Review of Weston ES3X

Review of Weston ES3X from Jonathan Steingard (handsome guy) :-)

Westone is about to launch a new version of their triple-driver molded in-ears... The ES3X. They had me test a pair out, and I've been enjoying them for a couple weeks now.

The standard ES3's (which have been available for a year or two) have a slight boost in the 3k-5k range, accentuating vocals, among other things. These drivers (ES3X), on the other hand, are largely flat, providing a smooth, accurate reproduction of sound sources. They are smooth and warm, and convey a sense of space in the sound they're producing. They make music sound BIG.

Part of the BIG-ness is the balance they seem to have in the bottom end. There are enough lows to provide a solid foundation without being overwhelming. Bass guitar tones feel substantial and full. Kick drums feel punchy and powerful.

The mids are well-crafted also. There is an openness in the lower midrange that is really pleasant. There is some internal porting going on, allowing the driver to "breathe" a bit, and this design really adds to the sense of space in the sound.

The highs are slightly less pronounced than I originally expected. My old single driver in-ears were quite bright, and high end frequencies were quite pronounced.... On these drivers, I can sense a dip in the high end (10k and up), especially when listening to sources that are normally quite sibilant.

On stage, this effect is quite pleasant. You can have a vocal fairly prominent in the in-ear mix without as much of the harsh sibilance from the voice, or from cymbal bleed. That being said, even with the 10k dip, the detail in high end sources is preserved remarkably. High-hats, tambourines, and shakers retain their attack and tone, and don't lose their presence in the mix.

Overall, these in-ear monitors are the most advanced, most thought-out, and most enjoyable molds I've ever used. They are particularly great for guitarists like myself, as guitar tones are wide and open in them. I can push the drivers to high levels of volume without distortion, so safe listening volumes are well within the headroom of the drivers. The tips of the earpieces are made of a softer material, that softens further as it warms up... It makes for quite a comfortable fit.

I'd recommend these ears to anyone looking for a great in-ear experience.... particularly to guitarists.

If you're in the market for custom molded in-ear monitors, or even universal-fit monitors or casual listening earphones.... be sure to check out Westone.

Original Post

HT Omega Claro Plus+ Review

HT Omega Claro Plus+

Written by Olin Coles

Original page:

HT Omega, Inc. was one of the first companies to offer authentic high-fidelity sound at a true 24-bit level of performance in their Original Claro sound card. Now revised, a new AD8620BR Op Amp from Analog Devices has joined the world class Oxygen 8788 based audio processor in the Claro Plus+. Like the Claro, the new Plus+ model supports EAX™ 1.0 & 2.0, A3D™ 1.0 and DirectSound™, but also adds Dolby Pro Logic IIx, Dolby Headphone, and a precision Base Management system. Benchmark Reviews has been fortunate enough to compare the HT Omega Claro Plus+ 24-bit/192KHz 8-channel high definition sound against the entire C-Media CMI8788 family of audio products in this review.

But we don't stop there. Back when the Claro was reviewed, integrated 5.1 channel sound was commonplace. These days, 7.1 (eight channel) audio support can be found in nearly every motherboard produced over the past year, so Benchmark Reviews will also test the HT Omega Claro Plus+ against the integrated High Definition Audio chipset previously codenamed Azalia. Don't be fooled though, because while integrated audio may offer the same high-quality 192KHz/24-bit audio output, it cannot do so without a hit to processor performance and system memory usage.

It is because of these integrated audio chipsets that manufacturers continue to throw around the term High Definition in all directions. It's everywhere; even the low-end segment seems to be offering onboard eight channel sound with their products. But it doesn't take long to notice that not all audio solutions sound alike; even if it has been labeled "High Definition". The sad truth is that consumers are unaware of the loose requirements necessary of such industry tags, and in the end some poor quality audio gets passed off as a premium solution.

This is because most computers being used today provide audio through low-quality integrated sound, or in some small numbers the computer may have a dedicated audio controller based sound card. At a glance, the two most prevalent forms of audio quality in personal computers are poor and acceptable. Although the industry tries to keep in step with Moore’s Law, there is one thing that is predominantly true: computer sound is the last item on the list for performance evolution. Gamers and audiophiles alike know better then to make this mistake, and keep sound quality at the forefront of there needs whenever they make a purchase.

In this review, I will revisit the features made famous in the original HT Omega Claro, and the new features will be showcased in the more-powerful Claro Plus+. With a sound level rating beyond 110dB, I will share the experience of clarity and definition in every melody that frolics on my eardrums. Intended for the audiophile with a discerning ear, the hardcore computer enthusiast and serious gamer who demands only the best, and the home theater buff who settles for nothing less than DTS: HT Omega offers the Claro Plus+ to delivers only the very best sound possible.

About the company: HT Omega, Inc.

HT Omega is a US based company operating out of Ontario, California which manufactures multimedia hardware and peripherals. With a dedicated R&D division for PC and professional audio components, HT Omega is quickly expanding into the global market for consumer PC audio equipment based on Dolby Digital and DTS technologies. Game users and home entertainment enthusiasts around the world use HT Omega for the ultimate results.

HT Omega specializes in multimedia devices, especially electronic audio. The research and development engineers at HT Omega have designed some of the most successful sound cards sold globally over past five years. The drive and passion of HT Omega's highly qualified employees is to continue to develop innovative and ground-breaking new products.

Claro Plus+ Features

The HT Omega Claro Plus+ with AD8620BR Op Amp is a premium-quality PCI bus 8-channel High Definition sound card that can be built into home audio electronics or personal computers to provide high fidelity sound playback and processing. The Claro Plus+ enables studio level audio performance, and offers gamers the complete spectrum of sound they require. With support for 8 outbound streams, Claro Plus+ can easily support the latest theater quality 5.1, 6.1, and especially 7.1 surround sound systems. For enhanced playback, Claro Plus+ reduces the system hardware resources used which allows complete surround sound experience whether using speakers or headphones.

HT Omega Specifications:

• The C-Media Oxygen HD CMI8788 Audio Processor
• AD8620BR OPAMP for Front Channel output
• 4 pcs 24-bit/192kHz AK4396VF (120dB-part spec.) DACs for 7.1channel output. (24-bit/192kHz in 7.1channel playback)
• 1 pc 24-bit/192kHz WM8785G (110dB-part spec.) ADC input (24-bit/192kHz recording)
• 1 pc CMI9780 AC'97 2.3 CODEC for AUX input, CD input, MIC input (16bit/48kHz playback/recording)
• Integrated up to 192k/24-bit S/PDIF high grade special Optical and Coaxial connectors for 44.1kHz,48kHz, 96kHz, 192kHz SPDIF output. (work simultaneously)
• Integrated up to 192k/24-bit S/PDIF high grade special Optical receiver for 44.1kHz,48kHz, 96kHz, 192kHz SPDIF input.
• Supports onboard Coaxial or CD Digital input connector for up to 192kHz SPDIF input. (Optional Cable need for Coaxial input)
• Standard 10-pin Front Panel Audio supports connectivity for stereo audio output and a microphone input from PC case
• DTS® Interactive - a real-time 5.1 channel encoder that takes 2 or more channels and encodes them into a DTS bit stream
• DTS® NeoPC - an up-mix matrix that turns any 2 channel audio into 7.1 channel surround sound
• Dolby® Digital Live(AC-3) real time 5.1 channel encoding bit-stream to facilitate the connection with CE AV receiver
• Dolby® Pro-Logic IIx surround processor, spreading stereo audio into 7.1 channel surround sound
• Renowned Dolby® Headphone technology, conveying 5.1 surround and 3D gaming audio over stereo headphones
• The latest Dolby® Virtual Speaker solution, creating amazing virtual surround sound from a generic two-speaker configuration
• C-Media FlexBass™ - configurable LFE channel crossover frequency(from 50 to 250Hz)
• C-Media Magic Voice™, a popular feature for disguising voice in online chatting
• C-Media Xear3D™ 7.1 Virtual Speaker Shifter technology
• C-Media's unique Karaoke functions: Microphone Echo, Key-shifting
• Individual 10-band EQ for each channel
• 27 global reverberation environments
• Play 3D demo program
• Supports most industrial standards of 3D sound for PC gaming, including EAX™ 1.0 & 2.0, A3D™ 1.0 and DirectSound™
• Supported Operating Systems: Microsoft Windows 2000 / XP / XP Media Center Edition 2005 (MCE) / XP x64 Edition, and Vista

Claro Plus+ Package Contents:

• HT Omega Claro Plus+ AD8620BR Op Amp HD Sound Card
• TOSLINK Fiber Optic Digital Cable
• Owner's Manual
• Drivers/Applications Installation CD
• Warranty Card

Closer Look: Claro Plus+

Since you can't see the immediate difference between sound card products, unlike processors or video cards, you depend on other senses. This is why sound cards have become something of a mystery to consumers. Even still, with such a fierce market for audio supiority it has become unproductive to compare one high-end card against another using your own ears. Manufacturers learned this important lesson very early on, which is why we see so many new audio devices equipped with gold-plated bells and solid-state whistles. Making a product which is visually different is a lot easier (and cheaper) then designing a high-performance product.

