DAC Connectivity and Battery Life

The Moondrop Evo boasts Bluetooth 5.2 connectivity with a claimed range of 15 meters (49.2 feet). However, in my real-world testing, I found this claim to be somewhat exaggerated. The connection began to drop out at around 6 meters (20 feet), making it more suitable for desk use or keeping your device close by. Despite this limitation, I found the Evo to be quite usable for everyday scenarios.

The Evo supports a wide range of codecs, including aptX Adaptive, aptX TWS+, aptX HD, aptX, AAC, and SBC. This comprehensive codec support allowed me to enjoy the full clarity of lossless streaming from services like Tidal and Roon. However, I did note the absence of Dolby Atmos compatibility, which would have been a welcome addition.

Battery life on the Evo impressed me. After two hours of use, I barely noticed a dent in the playtime. The charging case, while bulky, provides excellent protection for your IEMs and extends the overall battery life significantly.

In contrast, the iFi Go Pod also features Bluetooth 5.2 but utilizes the Qualcomm QCC 5100 chip. I found its range to be noticeably better than the Evo’s, making it more versatile for moving around. The Go Pod supports an even wider array of codecs, adding LDAC and LHDC/HWA to the mix. This expansive codec support ensures fantastic audio quality across various devices and streaming services.

The Go Pod’s battery life is equally impressive, offering about 7 hours of playback on a single charge, with the case providing an additional 30 hours. I appreciated the useful battery life display on the case, which helped me keep track of remaining power.

Design and Fit

The Moondrop Evo’s design is significantly bulky, but I found it provided a secure fit that didn’t impact my IEM seal. The device clasps noticeably around the ear, which might not be ideal for everyone, especially those with smaller ears. The rubber material is a little stiff, meaning it took a while to form around my ear. While I found it comfortable for casual listening and walking around, it’s not the best choice for workouts.

The Evo’s touch controls work well, and I appreciated the inclusion of ENC dual mics for great call quality. However, the bulky charging case, while protective, is far from pocket-friendly. You’ll definitely need a bag or tote to carry this around comfortably.

The iFi Go Pod, on the other hand, weighs just 12 grams, making it significantly more comfortable to wear. I found its around-the-ear fit more flexible than the Evo’s, conforming better to my ear shape. After extended use, I barely noticed I was wearing it, feeling more like a slightly thicker IEM cable than a separate device.

The Go Pod’s IPX5 rating adds peace of mind for light water exposure, though I’d still be cautious about using expensive IEMs during intense workouts. The included adapters for both 2-pin and MMCX connections greatly expand its compatibility with various IEMs.

Like the Evo, the Go Pod’s case is quite large, but I found it more manageable overall. The built-in mic with Qualcomm noise suppression performed admirably during calls.

Audio Quality

Turning to the all-important factor of audio quality, both DAC/Amps impressed me, albeit with distinct characteristics. I used the 64 Audio U18t, Nostalgia Audio Camelot, and Moondrop Aria IEMs in my testing.

The Moondrop Evo delivers clear audio with minimal distortion. I noticed a slight drop in bass and presence compared to a wired connection, but the overall volume and clarity were excellent. The Evo adds a warm, slightly V-shaped character to the sound, which I found particularly enjoyable with brighter IEMs.

Listening to “Synapse” by Linea Aspera, I appreciated the Evo’s handling of the track’s layered elements. The sharp synths mixed well with the reverb-heavy vocals, creating a natural and transparent soundstage. However, I did notice that trailing sounds were slightly shortened compared to a wired connection.

Moving to heavier genres, I played Morbid Angel’s “Blessed are the Sick” album. The Evo DAC added a nice character to the boosted guitars and bass, making them less piercing and more enjoyable. If you’re easily fatigued by highs, you’ll likely appreciate the color the Evo adds to the sound.

For a change of pace, I listened to “Loie” by Ike Quebec. The Evo’s warm and detailed sound beautifully supported the track’s haunting organ and vocals. The layered Van Gelder Studios recording came through with distinct fullness, showcasing excellent low-end detail.

However, when I tested the Evo with Brotherhood’s “Till Death” album, I found its limitations. The booming guitars were a bit too much for the unit to handle, resulting in some muddiness. While the drums retained enough sharpness, I wished for more character in the bombastic rhythm section.

Switching to the iFi Go Pod, I immediately noticed its flatter, more neutral sound signature. The Go Pod offers clear audio reproduction with very low distortion. I perceived slightly less clarity in the 2kHz – 4kHz treble range compared to the Evo, which can help tame harshness in some IEMs.

Revisiting “Synapse” by Linea Aspera, the Go Pod provided more clarity in voices and a more present midrange. I also noticed a wider soundstage that reproduced reverb more accurately.

With Freddie Roach’s “Loie,” the Go Pod’s flatter sound showcased the mix’s excellence. While bass was less prominent than with the Evo, I appreciated the more distinct, textured sound. Solos came through with brighter clarity, and cymbals sounded sharper and clearer without becoming fatiguing.

Returning to Morbid Angel’s “Blessed are the Sick,” I found the guitars lacked the same growling bite as with the Evo, but they made up for it with improved layering and body. Feedback and string noise details are louder on the evo as well. The drums pushed through the mix more clearly, with a faster, cleaner attack on the snare.

Finally, with Brotherhood’s “Till Death,” the Go Pod truly shined. Its character paired excellently with the album’s bass-heavy mix. The fuzzy, saturated guitars displayed more presence, and the rumbling low-end was a perfect match for this DAC. I also appreciated how the cymbals separated more clearly from the guitar and bass sounds.

Value and Conclusion

After extensive testing, I found both the Moondrop Evo and iFi Go Pod to be excellent performers in their respective price brackets.

The Moondrop Evo offers impressive sound quality and features at a more budget-friendly price point. While its connectivity range and bulky design may be drawbacks for some, its warm sound signature and compatibility with a wide range of IEMs make it an excellent choice for those looking to dip their toes into the world of wireless DAC/Amps.

The iFi Go Pod, with its $399 price tag, caters more to the high-end consumer with multiple pairs of IEMs. Its superior connectivity, more neutral sound signature, and wider codec support justify the premium to a degree. However, at a price point that exceeds many TWS earbuds, it may be a harder sell for casual listeners.

