity. This pattern has the shape of a heart (kardiá, Greek: heart). The “super” added to cardioid refers to that little tail behind the microphone that offer some extra sound intake from sources behind the microphone….for example useful when filming ahead while commenting from behind the camera.

FEATURES

Built-in Li-ion battery: supplies 60 hours of operation. An OLED display indicates battery level and when the Comica CVM-VM20 needs to be connected through its USB-C port to a USB outlet for charging – with the included cable.

Two-step low-cut button: cycles from flat through 75 and 150 Hz rolloff. The 150 Hz low cut filters out low-frequency ambient noise such as traffic, furnace, or air conditioning. The 75 Hz low cut essentially replaces the “pop filter” when speaking close to the microphone.

Gain knob: produces a variable gain from 1 to 10…which translates to a max. boost of 20 dB. The effect of the gain is demonstrated in my sound-sample video (below).

OPERATION

Easy. The Comica CVM-VM20 is mounted on a standard cold shoe or on a standard 1/4″-20 thread. It connects to a phone or camera with the included cables. No splitter or adapter required. Connect to your camera/phone, switch it on, decide on a low-cut filter (or not), set your gain…and you are recording.

SOUND

Equipment used: Comica CVM-V20 microphone, iPhone SE (first generation, 2016), Ulanzi video rig, amazon basics boom microphone stand with adapter.

I have used several lavalier and two cardioid pattern microphones before – and have never been satisfied with my YouTube sound. Some cut the bass off so that the sound is transparent and clear, but volume and body are lacking. Others do not have the upper extension that adds life to the sound. All of these microphones need lots of time-consuming post precessing to sound somewhat acceptable…but I still did not sound as strong and weighty as these groomed and curated YouTube tech salespeople.

This has changed with the Comica CVM-VM20. Even without processing (“live streams”), my voice is rich, full bodied, and weighty, yet crisp and lively – just like that of a radio host. There is good extension towards the upper and lower end and clarity is good, too.

I could also not detect any hiss or handling noise. Check out the sound samples below from outside and inside the house. I did not use any of the low-cut filters – and the foam cover instead of the wind muff. The sound is raw. In the outdoor part, the traffic noise of a nearby Calgary city highway and schoolchildren playing about 100-150 m away is picked up by the Comica CVM-VM20.

PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS OF THE COMICA CVM-VM20 MICROPHONE

Cardioid condenser shotgun microphones are used by the movie industry because of their directionality. The “super” added to the cardioid gives the person behind the camera (phone, DLR) a voice, too. The Comica CVM-VM20 can be used mounted on a camera/mobile phone or simply on a microphone stand for recording sounds from far and near. My videos and images in this article should give you some idea of the Comica CVM-VM20’s versatile uses.

I used the Comica CVM-VM20 for the Whizzer Kylin HE01 review below – in an untreated room – with no low-cut filter applied. It features minimal sound processing in iMovie: I pushed the “auto” button in the sound panel, and the software adjusted the sound minimally.

I shot the Earmen Sparrow video in the same room but applied the 75 dB low-cut filter. Sound was also adjusted to “auto” in iMovie.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

The Comica CVM-VM20 comes as a very pleasant surprise to me – after having tried so many microphones. It has impressed me so much that I have used it for all my blogging and zoom activities since. It delivers the full and rich-bodied radio sound I always wanted. The Microphone Geeks were spot on with their ranking. For an amateur YouTuber like me, the Comica CVM-VM20 is the sonic endgame. Why pay more?

And if you want to hear more Comica CVM-VM20 sound in the future, please subscribe to my YouTube channel:

https://www.youtube.com/c/audioreviews…or simply get your own.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

The Comica CVM-VM20 was provided unsolicited by PERGEAR. I thank them for that.