But what happens when you mix good looks with great performance? The last time we asked this the HT OMEGA Claro surprised us by offering both with no questions asked. This time around, the new HT Omega Claro Plus+ AD8620BR Op Amp HD Sound Card answers the question a different way: you get more than you bargained for.

Since both the Claro and Claro Plus+ are descendants of the Bgears b-Enspirer, it is refreshing to see that HT Omega did not just simply re-brand a similar product as their own. At first glance, you can see that HT Omega's use of all solid state capacitors in the product really catches attention. Not only will these components lend to a longer overall product life, but they certainly provide a more modern look to a very modern product - especially now that Gigabyte has started making them part of their marketing backbone.

At this point in technology if a product uses anything other than solid state capacitors, it might as well be tagged obsolete at the factory. Not much changes in the new Claro Plus+ AD8620BR Op Amp HD sound card, because everything is very much the same as it was originally designed for the Claro.

The new AD8620BR OPAMP for Front Channel output is complimented by two 192k/24-bit S/PDIF high grade special Optical and Coaxial connectors for 44.1kHz, 48kHz, 96kHz, 192kHz SPDIF output. Both of these S/PDIF connectors work simultaneously.

In the next section, we offer a more detailed look at the HT Omega Claro Plus+ AD8620BR Op Amp HD sound card, and prepare for testing.

Claro Plus+ Details

So far as I can tell, Benchmark Reviews has tested nearly every CMI8788-based sound card made, with the exception of the Sondigo Inferno and Auzentech X-Meridian (but not for a lack of trying). Unlike the b-Enspirer and Inferno which are clones of the C-Media reference model, the Claro and Claro Plus+ have much more in common with the X-Meridian.

The new Claro Plus+ sound card is essentially identical to the original Claro, which both use a design based on the C-Media reference model, and with the exception of an added AD8620BR Op Amp to the Plus+ they are quite literally the same product. Looks and op amps aside, these sound cards all utilize the same CMI8788 Oxygen audio processor. And why not? The C-Media Oxygen audio processor is among the best on the planet, so it makes perfect sense to build a better sound card using tried-and-true technology.

HT Omega didn't make any cosmetic changes to the Claro Plus+ when they added the AD8620BR Op Amp onto the PCB of the original Claro HD sound card. This is still evident by the ink stamped "Claro" on the top of the PCB which is identical for both versions. In all honesty though the original Claro didn't look bad at all, which gives this Plus+ version a head start on competing sound cards.

HT Omega includes an instruction/installation guide, driver software, TOSLINK optical cable, and the Claro Plus+ AD8620BR Op Amp HD Sound Card with this kit. The contents are very much identical to that of the original Claro, with the exception of a "Plus+" sticker on the front of the box.

Certainly the CLARO takes some of its styling cues from the auto industry. Between the black PCB and the gold plated accents, this card is clearly following the trends most enjoyed by the Bentley and Cadillac Escalade crowd. Come to think of it, I believe it was Creative's Sound Blaster Platinum that first hit the market with the black and gold outfit. I can accept this design, because despite it's overuse it is still attractive and refined. Let's just be thankful that colored LED's haven't made their way onto this device like they have with recent video card trends.

HT Omega Software & Installation

The HT Omega Claro Plus+ maintains a very slim profile; something most HTPS builders will appreciate. Installation is very standard: remove power from the system, install the sound card into an available PCI 2.2 slot, and fasten it to the case. The software provided by HT Omega on CD-ROM was also the most current version available at the time of this writing, so no additional downloading was necessary. I installed the HT Omega Claro Plus+ into a Windows XP Pro system at first, and later tested it with Windows Vista Ultimate Edition. To my surprise the Windows Vista system installed the device and worked without any problems.

With the Claro Plus+ in place, I found that Windows Vista did not automatically install a reference driver for the device, which I expected. So I used the drivers designed for Windows Vista available from the C-Media website to complete the installation.

There were some noticeable differences in the installations between Windows XP and Windows Vista. One difference is that Windows Vista requires you to right-click on the setup.exe file in order to run it as an administrator, and then proceed with the Windows Vista recommended installation procedure. Once installed, a small Xear 3D icon appears in the system tray. It's worth noting that a 64-bit driver is also available for both Windows XP and Vista Operating Systems.

Oxygen HD Audio Software

Most people may not need much more then the default settings for their audio equipment. Those people are also the same bunch that suffer from hearing loss and think that onboard audio is as good as it gets. HT Omega borrows from the refined C-Media toolbox to utilize the 3D Audio Configuration software (version 1.0.48.51). With the Oxygen HD Configuration software you can customize the settings to your ears’ content.

In the Main Settings page, you can adjust settings to best suite your system equipment. In this configuration, I have selected a 6-channel system with 192KHz digital audio output. Even beyond this first step, I am afforded the opportunity to raise and lower the gain from +12db to -96db on each channel. There is also a test sequence and sample music available at the bottom of the page to sample each channels configuration. During this process a simple bar graph will be drawn in the Audio System Status window showing audio peaks and valleys.

Even headphones are given special treatment, since HT Omega and C-Media are aware that not everyone has the ability or desire to mount eight speakers in their work environment.

The Mixer page is very similar to the Windows Audio advanced properties page. The one thing I noticed it that the volume knob displayed on this page will show the volume level, but it will not allow you to move the dial. I though this was a bit meaningless in a sea of feature-rich functions.

On the Effect page, you can customize and save 10-band equalizer settings to unlimited profiles. The Environment tool is a creative feature to disguise sounds or alter their presence and location. The Environment Size tool allows you to scale the sound reverberation based on your listening environment.

The FlexBass page allows for specific frequency crossover ranges to be programmed into your system. In my application, I noticed that enabling this feature cut-out my subwoofer channel and put the rear speakers in its place. I have this feature disabled so that the channels will not be affected by software separation of the channels.

RightMark 3DSound Testing

Since hearing and sound sensitivity is subjective to the individual, I relied upon software to do my bidding. It has become necessary to distrust my own ears, since each and every manufacturer declares specific device features; such as support for particular APIs and extensions, specific number of hardware accelerated sound buffers. it has become impossible to check the presence and quality of features declared for any sound device or new drivers without special software. Therefore, a dedicated sound test is required to diagnose and test the feature implementation quality of specific sound system.

This is where I depend on software to assist me in a subjective comparison. For testing sound cards, I know that my ears aren't a calibrated device nor are they reliable. I depend on RightMark 3DSound (v2.3). This is an independent synthetic sound test for benchmarking hardware features and quality of software support, specifically using the RightMark 3DSound: CPU Utilization test. All tests were run using the DirectSound test battery, and were configured with a frequency of 192,000 and 128 buffers.

It would be unfair to compare audio devices which promise very different features, so in my testing I decided to compare the HT Omega CLARO to its slightly older cousin, the Bgears b-Enspirer. Both devices utilize C-Media's CMI8788 Oxygen chipset, and both offer audio quality up to 24bit/192kHz over eight channels. The major difference between the two is in the construction and I/O interfaces.

Test System

• Motherboard: ASUS P5K3 Deluxe (Intel P35 chipset) with BIOS 810 (11/02/2007)
• Processor: Intel E6550 Core 2 Duo 2.33GHz @ 3.3GHz
• System Memory: Corsair PC3-14400 DDR3 1800MHz 2GB RAM Kit @1889MHz
• Cooling: Xigmatek HDT-S1283 Exposed Copper Heatpipe CPU Cooler
• Video: FOXCONN GeForce 8800 GTS 640MB overclocked to 600MHz Core / 900MHz RAM
• Hard Disk 1: Western Digital WD360GD 10,000 RPM SATA
• Optical Drive: Toshiba Samsung SH-S203 SATA 20x DVD R/W
• Enclosure: Antec P182 Performance One ATX Case with 2x120mm cooling fans
• PSU: ePower Technology EP-1200P10 xScale 1200W PSU
• Operating System: Windows XP Professional SP-2 (optimized to 16 processes at idle)

Audio Test Equipment

• RightMark 3DSound v2.3
• Bgears b-Enspirer 7.1 Channel 24-Bit Sound Card
• HT OMEGA Claro 7.1 Channel 24-bit 192KHz PCI Sound Card
• HT Omega Claro Plus+ 8 Channel Sound Card with AD8620BR Op Amp

Performance

Bgears b-Enspirer DirectSound 2D CPU Usage

HT Omega CLARO DirectSound 2D CPU Usage

HT Omega Claro Plus+ DirectSound 2D CPU Usage

From the charts above, you can see that the HT Omega CLARO is clearly not the same card as the Bgears b-Enspirer. While sound output quality may be identical, the CPU usage is slightly different. The DirectSound 2D tests showed that the Bgears b-Enspirer peaked at 5% and dropped to as low as 2.5% CPU utilization, while the HT Omega CLARO peaked as high as 7.5% and dropped to 3.5% comparatively.