Both devices successfully bridge the gap between wired audio quality and wireless convenience. The choice between them will largely depend on your budget, preferred sound signature, and how much you value the additional features of the Go Pod.

As for me, I found both DAC/Amps to be valuable additions to my audio arsenal, each serving different purposes. Despite this, it’s hard to consider paying around four times as much for the Go Pod when the Evo does about 80% of what they offer. I’d still suggest the Go Pods for use with high-end IEMs and DAPs.

In the end, both the Moondrop Evo and iFi Go Pod prove that the future of personal audio is bright, offering audiophiles the freedom to enjoy their favorite IEMs wirelessly without significant compromises in sound quality. Whether you’re a budget-conscious listener or a discerning audiophile, these devices offer compelling options to elevate your wireless listening experience.

Get the Moondrop EVO and iFi Go Pod at Audio 46

The post Moondrop Evo vs. iFi Go Pod DAC/Amp Comparison Review appeared first on Major HiFi.

Sony MDR-7506

The Sony MDR-7506 has been a staple in the recording industry for years. Its flat sound profile makes it ideal for mixing, although it does have a few quirks. The sub-bass rolloff and peaks at 2 kHz and 4 kHz are noticeable. Additionally, there’s a huge dip at 10 kHz, which can be a drawback. However, in a mixing setting, these frequencies can become ultra-fatiguing, so the Sony MDR-7506 remains a solid choice. Its closed-back design adds versatility, making it suitable for multiple applications.

Sennheiser HD620s

The Sennheiser HD620s offers a sound profile similar to the other models in the 600 series but with a closed-back design, making it perfect for mixing in loud environments. It provides a flat sound with a bit more bass than the HD600, closely aligning with the Harman curve. The 2024 model features upgraded comfort with a wider headband, ensuring long sessions are more bearable. Its detachable cable design and Sennheiser’s excellent quality control make it an excellent tool for monitoring and mixing live sound.

Beyerdynamic DT770 Pro X LE

The Beyerdynamic DT770 Pro X LE retains the classic sound of the DT770 but with significant enhancements. The detachable cable increases durability, while the bump in high-mids and low highs provides detailed sound that fans of the DT770 are used to. This headphone excels in sound isolation and accurate soundstage, making it perfect for pinpointing sounds and creating a balanced mix. The 48-ohm design means it’s easy to drive with almost any device, making it versatile for various mixing environments.

Audeze LCD-X

The Audeze LCD-X offers a unique mixing experience with extra bass and a 1.5 kHz push, providing a somewhat flat sound with more bass extension. This headphone is great for EQing modern tracks and balancing a mix. Its durable metal design, ultra-plush earpads, and huge 106mm drivers make it easy to hear through the soundscape with discernible holographic features. The 2024 revision reduces the scoop in the treble frequencies and using an amp still brings out its full potential. Despite its weight, the LCD-X is comfortable for extended listening sessions and the 2024 it’s lighter than previous versions.

Sennheiser HD600

The Sennheiser HD600 remains a standard mixing tool, known for its super flat sound with a slight midrange bump. Its focused sound lets you get the most out of most tracks without impacting the flatness of the sound signature. With a 300-ohm resistance, you’ll need an amp to use these, but once driven, you get superb clarity and revealing bass. This professional tool is perfect for those seeking one of the flattest headphones in production. Hand-assembled with a 2-year warranty, the HD600 is lightweight and excellent for engineers on a budget. Its cable is easily replaceable, and most parts are swappable due to its long-standing presence in the market.

Hifiman HE1000 Stealth

The Hifiman HE1000 Stealth offers a relatively flat response with added growl in the high bass/low mids and well-tuned treble. The balanced, analytical treble is non-fatiguing, and the dynamic mids provide excellent vocal detail. With a headband design similar to the Susvara, the HE1000 Stealth is super comfortable and fits almost all head shapes. Although Hifiman had quality control issues four years ago, they have since produced some of the most reliable headphones on the market. Paired with an amp, these headphones deliver a full range frequency response, allowing you to hear detailed performances and transient sounds clearly.

Conclusion

Choosing the right mixing headphones can make all the difference in your music production. Each of these headphones offers unique features and sound profiles, so you can find the perfect fit for your needs. Whether you prioritize comfort, sound isolation, or detailed accuracy, these headphones are the best options for mixing in 2024.

Get All the Products Mentioned and MUCH MORE at Audio 46

The post Best Mixing Headphones in 2024 appeared first on Major HiFi.

What’s In The Box – FiiO K11 vs. K11 R2R

Looks

I don’t have much to say on this topic considering the looks of the K11 R2R remain virtually identical aside from an R2R logo on the top. Those with minimal space in their set-up will enjoy the surprisingly small footprint. I use the term surprisingly considering how well the K11 can power high impedance headphones. I’ll address the power of the R2R later. I’m elated that FiiO has taken the “if it ain’t broke don’t fix it” approach in terms of looks. The durable aluminum frame, small package, and unoffensive styling makes the original K11 a fantastic looking item. Resources haven’t been wasted on refreshing a good looking product.

Design Differences – Fiio K11 vs. K11 R2R

The clearest difference between the R2R and K11 is in the chip that’s used. Originally, it was built around a CS43198 ΔΣ chip. Delta Sigma chips are found on many lower-level dongle amps due to their high-bit depth and high performance in regards to cost of manufacturing. This comes at the cost of THD+N and noise being higher than an R2R chip. With this in mind, R2R chips are more difficult to manufacture and often come at a much higher cost. Developing an R2R chip for a budget friendly item isn’t an easy undertaking. Along with this, making a high resolution R2R chip that supports 384kHz/24-bit is a recent development and it’s yet to hit entry-level devices. Seeing R2R in a sub-$200 DAC/AMP is a marvel in it of itself.

Many of you may be asking yourselves, ‘what’s the difference between R2R and ΔΣ chips’. For those of you who know, feel free to move to the next paragraph. Theoretically, you’ll be able to get a warmer sound from most R2R DACs without sacrificing the transparency of higher range frequencies. Although the THD+N and noise floor of the K11 and the K11 R2R are very similar, you still get less harmonic distortion, recreating high frequencies more naturally. This means that the R2R should have a warmer yet more transparent sound. This is said to increase the accuracy in soundstage, considering there’s less hazy distortion blocking out analytical highs.

