CrinEar IEMs by Crinacle

[Hifihedgehog]

Someone got 93 SINAD with the 5k in low gain mode https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...h-dac-headphone-amp.17386/page-17#post-741781 . Low gain should be enough for most (if not all) IEMs. Anyway even 82 db is absolutely not "terrible" and is well beyond your hearing limits. Features and exellent 5k software is much more important factor here

I know actual audibility and all that jazz but 100 dB or better in SINAD in 2025 isn't a big ask in my humble opinion, especially when a bog standard Apple dongle easily outperforms it in SINAD.

 

[Somafunk]

Unless there has been a change, the SINAD on that is pretty terrible if I am not mistaken, right? Bluetooth and crossfeed notwithstanding, unless I am missing something here, it doesn't look that impressive.

Once sinad gets above a certain number (personal to your own preference) it’s immaterial, anything above 80db is transparent in use.

 

[solawind]

but 100 dB or better in SINAD in 2025 isn't a big ask in my humble opinion, especially when a bog standard Apple dongle easily outperforms it in SINAD.

it really does not matter at all beyond your hearing limit. You can use software like https://distortaudio.org/index.html to get an idea of how much distortion is hearable or even simpler options like https://www.klippel.de/listeningtest/ . You will be surprised at how limited human hearing actually is. It is very hard to hear even 0.1% distortion not to mention 0.008% result of the Q5K.

 

[oleg87]

I know actual audibility and all that jazz but 100 dB or better in SINAD in 2025 isn't a big ask in my humble opinion, especially when a bog standard Apple dongle easily outperforms it in SINAD.

What is the point of this silly spec-chasing? Do you think you're going to be running your IEMs at 2Vrms? It has a respectable enough noise floor that's lower than the Apple dongle's if I recall correctly (not that Amir bothered to test its low-gain mode, and as measured by other users here, it dramatically outperforms Amir's 50mV measurement when you use the on-device volume control as opposed to digitally attenuate at full-scale), which is a more important metric than distortion-limited SINAD at full scale output (and I won't pretend to understand why Amir decided that is a sensible metric for ranking headphone dac/amps).

 

[solawind]

btw IEM distortion can be 100 times worse even at 1k (and it is still considered good IEMs)

 

[Hifihedgehog]

What is the point of this silly spec-chasing? Do you think you're going to be running your IEMs at 2Vrms? It has a respectable enough noise floor that's lower than the Apple dongle's if I recall correctly (not that Amir bothered to test its low-gain mode, and as measured by other users here, it dramatically outperforms Amir's 50mV measurement when you use the on-device volume control as opposed to digitally attenuate at full-scale), which is a more important metric than distortion-limited SINAD at full scale output (and I won't pretend to understand why Amir decided that is a sensible metric for ranking headphone dac/amps).

Thank you but understand that this is not what I am asking for, with all due respect. Again, while I appreciate the exuberate and opinionated responses, when push comes to shove, if there is the option for higher quality at an equal or lower price, I will go for it which is why I ask and I would appreciate going the way I had requested. Besides, the bigger issue here from the users responding is the joint assumption that I am going to use this with IEMs, when I am not. Some further inquiry into this would have been helpful, as well as noticing my post history here and my previous posts here in-thread about output power which would clue you in that I am not looking at this for IEMs. No, actually, it is for Dan Clark Audio Noire X which needs substantially higher power than a mere IEM. Hence my post earlier in this thread:

The fact you could hook up even a pair of Dan Clark Audio headphones to this and it (based on the specifications, anyway) not choke at low volume is extremely compelling.

Can Qudelix 5K technically power Amir's Ether CX? Yes, but I would prefer a more ideal power pairing that has a bit more headroom and flexibility for powering full-size headphones, not necessarily a more IEM-centric DAC-amplifier setup.

 

[jkim]

Unless there has been a change, the SINAD on that is pretty terrible if I am not mistaken, right? Bluetooth and crossfeed notwithstanding, unless I am missing something here, it doesn't look that impressive.

View attachment 483343

Amir's SINAD measurement of Q5K is often misinterpreted as representing its mediocre performance. See my explanation and measurements here.