Bgears b-Enspirer DirectSound 3D+EAX CPU Usage

HT Omega CLARO DirectSound 3D+EAX CPU Usage

HT Omega Claro Plus+ DirectSound 3D+EAX CPU Usage

Again, for the DirectSound 3D and EAX test you see that the HT Omega CLARO requires just a little more CPU then the Bgears b-Enspirer. In this test, the Bgears b-Enspirer peaked at 7% and dropped to as low as 2.5% CPU utilization, and the HT Omega CLARO peaked as high as 9% and dropped to 3.5%. These results certainly won't translate into any noticeable performance hit, but the numbers are there.

Passmark SoundCheck Testing

There really aren't a lot of testing programs out there for audio processors. In many ways, it becomes unfair to test one against another unless they share the same input/output interface.

Passmark offers a testing program named SoundCheck, which monitors the bitrate output and CPU usage. While the CPU usage is virtually useless on most systems anymore, since the figure is often times less than 1%, I didn't bother to take it into consideration. Especially when you consider the degree of error in such a result. Watch the Windows Task Manager on an idle PC and you'll see what I mean: the CPU usage moves all over the place even if you're system has been streamlined down to 16 processes (like our test system).

For testing this set of sound cards, I used the highest settings the SoundCheck software would allow. In each test, SoundCheck's sample rate was set to 128,000. I really would have liked to see a higher rate, as to really stress the cards, but it didn't exist in the program. Next, the channel setting was set to 2 stereo channels and the resolution was set to 24-bit. Finally, the sound buffer was set to 1MB and the white noise test sound was played.

Test System

Motherboard: ASUS P5K3 Deluxe (Intel P35 chipset) with BIOS 810 (11/02/2007)
Processor: Intel E6550 Core 2 Duo 2.33GHz @ 3.3GHz
System Memory: Corsair PC3-14400 DDR3 1800MHz 2GB RAM Kit @1889MHz
Cooling: Xigmatek HDT-S1283 Exposed Copper Heatpipe CPU Cooler
Video: FOXCONN GeForce 8800 GTS 640MB overclocked to 600MHz Core / 900MHz RAM
Hard Disk 1: Western Digital WD360GD 10,000 RPM SATA
Optical Drive: Toshiba Samsung SH-S203 SATA 20x DVD R/W
Enclosure: Antec P182 Performance One ATX Case with 2x120mm cooling fans
PSU: ePower Technology EP-1200P10 xScale 1200W PSU
Operating System: Windows XP Professional SP-2 (optimized to 16 processes at idle)

Audio Test Equipment

• Passmark SoundCheck v3.0.1001
• ADI AD1988B 8-channel High Definition Audio CODEC (ASUS P5K3)
• Bgears b-Enspirer 7.1 Channel 24-Bit Sound Card
• HT OMEGA Claro 7.1 Channel 24-bit 192KHz PCI Sound Card
• HT Omega Claro Plus+ 8 Channel Sound Card with AD8620BR Op Amp

Passmark's SoundCheck (v3.0.1001) is a software-based tool for benchmarking the CPU usage and bitrate delivered from the sound card.

ADI AD1988B Audio CODEC (ASUS P5K3/Soundmax HD)

To begin the testing the set, I started with the onboard audio chipset. With the onboard audio enabled and the Soundmax HD driver installed, I used Passmark SoundCheck to measure bitrate output.

In all honesty, I sincerely though Passmark's SoundCheck benchmark tool would prove that onboard sound is a poor audio solution. As it turns out, I was wrong. Offering only 0.2551% bitrate loss, it seems that the ADI AD1988B Audio CODEC is very much a competitor to aftermarket solutions. It may not a 24-bit audio solution, but it still offered great output... for free.

SoundCheck Test on ADI AD1988B 8-channel High Definition Audio CODEC (ASUS P5K3)

• Average Byte/Second Data Rate Output: 766,041 out of 768,000 requested (-0.2551%)

Bgears b-Enspirer 7.1 Channel 24-Bit Sound Card

Moving on to the Bgears b-Enspirer, I tried not to form the same opinion. Even though the b-Enspirer doesn't look as modern since it has standard capacitors, it offers every bit the same sound quality as the other two C-Media Oxygen HD CMI8788 based sound cards.

SoundCheck Test on Bgears b-Enspirer 7.1 Channel 24-Bit Sound Card

• Average Byte/Second Data Rate Output: 766,234 out of 768,000 requested (-0.2300%)

HT Omega Claro 7.1 Channel 24-bit 192KHz PCI Sound Card

HT Omega's original Claro sound card practically matched the b-Enspirer performance in the SoundCheck benchmark. Just as the RightMark 3DSound testing showed, the Claro products are not quite as efficient as the b-Enspirer despite the looks.

SoundCheck Test on HT OMEGA Claro 7.1 Channel 24-bit 192KHz PCI Sound Card

• Average Byte/Second Data Rate Output: 766,200 out of 768,000 requested (-0.2344%)

HT Omega Claro Plus+ 8 Channel Sound Card with AD8620BR Op Amp

Finally we arrive to our featured product. Based on the previous tests, the Claro Plus+ fall directly in-line with the results of the other two Oxygen HD CMI8788 sound cards. Considering that the error of margin should be at least 0.01%, it could be argued that all three audio products offer the same output bitrate.

SoundCheck Test on HT Omega Claro Plus+ 8 Channel Sound Card with AD8620BR Op Amp

• Average Byte/Second Data Rate Output: 766,202 out of 768,000 requested (-0.2341%)

Final Thoughts

HT Omega Claro Plus+ 8 Channel Sound Card with AD8620BR Op Amp

Have we reached a point in technology where the product exceeds our needs? This was the question that kept ringing in my ears throughout the article. I appreciate good quality sound as much as the next person, but even with a 5.1 channel Logitech X-540 speaker set positioned around me I still seem to feel very underpowered. It would be unfair to say the HT Omega Claro Plus+ 8 Channel Sound Card with AD8620BR Op Amp is just another sound card waiting to turn your gaming experience into a live action movie; the 7.1 channel integrated audio proved that it could do that. To fully appreciate the quality an operational amplifier attached to a 24-bit audio processor, you'll need to invest in some very high-quality (read: not Logitech, Creative, or Altec Lansing) or at least some very nice headphones.

Claro Plus+ Conclusion

From the colorful retail box to the black and gold accents, the Claro Plus+ maintains an appealing presentation. Solid state capacitors ensure long-life durability. and true 24-bit sound promises performance.

If you are even slightly inclined to appreciate great, high-quality sound, then you owe it to yourself to move up to professional grade audio hardware; and if you already insist on only the best than the HT Omega Claro Plus+ with AD8620BR Op Amp is clearly the sound card for you. Back when I reviewed the original Claro sound card I mentioned that my Logitech X-530 5.1 speaker system seemed outclassed by the quality; and even with a slight upgrade to the X-540 system I stand by my original statement. If you buy a race car, you buy racing tires. So if you want professional-grade audio from your computer you had better be prepared to step up into a full range 7.1 speaker system that can handle the fidelity.

The biggest setback for this premium product is the premium price. At the time of this writing, the HT Omega Claro Plus+ 8 Channel Sound Card with AD8620BR Op Amp is available at Newegg.com for $174.99. The price of the original Claro sound card has actually gone up since it was first available from NewEgg, perhaps because of the comparable products (Xi-Fi and Sonar) which cost slightly more but offer the same specifications. At any rate, we should hope to see some other major online retailers picking up on this product soon so that the competition can begin dropping the prices to meet with consumer demand. In regards to the overall value, it's difficult to ignore the quality sound card bundled with an included TOSLINK Fiber Optic Digital cable.