In regards to other changes, the NJW1195A volume controller uses a resistor ladder potentiometer. This means a more controlled and even volume dial which won’t ‘hiss’ as gain adjustments are made. The output power on both of these devices hasn’t changed, and you’ll still be able to power all the same headphones you were able to power before. The I/O have also stayed the same. They’ve ditched the filter settings due to a ladder resistor array. What’s added to compensate for this is an OS/NOS mode, allowing for a more faithful recreation of waveforms.

Summary

Instead of giving listeners a product with new looks, FiiO has decided to dramatically improve the quality and internals of their entry level DAC/AMP. Some companies recreate items by slapping a label on them and investing in marketing to pass off lower quality products at the same price. This isn’t the case with FiiO, who have made some great technical improvements in the K11 R2R. In my opinion, the K11 R2R’s $169 price-tag is well-worth the $40 increase. If you’re in need of a desktop amp under $200, this item is a blind-buy to me.

Pre-Order the New FiiO K11 R2R and MUCH MORE at Audio 46

The post What’s Different Between the FiiO K11 and K11 R2R? – Initial Impressions appeared first on Major HiFi.

Look and Feel – SRS-X1000 Review

The first thing I noticed about the SR-X1 earspeakers was how light they felt. The design cues taken from the SR-1 and SR-X are present in this modern headphones despite it’s retro look. The use of light materials has brought the weight of this headphone to only 234g. They’re incredible comfortable to wear for long periods of time. The leather is soft and doesn’t get too hot. The double-edged sword to their comfort is the seal. Because there’s so little weight around the headband, it was hard to get these to seal properly around my ear. The flexibility of the headband also improves durability, but didn’t allow the ear pads to properly seal around my head. Take this criticism with a grain of salt since we all have uniquely shaped ears and heads.

The SRM-270 is sleek and not too noticeable. The attenuator on this unit is incredibly responsive. The footprint of this energizer only measures in at 6 x 5.25 in. allowing you to place it on a desk without taking up much space. Those using certain DACs will be able to stack this unit right on top of their existing setup relatively easily.

Design

The design feature of the SRS-X1000 speaker system is impressive especially considering this is an entry level unit. The low-noise fet in the energizer and the electrostatic drivers bring down the THD≤0.01%/1kHz 100V. If you don’t get what that all means, simply put they almost never distort. The SRM-270 is surprisingly stable in it’s heat distribution. After hours of use, the amp didn’t got hot at all. I used the HifiMan EF500 as my DAC plugged straight into my computer, and there was no issues in any of the connections. There is an stereo RCA in/out allowing you to use these with your favorite compatible DACs. The 5-prong balanced cable plugs directly into the front of the unit.

In terms of cables, I was extremely impressed with the quality given the price point of the SR-X1. It’s clear that the cable and 6-pin design were borrowed from much more expensive headphones in the STAX line. I wish that other companies integrated that same compatibility, because it’s so frustrating dealing with proprietary connections that only work on certain models. The cable itself is OFC at 2.5m long, which is commonly an upgraded feature on headphones in this price range. At 7-41,000hZ playback, you’d have to be a different species to miss any of these frequencies.

Soundstage – SRS-1000X Review

This amp and headphone combination simply has all the width and tallness that you’d be looking for. Because I used a DAC, the limits of the SRS-X1000 setup will undoubtedly come from the DAC paired with the amp and headphones. With the Hifiman EF500, I felt a palpable wideness and shift in height from these headphones.

Other STAX have been too wide for some, but they have improved on this in the SRS-X1000. It’s hard comparing these to planar-magnets, but at only $980 you’d be very hard pressed to find any planar cans that can compete with this soundstage. The closest headphones that come near this width are the Hifiman Arya Organic. What the SRS-X1000 has over the Arya Organic is the fact that sound which are close come out with the right voice. What I mean by this is that close sounds don’t have supplementary reverb. There’s enough dynamic range to make close sounds feel intimate and far sounds feel expansive.

Tracks like “She’s Evil” by Repulsion have so much distance and wetness in their tone that it truly feels like an experience listening on these headphones. The oscillating vocals and snares pan hard from ear to ear with virtually no driver bleed. There’s a depth to sounds on the SRS-X1000 that are rarely present on headphones in this price category. “Everything is Romantic” on the new Charli XCX “brat” has a palpable width and height in it’s staging. Tracks with accurate panning and good recording allow these headphones to be versatile in their staging. Songs compatible with Dolby Atmos take on a huge stage-like feeling. Therefore giving listeners an immersive experience that’s tough to beat.

Listening Impressions – SRS-1000X Review

Bass

The SRS-X1000 has a strong ‘V-Shape’ frequency response that starts at it’s defined bass. There’s a lot of clarity in the bass range which thuds but doesn’t overwhelm the listener. The mix is somewhat even, but there’s definitely going to be more treble than bass in the frequency response. This makes sense considering they extend the treble range all the way to 41kHz, beyond out perceptible hearing.

The SR-X1 headphone feels bassy in all the right places. There’s no muddiness to sounds but instead a strong feeling of sub-bass. Low-pitched vocals do extend into the high-bass range, and the excellent timbre really shows itself off here. “Non-Believer” by 100 Demons has fantastic clarity despite many layers in the same frequency range. The deep vocals come out fantastically, as they punch through the mix beyond the bass and drums. The recreation of bass sounds is superb, and there’s absolutely no clipping I experienced in this range. Techno music with thudding kicks really pushes the headphones in an exciting way.

Mids

Although the mids aren’t the focus of the frequency response, I’m still very happy with the presentation of mid-sounds. The focus from horns, guitars, voices, and synths is unparalleled at this price point. Although the ‘V-shape’ pulls these elements back in the mix slightly, there’s enough volume from this range to compete with the palpable sub-bass and the bright highs.

Droning and distorted sounds in songs like “The Cold Sun” by Loathe ring freely on these headphones. There’s a great definition in even the fuzziest sounding mid focused instruments. Songs without heavy saturation like “I Was Doin All Right” on Dexter Gordon’s “Doin’ Allright” have a fantastic separation, especially in the head where both Gordon and Freddie Hubbard double the melody. Despite their overlapping frequencies, the clarity of the horns and piano make the SRS-X1000 an impressive listen.