 

[Hifihedgehog]

Amir's SINAD measurement of Q5K is often misinterpreted as representing its mediocre performance. See my explanation and measurements here.

To that, my only concern then is full-size headphone use. Do you happen to know the output power of the Qudelix-5K?

 

[jkim]

To that, my only concern then is full-size headphone use. Do you happen to know the output power of the Qudelix-5K?

I measured it myself and gave that information in my earlier post:

The maximum power output difference b/w these devices is not practically substantial. FiiO KA15/Protocol Max can be just 3.2 dB louder than Qudelix 5K at their maximum unclipping balanced output into 32 ohm load (4.3 vs. 3.0 Vrms @ 0.1% THD+N). Of course, not many headphones need that much power.

I always prefer to think of this issue on RMS voltage scale and covert it to dB scale because that is mapped better onto our perception. Sure, if you use wattage (e.g., mW), the difference may look larger (578 vs. 281 mW), but that does not mean the former is as twice loud as the latter.

 

[Hifihedgehog]

I measured it myself and gave that information in my earlier post:

I always prefer to think of this issue on RMS voltage scale and covert it to dB scale because that is mapped better onto our perception. Sure, if you use wattage (e.g., mW), the difference may look larger (578 vs. 281 mW), but that does not mean the former is as twice loud as the latter.

Yes! I usually work within mW myself but understand the difference is appreciable with power-to-volume scaling (a logarithmic function). Not to hijack this thread further but is the Qudelix-T71 a worthy upgrade, noting over course that the return-on-investment is far less appreciable if there even is an objectively measured improvement?

 

[jkim]

Yes, if you primarily use very power-hungry headphones, the T71 is one of a kind. In terms of drive capability, nearly no other portable devices can match that. But do you really need that? I would just use other headphones

 

[bahamot]

if you are using protocol max on LInux, you need to add udev rule to enable editing the EQ. But on Linux, the web interface insists the dongle only supports 8 rules PEQ. Not sure what is wrong.

#Crinear Protocol MAX
KERNEL=="hidraw*", ATTRS{idVendor}=="3302", ATTRS{idProduct}=="43cc", MODE="0666" SYMLINK+="Protocol Max"

 

[AMDfanTO]

Just got the Crinear Protocol Max. Unfortunately it's not going to be replacing my Qudelix 5k. My use case is 50% phone audio and 50% ps5 gaming. Unfortunately the audio output is severely volume limited using the Protocol Max. The ps5 halves the audio output with 3rd party usb audio devices. The Qudelix 5k can fully disable the ps5 audio limit with its UAC 1 mode. I hope they're working on a firmware update to resolve this issue.

 

[Precedent]

Just got the Crinear Protocol Max. Unfortunately it's not going to be replacing my Qudelix 5k. My use case is 50% phone audio and 50% ps5 gaming. Unfortunately the audio output is severely volume limited using the Protocol Max. The ps5 halves the audio output with 3rd party usb audio devices. The Qudelix 5k can fully disable the ps5 audio limit with its UAC 1 mode. I hope they're working on a firmware update to resolve this issue.

You can switch from default UAC2 to UAC1 mode (and vice versa) with the Protocol Max…
Hold the Volume Up button while connecting USB Source.

 

[AMDfanTO]

You can switch from default UAC2 to UAC1 mode (and vice versa) with the Protocol Max…
Hold the Volume Up button while connecting USB Source.

That doesn't resolve the issue. I am using UAC1 mode. UAC1 just enables the device to be compatible. The PS5 has hardware volume limiting and requires the DAC to override the limit. Qudelix has enabled hardware volume override for the 5K. The Protocol Max does not have this capability. Even my most efficient IEMs are so quiet using the Protocol Max it's unusable.

I've already reached out to their support and they responded they may look into this in future firmware updates, but no guarantees.

 

[Precedent]

That doesn't resolve the issue. I am using UAC1 mode. UAC1 just enables the device to be compatible. The PS5 has hardware volume limiting and requires the DAC to override the limit. Qudelix has enabled hardware volume override for the 5K. The Protocol Max does not have this capability. Even my most efficient IEMs are so quiet using the Protocol Max it's unusable.