In conclusion, this is the answer audio professionals has waited for. If you approach the Claro Plus+ with the proper speakers, it will exceed your expectations. To a large extent this review has focused on the C-Media Oxygen HD CMI8788 audio processor driven family of sound cards, but I have done so for a specific reason. It's not as if Benchmark Reviews is unaware of the different sound card products outside of the b-Enspirer, Claro, or Claro Plus+, but these are the most popular sound cards utilizing the Oxygen 8788 processor at the moment. The X-Fi and Sonar are just settling in on the market with the same hardware as the CMI8788 has offered for over a year now. So when it comes down to decision making, you need to only determine if you're willing to use premium audio hardware with a premium sound card. Anything less would be unfair to your ears.

Pros:

+ Unparalleled sound quality
+ True 24-bit audio processing
+ Digital 192KHz output into 8 independently controlled channels
+ AD8620BR Op Amp front channel enhancement
+ Feature-driven software interface
+ Solid state capacitors
+ Simultaneous optical and digital coax output
+ Gold plated I/O panel
+ Internal & front panel digital/analog connections

Cons:

- Premium pricing for a premium product
- Requres audiophile-grade speakers to achieve best results
- Software interface would benefit from a help file or balloons
- Audible improvement over ADI AD1988B integrated audio (ASUS P5K3) was marginal

Ratings:

• Presentation: 9.25
• Appearance: 9.75
• Construction: 9.75
• Functionality: 9.50
• Value: 6.75

Final Score: 9.0 out of 10.

Excellence Achievement: Benchmark Reviews Golden Tachometer Award.

Ultimate Ears Super.Fi 5 Review [New Version v2]

By: Martin Sägmüller on December 2, 2008 11:56 AM

Since the reader comments on my Ultimate Ears UE 11 Pro review were quite polarizing (“best thing ever” vs. “who is insane enough to buy such an overpriced thing”) I thought it would be a good idea to give one of the less expensive Ultimate Ears universal fit earphones a closer look. We at abi aren’t entirely made of money – and neither are many of our esteemed readers, so it’s probably good to keep the reviews in balance, financially speaking.

Enter the Super.Fi 5, the newest (and cheapest) member in Ultimate Ear’s series of medium-priced earphones. The name couldn’t be any more confusing, considering there are two other phones from the same range available, the Super.Fi 5 Pro and Super.Fi 5 EB. It’s no surprise these new Super.Fi 5 “Without A Suffix” are often called “SF5 v2”, “2.0”, or “The New One” in blogs and internet forums to avoid confusion.

Read on for the in-depth review.

* Ultimate Ears Super.Fi 5 Specs
* Driver: single custom balanced armature, top-firing
* Sensitivity: 115dB @ 1mW
* Impedance: 13 Ohm @ 1kHz
* Frequency range: 15Hz – 15kHz
* Cable: 120cm/46” (Y-style), straight 3.5mm gold-plated plug, microphone (optional, on the VI version)
* Accessories: Carrying case, silicon tips (2xS/4xM/2xL), Comply foam tips (4xM), cleaning tool

Accessories

The Super.Fi 5 come with a small plastic box with rounded edges. I don’t know how long it will take until the thin latch on the box breaks, but the size and form factor is very nice for use on the go. It's certainly more secure than storing earphones in cloth or leather bags. Next to the earphones you can store the ear wax cleaning tool in it and there might still be some space left to store a spare set of tips.

The included silicon tips are typical Ultimate Ears quality: thick and sturdy, yet soft and comfortable, with no injection mold ridges. I’ve always been a fan of UE’s older gray Super.Fi tips, and the new white ones don’t disappoint either. They’re certainly my favorite kind of silicon tips. Due to the thickness of the silicon material they might isolate a tiny bit more than thinner tips, but this might also depend on one’s ear canal shape. All in all, their isolation is pretty much average, same level as most other canal-phones out there provide.

Same as with many other medium/high-class earphones nowadays, the SF5 come with some fancy and expensive Comply foam tips. Too bad there are only two pairs of the same medium-sized Comply tips in the box. They’re too small for my ears and don’t seal at all – even if the equally large medium-sized silicon tips are perfectly fine for my ears. I'd appreciate it if Ultimate Ears packed a pair of large foamies with the SF5 instead. Comply foam tips give good isolation and are easy to compress and insert – but they don’t last longer than about a week or two with constant use and are therefore in my opinion seriously overpriced at about $15 for three pairs. So better save them for your next flight or train voyage and don’t waste them on everyday use.

Design, Build, Specs

Contrary to the older dual driver Super.Fi 5 Pro and EB variants, the new Super.Fi 5 use single armature drivers to reproduce audio. Time doesn’t stand still; armature technology is getting better, so it must not be a bad thing having fewer drivers in a phone. The Phonak Audéo for example shows that a single armature can even surpass some dual- or triple armature phones in certain aspects. I’ll say more about that in the sound chapter below, but in general the new SF5 don’t have to fear the comparison to their more expensive dual driver siblings in the SF5 range.

The one detail where the new SF5 completely stomp all over the older SF5Pro and SF5EB (as well as the Super.Fi 3 and Triple.Fi 10, for that matter) is comfort and fit. My personal opinion is that the SF5Pro and EB are the most uncomfortable and anatomically incorrect phones ever created. Their designers appear to never have seen a human ear in their life, which resulted in phones that are – both form- and comfort-wise – a blend of Lieutenant Uhura’s humongous “communicator” earpiece in Star Trek and the head screws of Frankenstein’s monster.

The new Super.Fi 5 are the exact opposite: very comfortable, easy to insert, and they don’t stick out of one’s ears in an unsightly manner. They might not fit exactly as securely as the other SF5 models with memory wire on the cables, but they certainly won’t fall out of one’s ears with normal use. I’ve been using them for some weeks now, even in bed – I couldn’t wish for a much more comfy phone for sleeping, my ears aren’t sore at all in the morning. Kudos to Ultimate Ears for creating an entirely different housing from scratch and not reusing design parts from the older SF5 models.

The left and right earpieces are easy to tell apart because of the distinctive bend in the housing. Nevertheless Ultimate Ears added another subtle visual cue: the inside of the right earphone is translucent red, the left one translucent gray. It’s quite unobtrusive having this color coding on the inside of the phones – contrary to defacing the outside, as seen on some Etymotic or MylarOne phones.

On the outside, the Super.Fi 5 are really quite fetching. I’m usually not a fan of blingy stuff, but the mirror-like chrome finish of the plastic (Ultimate Ears calls it “liquid silver”) and the minimalist UE logo look great. Of course the chrome is a fingerprint magnet, but it can be easily cleaned. My SF5 aren’t scratched yet; I hope they are going to be shiny for a bit longer…

So far, build quality appears to be fine. The phones’ housing feels solid and well manufactured. Strain reliefs should work reliably and the cables have a good diameter. The cables feel a tad stiff and rubbery though – but because of that they don’t tangle much, which is always a very welcome feature. Unlike the older SF5Pro and EB, the new version’s cables aren’t removable. I never had durability issues with any of Ultimate Ears’ cables, so I wouldn’t say this is a real disadvantage.

Personally, I prefer to wear the phones with the cables over my ears, which gives a better fit and reduces cable noise (“microphonics”), but the SF5 can be worn the traditional way as well, with the cables hanging down. With the cables hanging down they transfer a bit too much noise for my taste, but worn up around the ears they’re quite well behaved.

A few explanations concerning the technical mumbo-jumbo might be in order as well. An impedance of 13 Ohm and a sensitivity of 115db/mW means the Super.Fi 5 are loud – really, really loud. There are certain disadvantages to phones with ridiculously low impedances like this: background hiss, stereo separation issues, and bass roll-off could happen on many portable audio players. I really don’t know why companies even make phones with these kinds of exaggerated impedance/sensitivity specs – all modern MP3 players work perfectly fine with phones that provide “reasonable” specs, somewhere between 30 and 60 Ohm, and a sensitivity below 110dB/mW.

This being said, the Super.Fi 5 work fine on my Sansa Clip, with negligible background hiss and deep bass. On my Cowon D2 (and many other players) however they hiss a bit more, and their bass response isn’t as deep and massive as it could be. To fix these issues I use a portable headphone amp in between the Cowon D2 and the phones, then they perform even better than plugged directly into the Sansa Clip. An impedance adapter dongle could help as well. Of course they probably would sound perfectly fine for most people without an amp or impedance adapter; it’s rather subtle, not a “night and day” difference. It’s just sad to see these issues could be easily avoided with slightly higher impedance ratings. There’s really no advantage in using 13 Ohm instead of, say, 32 Ohm for earphones.