Treble

There’s plenty of treble in this headphone while having no problem with sibilance. As a person who’s not a very big fan of bright headphones, I typically stay away from them as soon as I hear sibilance. That’s not the case here, as I tried pushing the headphones with extra bright hyperpop. This was no match for the SRS-X1000, as even the brightest mixes still didn’t have any uncomfortable shrieking from any elements. Cymbals have excellent articulation, while the airiness and shape of more tonal instruments are present. Whatever STAX did to tune these headphones, there’s a perfect amount of brightness to my ears, without displacing any other frequencies in the mix.

Summary

STAX production of electrostatic earspeakers has always been notably impressive and luxurious. The new release of their flagship SR-x9000 coming out soon has been supported by their excellent release of a budget friendly option. Audiophiles who haven’t experienced electrostatic headphones should strongly consider adding this to their collection. If you’re a fan of bright or ‘v-shaped leaning towards bright’ headphones and want a home listening headphone, I encourage you to get something like this. There are drawbacks, like the SR-X1’s lightweight construction that verges on flimsy. Nevertheless, there are some really high quality components in this combination, which led me to giving them the Major-Hifi Gold Award.

Get the new SRS-X1000, SR-X1, and SRM-270s at Audio 46

The post STAX SRS-X1000 Earspeaker System (SR-X1 + SRM-270s) Review appeared first on Major HiFi.

What’s in the Box?

Looks and Feel

The number one complaint I hear about the HD600 and HD650 has nothing to do with the sound, but the tight fit around the earpads and headband areas. I’m acutely aware of this because I have a head that looks too large for my already big body. Wearing the HD600 isn’t uncomfortable, but I do have to adjust them pretty far. What I immediately noticed on the HD620s was a wider headband that also has an improved headband adjustment mechanism. The foam on the earpads and headband is noticeably plushier than the HD600 and HD650. Gone is the pressing feeling of the headband. My personal opinion is that the HD620s is the most comfortable of the three, but users should try them out to see if the shape fits their unique ears and head.

In terms of looks and dimensions, the products all have the sleek character Sennheiser is known for. The closed back of the HD620s has a chassis covering, unlike its open back siblings. Size wise, they’re all relatively similar, with the weight of the heaviest (HD620s) and the lightest (HD650) being within 60g of each other. The sustained curves of the HD620s expound on the oval shape of its predecessors. There’s a continuity in the appearance of all 3 products, with minimal branding, dark colors, and arching curves. Despite this, I’m a sucker for classics. In my opinion, the HD600 is one of the best looking headphones ever released. Let us know which ones you think look best in the comments below.

Design – HD600 vs. HD620s vs. HD650 Comparison Review

All three of these headphones share a similar 42mm transducer with a 38mm diaphragm. Sennheiser hand picks components for their products ensuring a tolerance of +/-1dB. This ensures uniformity in each driver and makes moving stereo panning feel uniform. The HD600 is rated at 97db/mw, HD650 at 103db/mw, HD620s at ???dB/mw.

The only complaint I have for the HD620s is the lack of stereo 2-pin cables. Both the HD600 and HD650 come with stereo detachable 2-pin cables. This feels like a downgrade from these. I suspect that Sennheiser’s design is meant to compete with another closed-back studio legend, the Beyerdynamic DT770 Pro. I still wouldn’t say this is a dealbreaker considering the meticulous quality control and assembly Sennheiser prides itself upon. The cable is undoubtedly high quality and should last with good care.

Soundstage

It’s hard comparing closed-backs to open-backs, specifically when looking at soundstage. A closed-back structure sacrifices width for less noise bleed and better isolation. Although the HD620s does feel closer than the HD600 or HD650, I was surprised by how wide this closed-back sounded. A quick soundstage test gave me a good idea of how expansive the HD620s is. Although not as horizontally far as the others, reverbs and trailing delays sounded fantastic for a closed back. That being said, they do sound more compact, but only marginally closer. Of the three, the HD650 sounds the most holographic, with the HD600 next and the HD620s being close behind. Sennheiser has done a fantastic job of coming close to the HD600’s medium width. Fans of the series soundstage can still expect a similar width without being disappointed.

Listening Impressions – HD600 vs. HD620s vs. HD650 Comparison Review

Lows

Of the three, the warmest headphone is the HD650. The HD600 has been a longtime benchmark for neutral sounding headphones, and the HD620s follows suit in its bass frequency response. I don’t want to call the frequency response identical, but the tight and flat lows in both the HD600 and HD620s are similar without a doubt. Listening to jazz on the HD650 was my favorite application for them. Walking bass on “Birdlike” by Freddie Hubbard had a round liveliness that stepped through the track with a rich character. Soul, electronic, jazz, and rap music all sounded fat and gratifying on the HD650.

I’m a huge fan of the HD600’s bass response and the HD620s seems to enhance an already great sound signature. My impression is that a slight bump in the upper midrange brings a little bit of tightness to low-frequency instruments on the HD620s. Less noise bleed from the closed back and higher sensitivity also ‘thuds’ a little more when driven, highlighting sub-bass texture. HD600 isn’t known as a bass-focused headphone, and that same neutrality is present in the HD620s. The bass on both of these are squeaky clean and not fatiguing at all. Like an identical dish with a little extra spice, Sennheiser has recreated its classic sound signature with detailed adjustments. Out of the bunch, I have to call it a tie between the HD600 and HD620s. Sennheiser hasn’t fixed anything that wasn’t broken.

Mids

I can confidently assume that Sennheiser’s philosophy when designing the HD series doesn’t favor certain frequencies over others. The entire line top to bottom favors neutrality over boosting any particular range. That being said, the mids in the HD620s are undoubtedly the most impressive.

My impression is that the HD650 brings more low mids into the mix to avoid a low shelf past 300Hz. Although this is pleasant on pop and jazz music, certain guitar sounds like Duane Allman’s or Tom Bukovac’s become too muddy and overtake a mix. For the non guitarists, these players use gear like the Nobels ODR-1 or Marshall Super Bass which already boosts low mids. Regardless of the virtuosity of the playing, the tones hijack the sonic space when played through headphones that boost this frequency. To balance this character, Sennheiser brings up frequencies between 1.5kHZ and 2kHz. The HD650 remains neutral in signature, but I’ve always noticed a subtle lean towards favoring the low end in these. They’re a little brighter in certain spots but something about these has never felt as organic as the HD600.

