FiiO FD5 Review (IEM)

[respice finem]

I really don't know much about the IEM market, but that looks like a nice frequency response (the FiiO FD5 reviewed here) that is easy to sort out with EQ, and is close to start with anyway. Nice distortion measurements too. Nice.

This, and, for mobile devices and lazy people (like me), perfectly usable even without EQ.

 

[beagleman]

This is what I kept talking about NOT needing to spend $2,000 to get great sound.

THIS GUYS!

 

[Keened]

I have the HA-FDX1 which is rather similar in design (12.5 single super stiff driver, replaceable tubes with different dampening material, etc) and I suspect sounds rather similar as well and I can easily say that it is one of the best sounding headphones I've ever had.

I appreciate the MMCX connectors for replaceable cables.

Really there are only two downsides to IEMs: they are very finicky with the fit since everyone has different sized, shaped, and oriented ear canals (and wearing preferences, over ear cable vs under ear cable) and they isolate you from the outside world/require things in your ear canal (which can be good and bad).

If I was on the hunt for new IEMs I'd give these a serious look.

 

[Jimbob54]

This is what I kept talking about NOT needing to spend $2,000 to get great sound.

THIS GUYS!

Even less! https://crinacle.com/graphs/iems/graphtool/?share=Harman_IE_2019_v2_Target,FD5,Kato_Steel

 

[Hifihedgehog]

For $299, I'd say this IEM was quite the engineering wonders, especially with the exceptionally low distortion and clean group delay.

And this looks like a joke in comparison.

I said this a couple of years ago and I stand by my statement still: the most exciting innovation I have seen as of late is not in headphones but IEMs, particularly Chi-Fi. This is bonafide objective evidence of what my ears have telling me all along. I left headphones because IEMs have been giving me better (cleaner and clearer) sound for less money in a smaller, more convenient package. I honestly have no reason to move back to headphones unless I fancy a bass massage on my earlobe.

 

[A Surfer]

In my experience IEMs are far ahead of speakers and headphones in getting good performance for the dollar - would be nice to see some sub-$100 models reviewed, I get the feeling they'd make many of the kilobuck ones seem like a waste of money.

I guess things as always are subjective. I am one of those people with a very odd ear opening shape and no tip will ever go in, and or stay. Plus, IEM have the potential to damage your hearing more easily, they push wax and debris deeper into the ear canal and they do not stimulate the delicate outer ear structure which is partially involved in recreating sound in terms of scale. So an IEM is essentially the most likely culprit to enhance the super stereo effect (not a positive thing) so saying they are ahead of speakers or even headphones is a very big claim and I would have to ask how are they ahead?

 

[A Surfer]

I said this a couple of years ago and I stand by my statement still: the most exciting innovation I have seen as of late is not in headphones but IEMs, particularly Chi-Fi. This is bonafide objective evidence of what my ears have telling me all along. I left headphones because IEMs have been giving me better (cleaner and clearer) sound for less money in a smaller, more convenient package. I honestly have no reason to move back to headphones unless I fancy a bass massage on my earlobe.

You might want to. Sound coming from an external source would strike and stimulate the outer ear structures first and that is absolutely part of how the sound in terms of scale would be interpreted by the hearing brain. It is a system after all and the internals are only part of the system (albeit major parts of the system).

 

[Keened]

I said this a couple of years ago and I stand by my statement still: the most exciting innovation I have seen as of late is not in headphones but IEMs, particularly Chi-Fi. This is bonafide objective evidence of what my ears have telling me all along. I left headphones because IEMs have been giving me better (cleaner and clearer) sound for less money in a smaller, more convenient package. I honestly have no reason to move back to headphones unless I fancy a bass massage on my earlobe.

Some people look at the term 'Chi-Fi' as a slur, but I'm right on board with you. To me, Chi-Fi is consumer driven quality with reasonable prices. The ethics of supporting China are a tricky matter, so I'd prefer Taiwain or alternative SEAsia manufacturing when possible.

But there is a clear difference between established western brands costing on reputation and the competitive Chi-Fi market which quickly iterates on how people respond to the last batch. User support can be tricky but since most manufactures only offer 1-2 years anyways with no replacement parts available after that...

 

[Hifihedgehog]

You might want to. Sound coming from an external source would strike and stimulate the outer ear structures first and that is absolutely part of how the sound in terms of scale would be interpreted by the hearing brain. It is a system after all and the internals are only part of the system (albeit major parts of the system).

I thought this way too for years and I theorized that pinnae interactions and such made headphones forever the better choice. My headphone demoing journeys led me to taste even the kilobuck monsters coming short of pretty much only the latest mighty Orpheus. Many early IEMs (Ultimate Ears and Shure) had that notorious "IEM veil" or lack in clarity in the treble that I couldn't stand and developed that dismissive view on IEMs in general. But then these chi-fi models hit the scene like a bolt of lightning and curiosity got the best of me and it was an absolutely revolutionary experience for me! They somehow overcame the "IEM veil" engineering flaw and sounded nothing like the IEMs of old. I totally changed my mind. In my brain's observation, anyway, I came to feel more immersed and the IEMs "disappeared" more than the top-dog headphones ever had. I now prefer IEMs for a mere fraction of the price given the perceived performance exceeding the best that headphones have to offer. Of course, this may change as headphone technology incubates and matures. But then again, why lug around a large pair of headphones when IEMs are so much more convenient and sound better to my ears and brain anyway?