You can get the Comica CVM-VM20 from PERGEAR.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

MORE VISUALS…

The post Comica CVM-VM20 Multi-Functional Super Cardioid Condenser Shotgun Microphone Review – Top Gun appeared first on Audio Reviews.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Dekoni Fenestrated Sheepskin earpads and and Hybrid Elite earpads offer outstanding workmanship and comfort. However, they alter the characteristics the Sennheiser HD 600 have been known for and may therefore not be for everyone.

INTRODUCTION

The Sennheiser HD 600 headphones have been standard staples with audiophiles since 1997. They are characterized by a stellar, natural sounding midrange, great treble extension, and a somewhat poorly extended and slow low end. Their characteristic sound is generated by the combination of driver and earpads.

But the stock earpads have a wear-and-tear, they will loose tension over time and cause the HD 600 to sound “wrong”. Because of the large distribution of the Sennheiser HD 600/650/6XX “( the “HD 600 series”), it has become lucrative for companies to offer after-market earpads. We have recently reviewed the offering by Japanese manufacturer Yaxi that failed our test on grounds of tonality. It is obviously difficult to break into Sennheiser’s market as they had enough time in the last >>20 years to optimize the sound of their HD 600 series models.

Dekoni Audio is an American company out of New Jersey that offers high-end headphone accessories for a number of popular models. For the Sennheiser HD 600 series, they boldly offer six different kinds of earpads, ranging from $50 to $80.

The company also offers measurements of all their ear pads relative to the Sennheiser stock pads [here]. The Dekoni Audios ear pads for these Senns show a different degrees of midrange recession (“V-shape”) compared to the stock pads.

I selected the two with the least such recession, the “Dekoni Audio Fenestrated Sheepskin Replacement Ear Pads for Sennheiser HD 600 Series Headphones” and the slightly more V-shaped (graphing) “Dekoni Audio Elite Hybrid Replacement Ear Pads for Sennheiser HD 600 Series Headphones“.

PHYSICAL THINGS AND USABILITY

Dekoni Audio claim that their pads are cooler and more comfortable than the stock pads. I tested them in the cold Canadian winter and leave the temperature judgement to testers in warmer regions. They are comfortable and have a lower elastic rebound than the stock pads.

The Fenestrated Sheepskin and Elite Hybrid have identical shapes with straight walls and flat tops. Material wise, the Fenestrated Sheepskin pads (fenestra, latin: window) feature the same material all around (sheepskin leather with little “window” holes). The Elite Hybrid feature velour on top, leather on the outer wall and Fenestrated Sheepskin leather on the inside.

The quality of these two ear pads is impeccable. I particularly like the Fenestrated Sheepskin that remind me of high-end leather seats in a luxury vehicle – compared to the Sennheiser stock pads resembling used back seats in a New York cab.

In terms of size, the Dekoni pads are narrower and 1-2 mm deeper than the stock pads and they have a slightly larger opening. The Dekonis also have a slightly smaller opening and a bigger contact area on the head owing to their flat top. The Sennheiser pads may have a bigger surface area but it is curved, and the inner walls are not straight either.

In terms of strength, the Dekoni pads (I assume they have the same fill) are firmer than the stock pads and the also have the much slower elastic rebound. I found the Dekoni pads very comfortable over longer listening periods. I leave the fit discussion to co-blogger Kazi and will focus on the most important thing: the sound.

Installation: You find lots of videos on how to replace Sennheiser HD 600 series pads on YouTube or on the Dekoni website. It is easy. You essentially rip the pads off and click the new ones into place.

TONALITY AND TECHNICALITIES

Follow these links for some background information:

My tonal preference and testing practice

My test tracks explained

Equipment used: MacBook Air; EarMen TR-amp, Sennheiser HD 600, Dekoni Audio Fenstrated Sheepskin and elite Hybrid pads.

The two types of Dekoni earpads do alter the sound of my Sennheiser HD 600 in that they make it darker, bolder, weightier – at the expense of the lean original signature. The stage becomes slightly deeper but less airy. The Fenestrated Sheepskin pads alter the sound less than the “bassier and more recessed” Elite Hybrid pads.