The HD600, on the other hand, is phenomenal in the mid-frequencies but could have always used a touch of brightness to my ears. Although I think the HD600 may be one of the most versatile headphones ever designed, scooped sounds have always felt a little hollow to me. This isn’t a criticism at all, because I know that their recreation of mid sounds is fantastic. My personal preference comes to fruition in the HD620s. The low and middle mid character is very similar to the HD600, with a little less added brightness than the HD650. The mids are organic, full, rich, and sparkling all at the same time. Of the three, the HD620s has my favorite mid character.

Highs

Sennheiser’s highs are beautifully neutral and responsive. In short, the brightness in order from most to least is HD620S, HD600, HD650. I’ve noticed the most variation in this frequency range. The HD620s have a similar brightness to the HD650 without the whooshing lows. There aren’t the same dramatic surgical cuts to the frequency response, and I did notice a little less brilliance in the HD650. With that in mind, the HD620s has a perceptibly brighter sound because of how much less bass and low mids I’m hearing. Users should remember that if everything in a mix is boosted, nothing is boosted. This reductive EQ means that the HD620s doesn’t have to compete with the lows present in headphones like the HD650.

Being a truly neutral headphone, the HD600 has enough brightness to accentuate the character of sounds but doesn’t have enough to be fatiguing for me. Its treble response is a little more subtle than the HD620s. With that said, it has a similar voicing that just doesn’t have as much shimmer as the HD620s. Songs like “Death Message” by Extreme Noise Terror which are filled with feedback are still comfortable to listen to. I don’t seem to hear the nuances like stick attack and string noise as much when listening to the HD600. This isn’t something I’m disappointed by, considering my ears are sensitive to treble frequencies. Of the three, the HD600 has my favorite high-frequency response.

Summary – HD600 vs. HD620s vs. HD650 Comparison Review

The HD620s builds on the legacy of its predecessors while still refining what makes the Sennheiser brand great. The multitude of fans who loved the HD600 will find a lot of the similar characteristics in the HD620s. I can’t tell you that this is just a closed back version of the HD600, because of how many similarities it shares with HD650. A more accurate assessment would be to call these the blend of the HD600 and HD650 with a closed back. With that in mind, if you like the neutral character all of these have and need a closed back for recording or mixing, the HD620s is undoubtedly worth the investment.

Order the Sennheiser HD620s, HD600, and HD650 at Audio46

The post Sennheiser HD600 vs. HD620S vs. HD650 Comparison Review appeared first on Major HiFi.

Best Reference Option – Audeze LCD-X

The Audeze LCD-X keeps the same neutrality of the HD600 with just a touch more bass in their sound signature. The reason I say this is the best option for professional use is because of their ‘medium-plus’ soundstage. These sound naturally wide, and their stereo image is accurate enough to be a useful studio tool. There’s a few additions to the neutrality which don’t hinder professionals from mixing or monitoring with elite accuracy. At 103dB/mW, these are going to be easier to drive than the HD600 (96dB/mW). Overall, these are a very clear headphone which improvement from the Sennheiser while keeping the same characteristics.

Best Hi-Fi Option – HifiMan HE1000se

If you’re an audiophile and you’re looking for ultimate audio-quality, be sure to look at the HifiMan HE1000se. Their extra wide soundstage and impressive verticality means that those listening to lossless streaming/Dolby Atmos compatible music are going to get the most out of their listening. Pairing these with a good amp are going to get some very close to endgame audio quality. What’s most exciting to me about these are the subtle bassy character, which truly fits in the neutral category. For those who like versatility and neutrality, these are a fantastic option. The extra sub-bass keeps these neutural with a slight touch of flavor to keep listeners coming back.

Closest to HD600 – Sennheiser HD800S

Telling you to upgrade from the HD600 and not mentioning the HD800s wouldn’t be an honest take at all. These are undoubtedly the closest in their neutrality, but there’s serious upgrades made the the audio quality and comfort. Obviously, the Sennheiser character remains similar between these two, and if you’re married to the sound signature, this is your best option. A bigger driver means increased clarity and heightened soundstage. A balanced 4.4mm 5 pole means that listeners are going to expect more volume and connector versatility right out of the gate.

Best IEMs – Campfire Moon Rover

The new planar-magnetic IEMs from Campfire Audio are to me, an LCD-X in an IEM package. Their bass boost take a step up in the neutral signature, but also remains clear enough to make sure all parts of a mix sing. It’s medium wide soundstage allows listeners to get everything they’re looking for from bigger headphones in a more portable package. The high-mids dip a little bit, but there’s a remaining flatness that make the Moon Rover very pleasant to listen to. Because Campfire is limiting the production to 888 pairs, I want to mention the Thei Audio Monarch MKIII. Although more of a ‘V-shape’, there’s enough neutrality in the sound to compare to the HD600 and is more available than the Moon Rover.

Best Premium Option – Austrian Audio The Composer

At $2700, this is going to be the biggest jump in price from the HD600 out of any on the list. If you do have the budget for headphones in this price-range, this is going to be a fantastic neutral-style headphone. Their mids are silky and smooth without the barking grittiness some mid-focused headphones have. The wide soundstage makes these a pleasure to listen to. There’s enough brightness to give sounds great definition but not enough to make sounds fatiguing. My biggest complaint about these headphones are the proprietary “banana connectors” which will make it difficult to replace cables. I’m always incredibly skeptical when companies make claims about the superiority of their proprietary connections, because the inconvenience of using these cables generally outweigh any benefits. Nevertheless, this is a fantastic sounding pair of headphones.

Best Closed Back – Dan Clark Aeon 2 Closed Back

Although these lean closer to a ‘V-shape’ frequency response than a neutral one, these are a great option for fans of the HD600 looking for a closed back. Typically, closed-back headphones bring more bass into the sonic picture because they let less low-end escape. Nevertheless, what’s most exciting about these is the soundstage. There’s some supplemental reverb to the sound, but overall it’s surprisingly wide for a closed-back pair of cans. Dan Clark Audio is in my opinion, making some of the best closed-backs in the field. The Aeon 2 is no exception, bringing added bass in a neutral package.

Honorable Mentions – HD600 Upgrades

I wanted to bring attention to the Final D7000 and the Sennheiser HD660S2. Although these are both vastly different headphones, they have similar characteristics to the HD600 in a lot of ways. I didn’t think that the 660S2 had a place on this list considering the HD800s comes much closer in it’s frequency response to the HD600. The 660S2 has a stronger ‘V’ than neutral character, meaning that although it’s a great headphone to listen to, it’s not mimicking the HD600. Nevertheless, it’s a great option if you’re looking for a headphone that’s close to the HD600 with some added highs and lows.