Sound

As strange as it seems, the Super.Fi’s armature drivers need some time to settle down (or “burn in”, as some people like to call it). I was honestly shocked how muddy and clogged they sounded right out of the box, but they got better over time – a lot better. After a few hours of listening they sounded fine – something I experienced with only one other armature phone before, the Shure SE530. Usually armatures don’t change their sound characteristics, but as it seems there are exceptions to this rule. Maybe it’s not only the phones but also the listener’s brain that “burns in” and gets accustomed to the new sound. In any case – give them some time; don’t judge them by their sound after the first few minutes you listen to them.

Of all single armature phones I heard to date the Super.Fi 5 certainly are among the bass heavier ones. They have about as much bass as the Phonak Audéo, slightly more than the dual-driver q-Jays, and a lot more than the Etymotic ER-6.The SF5 are almost on par with the dual-armature Super.Fi 5 Pro (just a bit less), the dynamic driver MylarOne X3i, or first generation V-Moda Vibes. The usual deficiency of low frequency impact in single armatures doesn’t apply to the SF5; they should satisfy most casual listeners’ tastes. It’s an enjoyable bass response for MP3 players on the go, even for players that don’t have a decent EQ or a rolled off bass response with low impedance phones.

Ultimate Ear’s claim that the SF5’s bass goes down to 15Hz is of course not true, the bass starts at about 27Hz. This is good enough, since portable players (and even professional sound cards) usually can’t reproduce frequencies below 20Hz anyway (and hardly any music track contains frequencies below 30Hz).

The midrange isn’t really recessed despite the phones' slight loudness curve or “fun” sound character. Vocals, guitars, etc. aren’t so much in the background that something would appear to be missing from the music. It’s a nice midrange for rock, pop, and also many styles of electronic music work well. Where the SF5 midrange lacks a bit is with dense, layered music, like string ensembles, choirs, or pipe organ chords. The armatures seem to be somewhat overwhelmed by such complex sounds, and the result is a slightly veiled or “nasal” presentation. However, solo guitars, vocals, and similar materials work well and sound good – when they’re not embedded in too dense background music.

Even if in some cases there seems to be a slight veil covering their clarity, they are definitely more detailed and precise than any average dynamic driver earphone. The difference might not be as obvious as with "surgical" precision phones, like the Phonak Audéo or Etymotics, though. Nevertheless, the SF5's dynamics, instrument separation, and attack speed is certainly a lot better than what can be found in most dynamic driver IEMs, and that’s what makes armatures so appealing, at least in my opinion.

An interesting feature about the treble is that it hardly ever seems to get veiled or lose its crispness. It’s usually quite clear and not influenced by the midrange and bass – not a bad feat for a single armature, covering the whole frequency range. The treble can be somewhat forward sounding, but it isn't too bright in general. It can get a bit harsh and sibilant with some badly recorded material, but for most recordings it’s very enjoyable. I didn’t notice any roll-off, Ultimate Ear’s claim that the driver reaches 15 kHz seems quite reasonable. All in all, the SF5’s treble is quite a bit better than what average dynamic driver IEMs usually are able to reproduce, just as one would expect from an armature.

Similar to the Phonak Audéo, the Super.Fi’s armatures don’t blast their sound directly into one’s ear canals, it goes around some corners in the housing. Ultimate Ears calls them “top fire” armatures. This might be a factor in the better than average stereo positioning and soundstage width of the SF5. While the music of course is still pretty much “in your head”, the Super.Fi manage a noticeably wider soundstage than most of the small direct-firing armature phones, like the q-Jays, Etymotics, or the older Super.Fi 5 Pro/EB models. Soundstage is one of the strongest points of the SF5. I sure hope to see more “indirectly firing” earphones in the future.

Compared to their more expensive dual-driver siblings, the new Super.Fi 5 are a tiny bit less precise (detailed, textured) and punchy than the SF5 Pro, but they have way better soundstage and are somewhat more “fun” to listen to. It might just be me, but because of their "exciting" sound the new SF5 even seem to have slightly better instrument separation than the SF5Pro. Compared to the bass monster Super.Fi 5 EB, the new SF5 of course have less (yet better defined) bass, but also better clarity and treble. Furthermore, considering the quite bad form factor and fit issues of the two older Super.Fi 5 models, I personally prefer the new version in any case. Besides the arbitrary name, they don't share many similarities with the other two SF5 variants anyway.

In my opinion they are a step up from the older two SF5 versions in most aspects – not a step down, despite their lower price.

Conclusion

So… who are the Super.Fi 5 actually made for? Ultimate Ears’ claim of the SF5 being made for “fashion minded consumers who listen to a variety of music genres” seems about right. In my opinion the SF5 are a good upgrade for people who used some of the inexpensive, higher quality dynamic driver phones like the V-Moda Vibe, MylarOne X3i, or people who want a less analytic, sterile sound than the q-Jays, Etymotics, or similar ones provide. The Super.Fi cater to people who like an “euphonic” loudness curve style that works well with portable players. They are tuned for “fun”, not for analyzing sound waves – which clearly must not be a negative thing, depending on one’s personal taste.

If you’re fed up with your dynamic driver earphones’ lack of instrument separation, dynamics, punch, or treble, but also don’t want overly analytic phones that aren’t “exciting” to listen to, then you should take a good look at the Super.Fi 5. They are really nice performers in general. Maybe not the best choice for critical listening, mixing, and mastering – but great for enjoying music on the go. All in all, they’re really precise compared to dynamic driver earphones and they’re really fun sounding for single armatures. Over the last few weeks I have grown to like them a lot - in my book they're a keeper.

Pros

• “Fun”, “exciting” sound signature, slight loudness curve character
• Very good soundstage for an earphone
• Good comfort and fit, fetching chrome looks

Cons

• Impedance is very low, may result in background hiss and rolled-off bass response with some audio players (can be fixed with an amp or impedance adapter)
• Slightly veiled midrange with certain complex audio materials

Purchase

MSRP of the Super.Fi 5 is $169.99 ($189.99 for the VI version with microphone); Amazon.com has them for cheaper, as usual.

Phonak Audéo PFE (Perfect Fit Earphone) Review

By: Martin Sägmüller on November 19, 2008 12:53 PM

Phonak, a market leading Swiss hearing aid company that has been around for over 50 years, recently joined the competitive in-ear monitor game with the release of their single armature based Audéo PFE (“Perfect Fit Earphones”).

While Phonak’s high-end hearing aids go for several thousands of dollars, their earphones are quite reasonably priced at $139 for the regular phone version and $159 for the headset version with microphone.

Read on for the full lowdown, but hold on to your wallet if you’re easily excited about earphones with near-perfect clarity and resolution – for a lower price than most of the competition offers…

• Phonak Audéo PFE (“Perfect Fit Earphone”) Specs
• Driver: single balanced armature
• Sensitivity: 107 dB @ 1 mW
• Impedance: 32 Ohm @ 1 kHz
• Frequency range: 5 Hz – 17 kHz
• Cable: 110 cm / 3.6 ft (Y-style), straight 3.5 mm gold-plated plug, microphone (optional)
• Accessories: Carrying case, silicon tips (S/M/L), Comply foam tips (M), cleaning tool, acoustic filters, silicon ear guides

Accessories

The Audéo PFE come with the usual accessories one would expect with a medium-priced ear monitor – but the items that stick out in a very positive way are the ingenious silicon ear guides which provide a proper over-the-ear fit and reduce cable noise. These silicon “memory wires” are removable and fit on most other earphone cables as well. All other in-ear phones I tried them with did also benefit from a better cable fit and reduced cable noise transmission. Phonak had a quite bright idea with those, and it seems they are going to sell these cable guides separately – if you have cable noise issues or cables slipping you should give them a try.

The carrying pouch is quite nice as well, as it has two compartments – one for the phones, the other one for the accessories. Since it’s made of quite thin fabric it won’t keep your phones from cracking when you sit on them, but it’s a good way to keep all the tiny parts in one place.

Silicon tips are very similar to the ones that come with Shure earphones, thick and sturdy, with unobtrusive injection mold ridges. They do their job very well and aren’t likely to tear. Foam tips supplied with the Audéo are of the fancy, expensive Comply kind. The PFE only come with medium sized Comply foam tips, which are probably too small for a lot of ears out there. Well, they give you a “fix” of the good stuff and expect you to buy the ones fitting your ears separately…

Phonak took a welcome modular approach with the Audéo PFE’s sound signature. They provide two varieties of acoustic filters and a filter changing tool with the phones. One kind of filter (white) gives a more midrange-centric signature, the other one (black) is more of a loudness-contour kind of sound presentation, boosting bass and treble a bit. It might not be as sophisticated as the Sleek SA6’s tweakability, but it gets the job done – and the difference between the filters is audible, to a certain extent.