Fenstrated Sheepskin Pads

After my bad experience with the Yaxi earpads, which pulled the weight too far down in the frequency spectrum, the Dekoni Fenestrated Sheepskin pads came as a somewhat pleasant surprise.

The Dekoni Fenestrated Sheepskin pads do not alter the bass quantity however reduce the frequency spectrum from the upper bass up. This translates to slightly perceived bass boost, a recessed midrange and less treble extension (compared to the Sennheiser stock pads). Such recession is adherent to all Dekoni models and is least evident in the fenestrated sheepskin pads, which probably makes them the most recommendable ones.

The reduction in upper and lower midrange has positive and negative effects. The good is that the shoutiness reported by many users has been essentially eliminated, which thickens the vocals and adds more note weight to them. The bad is that the midrange loses energy and air, and becomes darker. Some may perceive vocals as duller than before, others may welcome the increased note weight.

And yep, the treble extension the Sennheiser HD 600 has been known for certainly has been tamed to some extent and caters more to treble sensitive listeners. Cymbals have become more subtle but without losing definition.

Technicalities such as timbre, soundstage, separation and layering have been largely untouched. The HD 600 have never been known for their soundstage, Dekoni claims their pads increase it because of their bigger depth relative to the stock pads. The stage may have become a bit deeper but that difference is insignificant for daily use. Soundstage with the Dekoni fenestrated sheepskin pads is fine.

Elite Hybrid Pads

The Dekoni Elite Hybrid earpads are only different from the Fenestrated Sheepskin pads through their boost below 300 Hz. When playing music without bass, both models sound essentially identical. The extra-boosted low end (with respect to the stock pads) appears to turn my HD 600 into an HD 650. 

Since an earpad does not change the driver speed, the boosted low end amplifies its weakness and makes it sonically fuzzier and thumpier than with the stock pads. 

In the mix (the human ear hears the whole frequency spectre in context), the boosted low end pushes the vocals further back (than the fenestrated sheepskins) and can somewhat congest the transition bass-midrange. It also pushes the treble further back.

IMO, the Dekoni Earpads Hybrid earpads push the weight too far down towards the bottom of the frequency range. But all it does is bloating it as the HD 600 is not basshead material because of the driver’s limited articulation down there.

I therefore much prefer the Fenestrated Sheepskin pads of the two models.

In comparison to the Dekoni pads, the HD 600 with the Sennheiser stock pads may sound leaner and they have more air, but a shallower stage. Everything with the stock pads is more subtle and it is bolder with the Dekoni pads.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

The Dekoni Audio earpads tested are superior over the Sennheiser stock pads in terms of build and haptic – they are also pricier. The Fenestrated Sheepskin pads produce a thicker/weightier but less energetic sound than the stock pads on the Sennheiser HD 600. The sonic differences between the stock pads and Dekoni Fenestrated Sheepskin pads are, however, not earth shattering – and may be not be a dealmaker/breaker. However, they do alter the characteristic sonic signature of my HD 600 probably too much to please purists.

The Elite Hybrid, on the other hand, very similar to the Yaxi pads, add to much weight to the bottom of the frequency spectrum imo that is missing in the midrange and on the top. I would not recommend these to listeners who treasure the original sound of the HD 600.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

The earpads were provided by Dekoni Audio through their Head-Fi campaign – and I thank them for that.

Product Pages

Dekoni Audio Fenestrated Sheepskin Replacement Ear Pads for Sennheiser HD 600 Series Headphones

Dekoni Audio Elite Hybrid Replacement Ear Pads for Sennheiser HD 600 Series Headphones

Our generic standard disclaimer.

You find an INDEX of our most relevant technical articles HERE.

IMAGES…

The post Dekoni Sennheiser HD 600 Series Fenestrated Sheepskin Earpads And Hybrid Elite Earpads Review – Bold Statements appeared first on Audio Reviews.