The Final D7000 is a great option for listeners who are Jazz/Classical connoisseurs, without an excessive amount of low end. On the other hand, when I listened to classic Florida Death Metal, the booming low-end did make them clip in certain ranges. Although this could be due to the way these songs were mixed, I still would choose the options above over the D7000. Just because these don’t work for me, doesn’t mean you should disregard them. All our ears are shaped differently and therefore hear different things. These may be the perfect pair for you.

Summary

The various options we have in multiple price ranges means that consumers who like the Sennheiser HD600 will have multiple options when looking to upgrade. Although the stupendous value is going to be hard to replicate, the sonic magic of the Sennheiser HD600 is present in a lot of these cans.

The post So You Want to Upgrade? – Sennheiser HD600 appeared first on Major HiFi.

Function and Design

First and foremost, the Nyon cable’s swappable terminations make these an upgrade right out of the box. The HD600/650/660S2 and the like all only come with single-ended options. The fact that you can easily swap out terminations means that you’ll now be able to use these and some other 2-pin headphones with a plethora of gear. Although they’re not advertised this way, I was able to change the cable to the new Fostex TH-808. If you do decide to use the Nyon with non-Sennheiser headphones, just be sure to be gentle when fitting the cable. Placing the 2-pin connection in the wrong way could cause them to break or damage the headphone.

At 120cm, this cable is the perfect length to use with a DAC or a laptop. These fit flush into Sennheiser headphones but there is a gap when I used it with the Fostex. OFC silver construction with a copper colored rubber shielding means that you’re getting premium materials. The braiding helps with cable tangling and fits nicely on clothes without feeling heavy.

I didn’t experience any unwanted interference from the cable while using the iBasso DC-Elite. I tried walking around with the DAC plugged into my phone, and no amount of movement or shirt-rubbing gave my any static interference. These cables are clear and fit well with 2-pin connections.

Listening Impressions – Strauss & Wagner Nyon

The most notable bump in the frequency range comes from the high-mids and the treble. I tested the Fostex TH-808 and the Sennheiser HD650 with the Nyon cable. Both of these benefited greatly from the 4.4mm and 2.5mm balanced terminations. The Fostex sound signature has always been a bit too warm for my taste. Adding treble to the TH-808 really took the headphone to the next-level, by mitigating for it’s booming bass. Even through the 3.5mm termination, I still got more of this frequency. The warmness is still present, but adding treble gives them a totally new character which makes them much more pleasant and versatile to me. The “neutral-V” of the HD650 also experienced the same bump in the treble range. This gave them a little more focus and definition in their sound. Basses got a little more punchy in their delivery. In summation, this cable is defintely an upgrade from both of these headphones stock options.

Get the Strauss & Wagner Nyon Cable from their website or from Audio 46

The post Strauss & Wagner Nyon Cable Review appeared first on Major HiFi.

Look and Feel

The Mark Levinson No. 5909 is one of the most striking headphones on the market. It’s styling is reminiscent of 50s touring cars, with chrome accents, soft leather, and sloping curves. Looks are relative, but the retro-futuristic design makes these one of the best looking headphones on the market. Coming in red, black, and pewter, there are multiple options for you to get the look you want. It’s leather feels soft, but also durable and secure to wear. This is one of my favorite bluetooth devices to use day-to-day. At 355G, it’s not super light, but the construction makes it feel comfortable.

The PX8 from Bowers & Wilkins uses a more understated approach in their styling. Coming in silver, burgundy, and black, the colors are the most vibrant feature in this styling. The brushed aluminum and leather both feel smooth to the touch. At 320g per device, they’re light enough to carry around comfortably. What I’m not a big fan of is the narrow headband construction that presses the ear pads into my head. Although I didn’t find these comfortable to wear, those interested in these headphones should take an opportunity to try them out themselves.

Design

40mm dynamic drivers power the B&W PX8 limiting THD to 0.1% @1kHz/10mW. 4 ANC mics are enclosed within the aluminum construction with 2 more for phone use. They support bluetooth 5.2 and include aptX Adaptive, aptX HD, aptX, AAC, and SBC CODECs. A quick phone conversation left me with great impressions of the call quality and the device’s internal microphones. 30 hours of playback time with 7 hours on 15 minutes of charging means that these have above average battery life.

Comparing the two, the No. 5909’s 30 hours of playtime with ANC on and 6 hours on 15 minutes of charging means that these are both pretty evenly matched in their battery features. These support Bluetooth 5.1 with LDAC, AAC, and aptX Adaptive CODECs. The 4-microphone array works well for ANC and calls, but I’m not sure if call quality is on the level of the B&W. The most impressive feature I noticed was how clear and effective the ANC on the No. 5909 was. Music is able to clearly come through without the strong “whoosh” effect from other brands ANC. B&W comes close, but for all the same subtlety, there’s not as much noise cancellation.

Soundstage – Bowers & Wilkins PX8 vs. Mark Levinson No. 5909 Comparison Review

The staging on the PX8 left me wanting more to put it simply. There’s some depth to sounds and the accuracy of stereo imaging comes through well. I’m able to hear the effect of sounds creeping up behind me. What isn’t very discernible is the height of noises. These are very short in their soundstage, and the rise in the drivers are somewhat lacking. I can hear subtle changes, but the sound is still very much in my head. These aren’t very wide and at this price point, I really was expecting more from the staging.

The Mark Levinson No. 5909 is a lot more worthwhile in it’s soundstage than the competition. Although they aren’t as wide as wired headphones, their staging comes pretty close to some medium-wide headphones. There is a verticality to the sound, but it’s not going to have the same holographic qualities as $1000+ open-backs. When comparing to other Bluetooth devices, these have some of the best staging out of the bunch. They’re ultra-wide compared others in the field and have some perceptual holographic qualities.

Listening Impressions

Lows

Although both these headphones lean brighter than warmer, there’s a lot to like about the low end. With the EQ settings bringing bass up, the Mark Levinson’s are able to boom loudly. At it’s stock settings, a lot of music has a subtle bass which can get driven at higher volumes. The lows were versatile on these for the specific reason that it can handle music with a lot of mixed bass. On the other hand, recorded live sets that can sometimes lack lows are easily discernible. The drivers have enough clarity to allow for more bass with the EQ. Bassheads who want their headphones to thud will be able to attenuate their mix to “thud” the way they want it to.