The downside to these filters might be that they need to be replaced over time, but I can’t say how long the filters hold up, and how much some replacement filters are going to cost (two pairs of both filter variants come with the Audéo, four black, four white).

Design, Build, Specs

Phonak claims their single armature drivers go from a 5 Hz earthquake-simulation straight up to 17 kHz. While I (and probably many other humans) don’t hear these absolute extremes or have music that contains these bass frequencies, the Audéo’s drivers certainly cover the audible frequency range perfectly well. A 20 Hz bass is no issue for them; neither do they lack the upper-most treble extension.

Their decent impedance of 32 Ohm and their not overly exaggerated sensitivity of 107dB means one thing for real-life usage: they don’t hiss much, even with problematic players. They behave very well on the Cowon D2, known to be a somewhat hissy player with many low impedance phones, and they even passed the most devious of tests: plugging them into the epitome of hiss-inferno, the Nintendo DS. The Phonaks aren’t the loudest phones available, but of course they perform well with any modern player, being more than loud enough for anyone’s needs. Trading a little sound pressure level quantity for noiseless background quality certainly is the right thing to do.

Build quality is ok on the Audéo PFE; they’re neither the shabbiest nor the best built phones around. They’re all-plastic, with a decorative metal plate hiding two screws underneath, for access to the armature drivers. There aren’t any other in-ear phones I know of that use standard Phillips screws to hold them together. This might be a welcome target for DIY repairmen or other “tweak-a-holics”, since recabling the Audéo seems like a very easy task, compared to other earphones which are usually glued or snapped together.

The Audéo’s cables are top notch. They remind me of Shure’s SE530 cables in certain ways: thicker diameter than usual, very soft, little noise transmission, and virtually tangle-proof. The strain relief on the 3.5mm plug appears to be a bit stiff, the Y-splitter has no strain relief, and the part of the housing where the cable enters the earphones is rubberized… I’ve seen better solutions, but it work so far. Cable length is 110cm, which is slightly shorter than what most other companies use. I find this to be a great length, as there is no excess cable getting in the way, be it with the player in my trousers’ or in my jacket’s pocket. It might not be the perfect length for a basketball player or similar beanpole, but for me it’s just right.

On a side note: the Audéo PFE are made in Vietnam, which is somewhat out of the ordinary. Most other mass-manufactured phones usually come from China, Taiwan, Japan, or Korea. Vietnamese quality control certainly seems up to the task, no complaints there.

Let’s talk wearing comfort. The Audéo are marketed as “Perfect Fit Earphones” with “exceptional comfort” – well, they don’t really come close to that bold claim, at least for using them while sleeping. Phonak might be a company that has 50 years experience with hearing aids, but they sure failed at making their first earphones as comfortable as their advertisements promise. It’s rather simple, actually: doesn’t Phonak’s design team know that you don’t put sharp edges on earphones?

When using the Audéo for sleeping my ears feel like they’ve been resting on a two-by-four piece of lumber for the night. Anatomically speaking, these phones put pressure on some sensitive parts of my ears, specifically the inner side of the tragus, the part above the tragus, and the anti-helix. “Simple” shaped earphones like the Sennheiser CX300 or V-Moda Vibe are more comfortable for me and even bigger, bent ones like the Shure SE530 provide better comfort while sleeping.

However, to be fair: for regular use they’re ok and don’t hurt like when using them in bed, but my ears still get slightly irritated after some time when using them on the go. The bottom part of the housing is the main culprit here, the lower edge of the metal veneer tickling my ear’s anti-helix. It might just be me, though – people with bigger (or less sensitive) ears might have fewer issues.

This being said, the other part of Phonak’s “perfect fit” claim is true – they fit securely and aren’t likely to fall out. I’ve been working out with them, and they never even broke their seal. The silicon ear guides aren’t really necessary for a secure fit since the phones stay put on their own (well, I didn’t do cartwheels and similar capers). The guides are more useful for counteracting cable noise, but that might vary depending on a person’s ear shape. In any case, the Audéo PFE are a very good choices for people looking for workout phones.

The amount of outside noise isolation can be altered to fit one’s needs. With silicon tips the Audéo isolate about as much as every other IEM out there, with Comply foam tips they attenuate quite a bit more. They won’t block noise as efficiently as Shure SE530 foamies or Etymotic triple-flange tips, but they work well enough for reducing road, train, and similar noises so you don’t have to turn the volume on your MP3 player to unsafe levels.

Which brings me to a point that’s quite important to me personally: I hate having to listen to dangerously high volume levels; I want to preserve my hearing for years to come. Fortunately, the PFE are phones that work quite well even at very low listening levels. Many other earphones don’t sound good at quiet levels (especially when driven by a wimpy MP3 player amp); they often lack bass impact, detail, and dynamics. The Audéo are an exception to this rule, they sound very acceptable at low volume settings. Some day your ears will thank you for that.

Sound

Phonak sent me a prototype version of their Audéo PFE a few months ago. Back then I wasn’t overly pleased with the small amount of bass this preproduction unit delivered. Now, a few months later I was quite surprised when I put the bass-enhancing filters onto my new final-version Audéo, started listening, and noticed these things now actually got some of the desired “oomph” going on. The prototypes had about as little bass as Etymotic ER-6, and the various filters didn’t really help much. Now they have about as much as the q-Jays, but with slightly deeper bass extension and less roll-off. Furthermore, none of that silly midbass exaggeration that can be found in cheap boomy phones is present in the Audéo’s sound; it’s all the real deal, all the way down to 20 Hz, tight and punchy. However, as good as the quality is, the quantity certainly won’t please a diehard basshead – at least not without some EQ tweaking.

Midrange is very neutral, detailed, and smooth. Where phones like the q-Jays might sound “hollow” and Etymotic “too forward” with certain audio material, the Audéo sound very natural and balanced. They’re not quite up to the glorious smoothness of the SE530’s midrange, but considering the Audéo’s price range, they’re more than fine. Even very complex music like orchestral pieces or dense heavy metal tracks sound good and are reproduced with ease. It seems as if Phonak’s history in creating hearing aids shows here as well, as human voices seem to have a particularly great intelligibility on the PFE. I would say the Audéo fit well in the noble “ear monitor” category; a mere “earphone” denomination is a bit of an understatement.

Treble quantity is just about right – less than the q-Jays, more than the SE530, about as much as the UE11. The actual quantity depends a bit on the acoustic filters used, but I didn’t notice as much difference between the two filter varieties as with the bass response. Treble quality is great, in every way. It’s never harsh or sibilant, yet there’s no detail missing in the music. They sparkle without hurting, so to speak – and that’s a good thing. I didn’t notice any significant roll-off, which isn’t the norm with single armatures trying to reproduce the whole audible frequency range, but the Audéo don’t disappoint; right up to my hearing’s limits (ca. 16.5 kHz).

From the above paragraphs you might already have guessed that the PFE’s clarity, resolution, and instrument separation is nothing to sneer at. Usually you find this kind of precision only in a higher price segment, but the Audéo take on the big boys with ease. The PFE do match the clarity of my personal reference – the Ultimate Ears UE11 – to a certain extent, so that’s probably as good as it gets for earphones (to the best of my knowledge). They stomp all over dynamic driver IEMs when it comes to detail and precision. They even make some of the medium-priced “benchmark” armature phones like the Etymotic ER-6 or Super.Fi 5 Pro sound a little muddy and anemic in comparison.

The Audéo’s armatures are “edge-firing”; they are mounted at a right angle to the nozzle that leads into the ear canal. I can’t be certain this has anything to do with the rather decent stereo imaging (“soundstage”) the PFE’s deliver, but it might be a contributing factor. As it is the case with all other ear monitors, the soundstage is pretty much in your head and doesn’t psychoacoustically expand beyond the physical limitations. However, I’ve certainly heard worse ones. The Audéo’s soundstage isn’t as wide as the SE530’s, the V-Moda Vibe’s, or similar phones, but it is wider than the Etymotic’s, Super.Fi 5’s, and even the UE11’s. However, it doesn’t deliver the pinpoint accuracy and 3D feeling of the UE11; the PFE is more of the usual “three blob” soundstage.

Conclusion

Bassheads have perhaps stopped reading this review already a few paragraphs above – but to reiterate: these phones are probably not for you. The PFE are the right phones for people who appreciate the sound signature of, say, the q-Jays, Etymotic ER-4, or the AKG K701. They do have a certain quantity of bass, with better quality than many other earphones, though.

Considering the comparatively low price of the Audéo PFE, it’s a no-brainer: they give you the perhaps best clarity and precision in the sub-$150 earphone price range. They have better treble than the SE530, better midrange than the q-Jays, and a decent soundstage for an IEM. They are definitely worth their price. Sure seems like certain single armature implementations have come a long way… Higher priced multi-armature IEMs like the UE11 or the SE530 are of course better in certain aspects, but the improvements stand in no relation to their price.