I've already reached out to their support and they responded they may look into this in future firmware updates, but no guarantees.

Wasn’t aware of the PS5 limit even in UAC1. Thanks for the insight, good to know.

Fingers crossed that the HW override can be enabled via FW update.

 

[chungjun]

Just jumped on the boat for the CrinEar Daybreak + Protocol Max combo.

Ordered and received delivery from The Hangout by Crinacle. For what it is worth... I'm not affiliated, just a regular end-consumer. Heck, I bought mine at full price individually -> The Hangout now has a bundle deal (Daybreak + P.Max) at a superbly attractive pricing.

Daybreak (on its own / without P.Max) - Wow... to each his own but I love Daybreak's tuning and I am genuinely surprised by how much Daybreak can delivery. Indeed it is evident a lot of thought and work are put into it by Crinacle and team and a wonderful product and result I would say. I can see it as my daily driver along with Fir Audio M5 CIEM. I'm running Daybreak with stock tips. Reviewers have suggested wide-bore tips (which is also included with Daybreak package), which I will give it a try at some point. Fun times.

Protocol Max (dongle DAC/Amp) - Well, I tend to prefer simple setups and find dongle DAC/Amp a bit fidgety. I prefer to just carry an extra DAP but then if bulk is an issue, next best would probably be dongle DAC/Amp like P.Max. Not much I can add, first time using a dongle DAC/Amp and will still need to see how I can incorporate it into my daily carry.

 

[confucius_zero]

Question: can we turn off DRE on this dongle?

 

[inselwissen]

I recently bought a used pair of Daybreaks and while I felt they were tuned well and sounded very natural to my ears, I was shocked how close they were to the 7Hz Zero:2. Even if they measure relatively similar, I was expecting more of a difference. You can hear both pairs were tuned by someone who likes a neutral tuning with a healthy boost in the bass. So do I!

Don't get me wrong, the Daybreaks still sounded better to my ears. The treble profile works super well. They sound more open, but there's no stray frequencies poking out with certain instruments or any sibilance, which sometimes happens with the Zero:2. But a simple EQ match via AutoEQ made both pairs sound even more similar. I started fiddling and ended up with an EQ curve somewhere between the Daybreak curve and a tilted JM-1 curve (not much difference between those two targets!), with a few concessions in the treble for my own ears. Maybe half an hour of work.

If you don't have EQ capabilities, the Daybreaks are great, but a little EQ makes the Zero:2 sound better to me (!) than the Daybreaks. Ergonomics are about equal, I would say, so there was no reason for me to keep the Daybreaks. People throw the term "giant killer" around willy nilly, but it 100 % applies to the Zero:2. Add something like a CB1200AU dongle and you're golden.

 

[Jiraya369]

I recently bought a used pair of Daybreaks and while I felt they were tuned well and sounded very natural to my ears, I was shocked how close they were to the 7Hz Zero:2. Even if they measure relatively similar, I was expecting more of a difference. You can hear both pairs were tuned by someone who likes a neutral tuning with a healthy boost in the bass. So do I!

Don't get me wrong, the Daybreaks still sounded better to my ears. The treble profile works super well. They sound more open, but there's no stray frequencies poking out with certain instruments or any sibilance, which sometimes happens with the Zero:2. But a simple EQ match via AutoEQ made both pairs sound even more similar. I started fiddling and ended up with an EQ curve somewhere between the Daybreak curve and a tilted JM-1 curve (not much difference between those two targets!), with a few concessions in the treble for my own ears. Maybe half an hour of work.

If you don't have EQ capabilities, the Daybreaks are great, but a little EQ makes the Zero:2 sound better to me (!) than the Daybreaks. Ergonomics are about equal, I would say, so there was no reason for me to keep the Daybreaks. People throw the term "giant killer" around willy nilly, but it 100 % applies to the Zero:2. Add something like a CB1200AU dongle and you're golden.

apart from the upper treble/air, what makes you say they dont measure relatively similar?

They're the same till 6k, daybreak has a more extended treble in the air region and that's pretty much it. The younger you are and the better hearing you have, the more you'll appreciate daybreak. Otherwise the zero 2 is superb if you dont care too much about 15khz+