Right out of the box, the PX8 is going to be bassier. With EQ settings all the way up, I noticed slightly less sub-bass but the higher bass and low mid textures hold up the warmness in the sound. These will also “thud” in a similar way, but the warmth of these headphones is held up by the high bass frequencies. These have a more dramatic “V” shaped frequency response. At the same time, music with a lot of warmth can get muddy at times. This was most clear when listening to “Help on the Way”, the Grateful Dead song covered by Bela Flek. The low pitched drums, his voice, and the bass all walk over each other in a sonic sense. There’s some unwanted boxiness in this dark mix, which wasn’t present on the No. 5909. If you’re a dedicated basshead, these will still be a great option. Just not as versatile as the Mark Levinson 5909’s.

Mids

The mids on the PX8, although not the focus of the frequency response, are one of my favorite qualities. Voices and guitars are able to sing vividly without being overpowering. Simply said, I loved how clear sounds could come through. With this in mind, sounds with a lot of low-mids can be a little too much with the way the mid-frequencies are tuned on the PX8. It is rare, but the example above demonstrates how too many voices in this register can sound a little muddy without any EQ. By and large, most mixes don’t favor these frequencies. Generally, music sounds crisp while still having a great roundness in the low-mids.

Mark Levinson’s No. 5909 are very similar in the mid quality, just with a little less low mids. Overall, voices in the mid-range have even better clarity and crispness. Sounds are a little more glassy because of the reduced low-mid quality. Cymbals don’t have too much attack on them to be sibilant, but there’s enough shine that it’s palpable listening them clash. Overall, I want to say that the 5909’s mids are more versitile than the PX8. On the other hand, it’s difficult to EQ them to sing in the same way that the PX8 can. There’s slightly less sustain out of distorted guitars, but it’s not much of a drawback considering how close they can get.

Highs

The No. 5909 have a great treble range to them once you do a simple trick to make them a little tamer. EQing the frequencies around 7kHz by about 3-5 dB evens out the treble response of these significantly. It feels like there’s a huge bump in this range that feels slightly unnatural. I didn’t do this in the app, but through my device in the Roon player. For a $1000 headphone, I want a multi-band eq specifically for this reason. Sony and Sennheiser are able to do this to their Bluetooth headphones priced in the mid $300 range. Nevertheless, there’s way less harshness to sounds once you make this slight adjustment. Before I made this shift, I noticed too much airiness in higher-pitched sounds.

Right out of the gate, these are bright headphones without being brittle. There’s a great amount of sharpness in sounds without sounding sibilant. Although I’m sensitive to highs, I didn’t experience much fatigue in this range even after hours of listening. Cymbals, high pitched voices, and airy synths all have a great shine to them with no EQing. Considering there was no doctoring I had to do on these, the PX8 wins the battle for highs in the comparison review.

Summary

Although both headphones have qualities that make them very enticing options, I have to choose the Mark Levinson No. 5909 for this comparison. Despite having an underwhelming app and too much airiness for me, they’re ultimately comfortable and have a great soundstage. The lack of comfort and soundstage of the PX8 means that although the tuning was very pleasant from these headphones, I couldn’t see myself putting them on everyday. If you’re thinking about getting a pair of PX8s, I don’t think you’ll be disappointed. However if you’re not sold and could bring your budget up, I would definitely consider the No. 5909.

Get the No. 5909 and the PX8 at Audio 46

The post Bowers & Wilkins PX8 vs. Mark Levinson No. 5909 Comparison Review appeared first on Major HiFi.

Best Bluetooth Headphones Under $200 – Sony ULT Wear

Sony’s most impressive quality in my opinion has been it’s noise cancellation and companion app. When I heard that Sony was releasing a budget friendly option, I was excited but skeptical. These didn’t disappoint at all, with great bass extension and noise cancellation. They’re incredibly lightweight and comfortable to wear on the go. The sound quality is very good, but they can get muddy if you turn on the ULT (bass boost) setting on while listening to certain kinds of music. Nevertheless, these are incredibly clear and rich sounding. For $200, I’ve never heard this heavy of a bass sound in bluetooth headphones.

Best Bass Boosted Headphones – Focal Bathys

Focal’s attention to detail and comfort are second to none in the field. Everyone of their products feels luxurious but also delivers great sound quality. The Bathys doesn’t necessarily have the loudest bass out of the box, but with the companion EQ I was able to get them to sound clean with the low frequencies all the way up. If you decide to plug them into the 3.5mm connection and turn on the internal-DAC mode, you’ll be getting the same bass as more power-hungry wired headphones. The bass on the Focal sounds great to me even when attenuating the low-end to obnoxiously high levels. Add this to the fact that they have an impressive soundstage and beautifully tuned mids. This makes the Bathys one of the best options in the field. An honorable mention goes to Sony WH-1000XM5, which has some really loud bass, but it didn’t attenuate as high as the Focal.

Best ANC Headphones – Sony WH-1000XM5

Sony’s Q1NE chip responsible for handling noise-cancelling in the XM5 does the best job out of any for blocking outside sounds. Like the ULT, these are also incredibly lightweight and comfortable. To me, this makes them perfect for traveling or working out. When testing these, I walked through Midtown Manhattan at 2 PM. The only thing that was able to get through the ANC were sirens and horns. Many retailers have them up for $328, and this ANC beats a lot of the other options for $1000+. These are going to ‘thud’ in the way bassheads want. A companion EQ allows users to pull the frequencies they may be looking for from this great pair of cans.

Best Bluetooth Headphone Battery Life – Sennheiser Momentum 4

At 60 hours of continuous battery life, it’s really hard finding an option that’s going to give you a better longevity. Most users are only going to have to charge their headphones 1 to 2 times a week. With only 2 hours for a full charge and 5 minute quick charge for 4 hours of playtime, battery life is not going to be a problem when considering these headphones. Some pleasant mids and highs in the sound signature are also a plus for these headphones. You can pick these up at most retailers for $299, making them one of the best values for the money in this list.