With the bass boost filters I find them to be reasonably fun and exciting to listen to, with the midrange boost filter they are a little more “polite” and analytical. Both variants sound quite punchy and dynamic to me; however I do prefer the more bass heavy approach. I wouldn’t mind if they had slightly more bass quantity overall – let’s wait and see if Phonak releases some bass heavier filters in the future. In the meantime, a little EQing won’t hurt.

If you have a good source and properly encoded audio files you will enjoy them – mostly when listening to classical, jazz, folk, or other varieties of acoustic music. Various genres or rock and heavy metal are equally well reproduced (as long as you can live without an overly visceral “oomph” in the lowest octaves), since the Audéo’s armatures handles dense, complex material quite well. A personal anecdote: the Audéo almost appear to be specially made for listening to the band Opeth – they handle both their airy acoustic interludes and their brute metal parts equally well. I can’t say the same about too many other earphones.

They might not be the most comfortable (despite all of Phonak’s marketing speech), but they should be comfortable enough for most people, and the price/value ratio is very fair. So I can say with good conscience: highly recommended. Phonak Audéo PFE are among the nicest things to come from Switzerland since wristwatches and cheese.

Now excuse me while I’m off to slap an “Editor’s Choice” badge on them.

Pros

• Very good dynamic midrange and treble, decent bass
• Excellent clarity, precision, resolution – perhaps the best in this price range
• Acoustic filters to change the sound signature
• Barely noticeable background hiss with problematic sources
• Ingenious silicon ear guides, little cable noise

Cons

• Not quite as “exceptionally comfortable” as advertised (but very secure fit)
• Acoustic filters might need to be replaced over time

Purchase

At the time of writing Phonak only sells the Audéo directly on their website, there's no other resellers yet. Price is $139/€119 for the standard version and $159/€139 for the version with microphone. I assume in the future the usual suspects like Amazon will stock them as well.

Ultimate Ears UE 11 Pro Review

By: Martin Sägmüller on October 16, 2008 12:23 AM

Here they are, the Ultimate Ears UE 11 Pro: reference ear monitors worshipped by recording artists, sound engineers, and audio nuts alike.

Besides the EarSonics EM3 and ACS T1 they're the most expensive in-ear phones available at the moment. Ahead of all others in the ear monitor race however, the UE 11 raises the ratio of drivers per earpiece to a whopping four armatures. That’s more drivers than many full-sized floor standing speakers have.

Do I notice similarities to the marketing stunts of certain shaving utensil manufacturers, adding one more blade to every new razor model? While these delusions of grandeur appear a bit nonsensical for something you waggle around your face to get rid of stubbles, let’s see how the old “more is better” applies when it comes to professional ear monitors.

• Specs
• Drivers: custom quadruple balanced armatures (2x bass, 1x mids, 1x treble), passive three-way crossover
• Sensitivity: 119dB @ 1mW
• Impedance: 18 Ohm @ 1kHz
• Frequency range: 10Hz – 16.5kHz
• Cable: 122cm or 168cm (Y-style), user replaceable, angled 3.5mm gold-plated plug
• Accessories: Engraved carrying case, storage box, cleaning tool, printed manual

Accessories

One would expect some rather upscale accessories to come with a phone like the UE 11. While you don’t get a diamond encrusted mahogany chest with them, the included aluminum carrying case is probably the next best thing. It’s about 14x17x6 cm and has the owner’s name engraved on top. In my opinion it looks really classy. It’s not exactly the equivalent of a Storm or Pelican case, but it should withstand any moderate abuse. The foam padding on the inside of the case has two pre-cut compartments – one for the smaller earphone storage box and another one that’s (not surprisingly) cut to the dimensions of an iPod. Of course it will fit other players as well; it just needs some utility knife surgery to fit a larger player.

The smaller quadratic aluminum box, measuring 7x7x3 cm, is lined with some flock/felt material. This is not a good thing. The flock fibers come loose and stick to the earphones. When I first received my UE 11, they were covered in that dust. It might become a serious issue if too many of those particles enter the sound ports.

Good thing Ultimate Ears also provides a cleaning tool for these dirt/dust issues. It has a wire loop on one end for removing gunk from the sound tubes and a very rigid brush on the other end – which purpose eludes me. Not even the manual mentions the brush. In any case, cleaning the exterior of the phones with an antiseptic wipe seems to be a better method than brushing.

On a side note, to protect the phones from moisture I use a few bags of desiccant material in the storage box. You can get these from any hearing aid specialist, probably for free. They also come with computer parts, in shoe boxes, and so on.

One accessory I’m missing with the UE 11 is a 3.5 to 6.2mm adapter. I can’t be the only person using the UE 11 with a desktop headphone amplifier sporting a 6.2mm jack; these phones are just too good to be used only on the go. Furthermore, UE’s cheaper Super.Fi and Triple.Fi series includes that adapter – it really shouldn’t add more than $1 to the cost of the phones.

Design, Build, Specs

First things first: you can’t just waltz into a store and buy the UE 11. Their housings are custom molded for your ears, requiring you to get ear impressions made by an audiologist and sending those to Ultimate Ears in California.

These impressions are scanned with a 3D scanner and stored in Ultimate Ear’s database for future reference. A negative mold is made and filled with liquid acrylic that hardens when exposed to UV light. This gives the basic shell, which then is manually processed to get rid of imperfections. The armature drivers are individually tuned to narrow tolerances and put into the housing, together with the passive crossover. Some more tweaking is done to the two sound tubes going from the drivers towards your ear drums to achieve the correct sound.

I want to thank Martin Zwettler from audiophon.at for making perfect impressions of my ears, free of charge. It can be quite a hassle getting your impressions rejected by Ultimate Ears because they don’t match their quality standards... especially for people like me, living on another continent, where flawed impressions would add several more weeks of waiting time.

Of course Ultimate Ears custom phones can be blinged out for a little extra cash with different colors, logos, or even gems. There’s an entertaining Ear Art Gallery on UE’s website showing the possibilities (and also the questionable taste of a few well known recording artists). I chose the standard silver UE logo and a translucent grey shell. A true geek doesn’t hide the inner workings of these phones.

With the cable you get some options as well. You can choose between two lengths (122/168cm, 48/66”) and five colors (beige, black, brown, clear, white). The cable sleeving is made of an excellent soft and flexible material; it doesn’t tangle as much as most other IEM cables. It is user replaceable, so damaging the cable is only a minor issue and doesn’t mean the whole phone has to be replaced or sent off for repair. Unfortunately there’s no choice when it comes to the 3.5mm plug on the cable – only an angled plug is available. If you want a straight plug you might as well start warming up your soldering iron now.

The cable’s Y-splitter is a bit of a botched design (see photo above). It really is Y-shaped and thus doesn’t play well with the small plastic tube that’s used for joining the two cables going to the earphones. Westone uses a very similar splitter on their cables, but without the pronounced Y shape – this one seems more reasonable. Other than that, the UE 11’s splitter seems to be sturdy enough and the strain relieves are of the tried-and-proven kind.

On the earphone end of the cable we find the gold plated prong connectors and the memory wire. That’s the plastic tube with a flexible wire inside, used to direct the cable up around your ears. The memory wire might be a nice feature for some people, but I don’t like it much. It’s hard to bend into a really comfortable position and it increases the transmitted cable noise for wearers of glasses. Needless to say, I removed the plastic tube and wire and enjoy my UE 11 without it. The cables stay in place perfectly fine without the wire.

The aforementioned cable noise, often referred to as “microphonics” is my biggest gripe with the UE 11. Together with bone conductivity made audible by the phones, due to their large surface contact area with the ear/skull and their hard acrylic shell, this accounts for quite a bit of unwanted noise transmission. The cable rubbing against a shirt is pretty loud, your own footsteps can be heard as bassy thuds when running (better wear soft sneakers instead of leather soles), and eating cornflakes while wearing the UE 11 can almost lead to noise-induced tinnitus. When I use the phones while working out, I even can hear my own blood pulse clear and loud in the ears. Of course there’s not much one can do with a shell construction like that. Maybe a soft silicon shell like used on Sensaphonics IEMs is less susceptible for these unwanted noises, but it seems I have to learn to accept it with the UE 11.

I have to mention that I usually listen at very low volume levels, probably much quieter than many people are used to. If I turn the volume up to levels that are uncomfortable for me (but perfectly fine for other folks, such as my girlfriend) these noise transmission issues disappear.