 

[Robbo99999]

Even less! https://crinacle.com/graphs/iems/graphtool/?share=Harman_IE_2019_v2_Target,FD5,Kato_Steel

That looks even easier to EQ, less sharp peaks, and here in the UK it looks like it's £80 less here in the UK. Do we know what distortion measurements are like on that one, as good as the FD5 for distortion?

 

[phoenixdogfan]

Wavelet is very popular, but it uses a graphic equalizer. You would have to convert the given PEQ filters to match the format used, but there's also a chance someone has added this headphone to the Wavelet built in database already!

I see Tone Boosters offer PEQ in conjunction with the USB Audio Player App. Neither app is free but both pretty cheap.

 

[Jimbob54]

That looks even easier to EQ, less sharp peaks, and here in the UK it looks like it's £80 less here in the UK. Do we know what distortion measurements are like on that one, as good as the FD5 for distortion?

No idea about the distortion.

 

[TheTalbotHound]

Moondrop Variations review would be nice

 

[MenloBob]

Marmalade, I like marmalade.

 

[MayaTlab]

You might want to. Sound coming from an external source would strike and stimulate the outer ear structures first and that is absolutely part of how the sound in terms of scale would be interpreted by the hearing brain. It is a system after all and the internals are only part of the system (albeit major parts of the system).

I don't think that it's been superbly well established yet that over-ears activate the pinna in a way that necessarily is desirable (ie, for stereo recordings, express your own HRTF as if you were the dummy inside Harman's reference room), let alone constant.

If so you'd see a constant transfer function between two pinnae when measuring several headphones ceteris paribus, but that isn't what you see if you digitise SoundStageSolo's experiments with both the RB5000 and RB0066 pinnae, for example.

Rtings' PRTF tests were interesting but I'm not certain that they were thorough enough to be conclusive.

Anecdotally, I prefer the earbuds I'm wearing right now over most of my unEQed over-ears for whatever I'd call "spatial qualities" (a term that doesn't make a ton of sense to me for stereo recordings anyway) . But maybe that's just sheer luck and they just happen to work well for me.

 

[Berwhale]

does any member have a recommendation for an Android PEQ app that could accomplish these corrections Amir, or, for that matter, Crinacle shows?

I use the ToneBoosters PEQ plug-in for USB Audio Player Pro.

 

[Hifihedgehog]

That looks even easier to EQ, less sharp peaks, and here in the UK it looks like it's £80 less here in the UK. Do we know what distortion measurements are like on that one, as good as the FD5 for distortion?

Nice! My current favorite is the KZ ZAX. It has a bit of a bump in the upper midrange and part of the presence region but has better upper treble in the 10KHz range.

In-Ear Fidelity – IEM Graph Comparison Tool

Easily compare industry-standard frequency response measurements of hundreds and hundreds of IEMs.

crinacle.com

I am currently demoing the Elysian Annihilator from Malayasia. Just waiting on a balanced to unbalanced adapter cable and some small CP155 tips so I can actually listen to them tomorrow :

Crinacle's IEM Graph Comparison Tools | Hangout.Audio

The world's largest public database of IEM measurements.

crinacle.com

 

[Guerilla]

If we had a score like with speakers this would have a better score than many over ear headphones. Si as I see it they are better in FR, not just "better".

As I see it, with speakers you create the illusion of a live performance in a real environment with reflections, etc. but the sound is more accurate from this IEMs. Plus, amir reports...

If music was mixed and produced using in ear headphones, then they would more often be preferable. That is almost never the case, but I quite enjoy using inears when they dont fall out of my ears all the time.
Cheers!

 

[Guerilla]

That's exactly why we won't discuss it or what it supposedly should be (such target). I don't use IEM's (discomfort issue's) instead use earbuds (sacrificing subb bass) which is acceptable for me on the go. If you have hard right built preference (comes with practice) you can do mixing even on lacking equipment that you know very well (including it's deficits for example Yamaha NS10). I never said those are best IEM's ever, just very good for the price and good quality also (Creative could have done better with cable's as they did in the past with PTE one's but still better than what you will get with similar priced FiiO ones for example).

Have a nice time and enjoy.

Dont feed that ****** NS10 story please. The world would have had much much less bad recordings if it wasnt for those tales of why and how they are usefull. They are usefull for fking up your perseption of naturalism. Wow! I have friends and aquantases who still have them in their studies. So sad.
Cheers!

 

[Guerilla]

Nice! My current favorite is the KZ ZAX. It has a bit of a bump in the upper midrange and part of the presence region but has better upper treble in the 10KHz range.

View attachment 197667

In-Ear Fidelity – IEM Graph Comparison Tool

Easily compare industry-standard frequency response measurements of hundreds and hundreds of IEMs.

crinacle.com

I am currently demoing the Elysian Annihilator from Malayasia. Just waiting on a balanced to unbalanced adapter cable and some small CP155 tips so I can actually listen to them tomorrow :

View attachment 197677

Crinacle's IEM Graph Comparison Tools | Hangout.Audio

The world's largest public database of IEM measurements.

crinacle.com

Why are you posting about all other models than the ifi this thread should be about?
Cheers!