Best Audio Quality – Dali IO-12

It was really difficult making a selection for best audio quality. I have to say that the IO-12 is consistently impressive in most sonic fields. The soundstage is both wide and holographic while the signature tuning brings a beautiful amount of bass and treble information. Tracks seem to come alive with crisp clarity, while staying resoundingly warm. These are absolutely a higher end item that has a significant price-tag ($1300). At the same time, the price to quality ratio is still worth it in my mind considering how nice they sound. I have to give an honorable mention to the Mark Levinson No. 5909, which leans a little brighter than warmer. Although another great option, the IO12 has such an expansive soundstage that it makes it hard to beat.

Get all of the and much much more @ Audio46

The post Top 5 Bluetooth Headphones appeared first on Major HiFi.

What’s in the Box?

• GO bar Kensei
• Lightning to USB-C Cable
• USB-C OTG Cable
• USB-C to USB-A Adapter
• Quick Start Guide
• Instruction Card
• Leather Travel Case

Aesthetics/Functionality

The styling of this DAC clearly expands on the Go bar platform with added touches. I reached out to the ifi marketing team to get a better idea of what’s different on here. They told me that the design attempted to recreate the increased quality and looks of the limited edition GOld Bar 10th Anniversary DAC. Because consumers have been asking for a standard release of the same unit, iFi has decided to bring out the Kensei.

The most apparent difference is the Japanese stainless steel construction. It has a signaficantly sturdier weight to it, but it’s not outrageously heavy. There’s a 3.5mm single ended and 4.4mm balanced output. The IEmatch setting allows you to use ultra-sensitive IEMs with both outputs. “X-bass” and “X-space” allow for boosted bass and wider sound respectively. MQA and K2HD compatibility allows users with lossless streaming to get the most from their services.

Design

From first sight, it’s not easy discerning the difference between this unit and the regular ifi Go Bar priced at $329. Aside from the increased weight, it takes a persistent consumer to understand the difference. The ifi Go Bar Kensai’s important important improvements are the GMT clock, K2HD capabilities, and some enhanced circuitry. You won’t be able to get more power from this unit meaning that it’s going to drive the same headphones to the same levels as the Go Bar. Improved clocking will allow users to get ultra-low jitter from this device. K2 technology developed by JVC-Kenwood aims to process digital signals as close to master quality as possible.

I know this isn’t a sexy topic but the enhanced circuitry and aluminum housing with better EMI shielding really make the most obvious difference. Unless you’re an electrical engineer, you’re most likely not going to be that excited about op-amps and transistors. Nevertheless, these are the components of an amp and improving upon this is the most effective way to improve an amp or DAC. I personally noticed less background noise, no jitter, and increased audio quality from the ifi Go bar Kensei.

Soundstage – ifi Go Bar Kensei Review

I’m not sure if I’m missing something while listening but the regular soundstage of the Kensei literally fell a little flat for me. The X-Space setting absolutely enhances staging, but at it’s regular level I was left wanting more. With the X-Space setting on, I got the width of headphones like the Hifiman Arya Organic, but the height of sounds felt shorter than it did on other DACs. The panning of mixes still accurately comes through each driver. I’m able to get the localization that I want when listening without sounds bleeding through each ear.

What I experienced when listening to a sound staging test was that the height of recordings had a sonic ceiling. It felt like sounds rose until a certain point, and then stayed at that stage despite changes in relation to where the audio source was being recorded. The more you pay attention the more unnatural it feels. The Kensai’s saving grace is the X-Space setting which unilaterally pushes everything away in the sonic image. It’s wider than most budget DACs, but at this price point I’m expecting a little more height.

Listening Impressions – ifi Go Bar Kensei

I wanted to use a variety of headphones with different characteristics and price points in order to get the full picture of the DAC. I used the Sennheiser HD600, Fostex TH-808 and T-X0 II, Hifiman Arya Organic, and Final D8000 Pro.

The Sennheiser is a perfectly neutral headphone. I think for the price it’s the best value out of anything you can buy. That being said, the iFi Go Bar Kensei brought up some of the bass and low mid frequencies in them. It’s subtly warmer, but gives sounds enough grit to push the headphones a little bit. These aren’t the most sensitive headphones, but I was able to get them to drive to where I wanted them to be. If you really want these to dance, I’d still look at getting a more powerful DAC.

Both the Fostex are the bassiest headphones in this list to me. With this in mind, I noticed that the same sound shaping happening. I personally feel that the new TH-808 is too warm and booming for me at times. By themselves, the sound was very warm to the point where jazz tracks without too much definition became muddy. What I did to combat this was swap out the 1/4in single-ended cable for a balanced 4.4mm cable. This DAC absolutely brings out more low frequencies. With the balanced cable, I got enough of an increase in the treble side to support those lower sounds. The bass volume increased as well, but not enough to make them sound muddy like they did before. These were much easier to drive than the others.

The Arya Organic from Hifiman is not only the widest, but also the brightest headphone to me out of the bunch. Here, the personality of the DAC really enhances the sibilant headphone. I listened to “All the Things Your Are (Live)” with Louie Bellson, Barney Kessel, and Hank Jones. The masterful playing in this live recording gets brought to the next level with how much more bass you get out of the Arya. This is tangential but if you’re a jazz fan, please check this record out. These solos are filled with quotes from great tunes, and would be a joy to transcribe for any student. Regardless, the added warmth did a great job of balancing these headphones.

Because of the character of the amp, I didn’t bother turning “X-Bass” on for any of these except for the Final D8000 Pro. These headphones have such a flat and and even response, that bringing out the bass just a touch more gave these a very nice adjustment. I wouldn’t always do this with every pair of cans, but the option for it is really nice. Nevertheless, the transparency and singing mids were retained in this awesome pair of headphones. They just got a little more bass extension to really bring out a lot of nice warmness.

Summary

The Ifi Go Bar Kensei is an great improvement on one of the most popular options for portable DACs on the market. Increased clocking capabilities and an improved circuit board makes these a great option for audiophiles looking at portability. The warmness that’s provided by this DAC makes it great for bassheads or those who have any trouble listening to low frequencies. I think that some work could be done to the sound staging, but for the price it’s going to give you some great results on the go. For all these reasons, I’m giving this DAC the Major Hifi Silver Award.

Get the ifi Go Bar Kensei and all the other products I mentioned at Audio 46

The post Ifi Go Bar Kensei Review appeared first on Major HiFi.