Besides those issues, the phones’ construction is great. They’re comfortable enough for regular use and they stay securely in one’s ears, no matter how heavy of a headbanger one might be. Granted, for my taste they’re a bit too big for use in bed, the way they fill one’s ears with hard acrylic. For me they stick out a little too far to be used comfortably while sleeping, but other people have no issues with that. Don’t get me wrong – they’re far from being uncomfortable, it’s just that they don’t “disappear” like smaller phones. Some universal-fit IEMs have an advantage there.

Isolation from outside noise is probably as good as it gets for an in-ear phone. The UE 11 block noise a bit more than the best isolating non-custom phones, like the Etymotic ER series, or the Shure SE530 with foam tips. It’s still not quite as much isolation as, say, sticking your fingers in your ears, but they block wide-range frequencies like car traffic, wind, or water very efficiently. Active noise-canceling phones don’t come close to this amount of attenuation – not to mention those need batteries and generally don’t sound as good as the UE 11.

The low impedance and high sensitivity rating of the UE 11 might suggest that they hiss with lower quality sources like portable players. I’m glad to report this isn’t the case. Sure, there’s a little background hiss with some MP3 players, but it’s almost negligible. Compared to some other hyper-efficient phones the UE 11 are very well behaved.

The armatures used in the UE 11 might come from Knowles Electronics, manufacturer of armatures for almost all IEMs and hearing aids in existence. However, they bear the UE logo, so they are most likely custom made and tuned to UE's specifications.

Amplifying the UE 11 isn’t really necessary; they work fine with most portable players. Of course an amp might squeeze even higher quality sound out of them. But in the end this last bit of quality is what it’s all about, I believe… otherwise one wouldn’t consider using phones that cost more than a thousand bucks anyway.

Sound

For me the most convenient feature about the UE 11’s sound is that it takes the guesswork out of which phone to choose for certain kinds of music or listening situations. Until now I used to pick a specific IEM for certain tasks, like critical listening/monitoring contrary to enjoying laid-back muzak, I had to choose if I prefer a lot of bass at the cost of reduced precision or vice versa, I had to keep in mind that some IEMs don’t work well with very dense orchestral pieces, and so on. With the UE 11 it’s easy – they work well with any audio material you throw at them, with hardly any compromises. A drawback would be that the rest of my earphone collection started gathering quite a bit of dust.

The bass response is very fine, both in quality and quantity. Speaking in relative terms, I would say we’re dealing here with the performance of a precisely tuned Velodyne or Hsu subwoofer, reducing many other IEMs’ bass performance to the equivalent of a cheap boomy car sub. The UE 11’s bass attacks fast, it is punchy and textured – everything you expect from a quality low frequency reproduction.

I’ve noticed some reviewers complaining about the UE 11 having too much bass. I definitely cannot agree with these opinions. The UE 11’s frequency response reminds me of full sized speakers, not some tiny bookshelf monitors. People who believe that a perfectly flat bass response means a “true to the source” or “faithful” sound reproduction should look up the definition of “Fletcher-Munson equal-loudness contour”, or the ISO 226:2003 standard. The human hearing doesn’t interpret a completely flat response as such; the bass needs to be slightly elevated to be perceived at natural sound pressure levels. The UE 11’s bass response is certainly closer to the dubious audiophile ideal of “how the artist meant the recording to be heard”, than many other phones with less bass. The UE 11 aren’t basshead cans, but they have real bass – bass that goes down to 20Hz without breaking a sweat and without making the rest of the frequency range muddy. It can’t get much better than that.

The midrange is a bit on the “dry”, analytical side. They don’t have the lush silky tonality of, say, a Sennheiser HD650 driven by a tube amp. Here it’s most apparent that the UE 11 were designed as professional ear monitors and not as regular Hi-Fi phones with tendencies to color the sound in an euphonic way. This isn’t a bad thing – it’s just that the old “crap in, crap out” rule applies: with badly mixed/mastered recordings you will notice the inferior sound quality; the UE won’t sugar-coat it. On the other hand, with well produced tracks you will hear the proverbial angels singing – every detail, every nuance delivered in all their glory. No matter if voices, acoustic or electrical instruments, jazz trios, orchestras, metal bands, drum’n’bass acts, or anything in between. For me this is a more welcome approach to sound reproduction than compromising audio quality for the sake of “polishing” muddy or hot-mastered material to become more or less listenable. Excellent clarity and dynamics is what describes the UE 11’s midrange sound best.

The UE 11’s treble is very… “fast”. A phenomenon I usually experience from phones like the q-Jays, which for me are top notch in treble reproduction. Cymbals, hi-hats, and similar material is delivered with attack speeds like on very few other phones. It sounds like the real thing on the UE 11, not like a reproduction. If you think Etymotic ER-4 or AKG K701 have proper treble, you might need to test the UE 11… Not to mention phones like the Shure SE530 or almost all “slow” dynamic driver IEMs, which don’t even come close. Admittedly, the UE 11’s treble is slightly recessed (but not rolled off). It doesn’t hit you with its full weight (like the q-Jays), but this doesn’t mean that any sonic cues are missing at all. Everything is there, every little bit of detail. It just isn’t as fatiguing as with some other phones. It even has that nice “shimmer” that I really appreciate with certain female vocals, violins, and other material. The UE 11’s treble is more or less perfect. Not to mention Ultimate Ear’s honesty of rating them up to a range of 16.5 kHz, which is perfectly fine – not the usual standard claim of a 20 kHz response or some similar half-truth.

Stereo imaging is a remarkable feature on the UE 11. It may not be the widest soundstage, defying the laws of physics by reaching a mile to the left and right of your head (the V-Moda Vibes or MylarOne X3i are slightly more expansive), but it does one thing right that most other ear monitors don’t: getting rid of the “three blob soundstage”. Music really pans smoothly between both ears, contrary to the usual crude distinction of “left-ish/middle/right-ish”. Furthermore, the UE 11 are the only IEMs I know that have a slight sense of dimensionality to the front and back, up and down. It’s even noticeable with mono recordings: some sounds are right behind your eyeballs, others are in the back of your head. This might sound unappealing in an anatomical way, but it sure is a pleasant sonic experience.

The UE 11 might not exactly have the soundstage of the AKG K701, the smooth midrange of the Sennheiser HD650, the bass impact of the Ultrasone HFI-780, or other characteristics that make quality full-sized headphones generally better than in-ear monitors. But then again, you can’t put the HD650 in your jeans pockets or use them in a noisy subway. It is an unfair comparison anyway: the UE 11 are not the exact equivalent of big cans – nevertheless they’re very close despite their comparatively tiny form factor. That’s better than it usually gets, considering most other IEMs don’t even compare to way cheaper headphones than the ones I mentioned above.

Comparing other IEMs to the UE 11 is difficult. That’s why I used these slightly far-fetched references to full-sized phones instead. All other IEMs I know – even the best – do a good job in certain aspects, but lack in other ones. Not so with the UE 11. When I listen to music with these earphones I never found myself wishing for “more”, I just enjoy the sound.

You have to hear the UE 11 to believe it. They’re seriously good.

Conclusion

Are they worth the immense price tag of $1150? In my opinion they are, especially when considering the law of diminishing returns in high-end audio. Certain other ear monitors – no matter if $50 or $500 – might be overpriced in my opinion, since they all have their fair share of flaws, but with the UE 11 I can’t find anything major to complain about. The UE 11 sound the best of all ear phones I know. If money is no object, they wouldn’t be a bad choice for almost any application. There aren't many ear monitors that deserve the commendation “reference”, but the UE 11 would be one of them.

There’s nothing specific to mention like, “aaah, the treble” or, “whoa, the bass” – since everything is just very fine with the UE 11. They sound better and isolate better than most other IEMs – cable noise and bone conductivity are an issue, but other than that I couldn’t think of any flaws. It’s kind of boring trying to describe phones that do almost everything right. Four drivers (and some quality engineering) indeed do make a difference; they’re not a marketing ploy by any means.

Well, now that I’ve listened to the UE 11 I can die happy. Don’t expect any more headphone reviews from me… or maybe you should, now more than ever.

Pros

• Excellent sound quality with hardly any flaws
• Excellent clarity, instrument separation, dynamics
• Very detailed, accurate stereo imaging
• Good noise attenuation

Cons

• Cable noise and bone conductivity could be better (at low listening levels)
• You can’t share the experience with other people.

Purchase

Your best choice is ordering them directly from Ultimate Ears. There are some resellers for Europe and other regions, but their asking price is in general considerably higher than ordering them directly from UE, so I wouldn’t recommend going that way.

Thanks to Lauren Kamm and Austin Appel for their help in making this review possible.