Fiio e11 9 mean
Hi guys, I'm Mad Lust Envy on headfi. I have a headphone gaming guide where I post all my reviews. I assume it makes sense to paste the Panda review here, so, here it is, below. I was not paid by Drop or THX or anyone. If you find some errors, forgive me. I have the original A with no inline mic and love them.
We are searching data for your request:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.
FiiO E11 Review & Unboxing
What happens if an engineer who's into noise and analog circuitry is a bit of an audiophile with emphasis on headphones and music nut as well? Well, this page, duh. Since it features none of the fancy functionality of the Web 2.
This entry has moved. Please update your bookmarks. I apologize for the inconvenience. Do you ever end up writing a forum post and thinking, "man, this one should get a dedicated spot of its own"? So here's a look at a contentious topic — hiss in active monitors.
Some are affected more than others, with the likes of Neumann, Genelec or Yamaha generally coming out on top the Mackie MR series seems to be quite good, too, if somewhat plagued by transformer buzz , while JBL's 30x series are some of the more notorious though there seem to be noticeably worse offenders still — basically everything Kali Audio, for example, which is a major shame because otherwise those are absolutely superb for the money. Let's have a look at these and other similar inexpensive DSP-based speakers:.
I think the level control actually controls a digital attenuator. There are something like four sources of hiss on these that you might encounter — in roughly descending order:. That fortunately includes a lot and excludes only a little gear. This calculator has moved. Rugged all-metal chassis. No wobbly RCA connectors, unlike Behringer. Locking power connector and power switch appreciated.
Dials a bit mysterious at first, some deviations here and there, pretty much same as Behringer. Prefer Behringer's main mix fader over Mackie's rotary pot, but the latter's bar graph LED level meter is much more useful in return.
Don't like the spot for the headphone level control overly much. Input noise when fed from a short circuit 1. Even with a ohm microphone, the difference still is about 1. Some more power supply hum in the Mackie. Short to open delta is 13 dB nominal input impedance is 2. I was extremely impressed with distortion performance. Even at full gain, distortion remains negligible as in dB 2nd, dB 3rd right up to clipping.
If anything, the rest of the mixer is holding the preamp back! The overload indicator lights up about 4 dB below clipping, 4. Frequency response flatness is good even at full gain, with I was unable to improve this via the tone controls, as the center detent meant minimum adjusts were in the order of 0. Seems like the bass may be a resonant filter, and the highs control is a shelving one.
I never noticed that the low-cut filter in the Behringer had about 3 dB of overshoot — no such overshoot is present in the Mackie, it just rolls off cleanly.
When splitting one input across both stereo channels by disabling the L-R pan function, level drops by 3 dB. Just something to be aware of. Conversely, the Behringer gains 3 dB by panning to one side. Effectively it's got 3 dB of gain in the tone amp section. I was generally comparing L-R pan in the Mackie to center pan in the Behringer. I found some issues with my cabling though…. There are some function differences: In the Behringer, the headphone out is slaved to the main mix, while in the Mackie it is fully independent.
You can also opt not to route the unbalanced Tape In to main mix, allowing you to do a mix-minus you can hear the Tape In signal over headphones but it is not going out. In the Behringer, this function is occupied by the internal USB sound device. And the shocker is: It doesn't even suck, quite the contrary! I think the internals are similar to the Behringer B-2 Pro.
That definitely shows: You get externally accessible highpass and pad switches in addition to pattern selection, its massive aluminium aluminum for my American readers diecast shell outclasses the smaller SC's machined parts, and the optional shock mount SP01 is much bigger with softer suspension, which in sum means shock absorption should be a lot better. The tube around the SC's electronics doesn't exactly have the most well-defined electrical connection to other case parts either if it starts humming when touched there, make sure the end piece is screwed on tight , not to mention that the whole top of the mic is fairly resonant, the headbasket in particular.
Speaking of this, the grille is rather thin and can be dented should you accidentally drop the mic — though on the pro side you won't need very much force to get dents back out either. Don't ask how I know… At this price point you don't get a shock-mounted capsule either. Finally, the accompanying spec sheet is largely bogus. That said, even if its construction may be somewhat lacking in finesse, I was surprised by how solid the case parts are.
The tube is literally something like 5 mm thick. The pad-printed lettering may eventually wear off, but I don't foresee any dents in the body any time soon. It's also super easy to take apart — unscrew end piece, slide off tube, and there's the electronics in plain sight, mounted in a metal frame and split over two boards on opposing sides. Well, I guess it has to be if the low-cut switch is hidden inside, but still. I'm still puzzled by how the CL8 might open… there's clearly two parts to it, but no clue how they might come apart.
I did find a brass screw that'll release the innards of the XLR connector when screwed in! I suspect there might be a screw hiding in the hole with the round bump in it else why would there be such a thing in the first place?
The included shock mount — almost identical to the t. The weakest point appears to be the fixating screw's thread. I would have added "well thought-out" to the list had I not spotted a problem — the two clips used to widen the mic holder are actually touching the outer ring, thereby blocking any movement altogether!
This makes the shock mount not just stiff, but straight non-functional. Actually I originally thought that the clips were some sort of transport lock… The worst part is, I've checked the promo photos and various videos, and this appears to be just the way they come in many cases. A vise with some scratch protection should work. The stiffness is another issue. I have unhooked the elastics which aren't, well, terribly elastic at two points, that allows the mic to wiggle back and forth at least.
I guess I'll have to look for another similar but better shock mount. The one shipped with Auna mics for the last two years or so seems better, though it may still require some clip bending to resolve clearance issues. I definitely appreciate it if there isn't this huge thing dangling in front of my monitor.
Besides, and this is purely superficial, a black microphone and shock mount also fit my black microphone stand well which incidentally cost almost as much as the mic… , whereas the Samson gear is kept in a silver tone. Both want the full P48 and would in all likelihood not work too well on an input with substantially lower phantom power supply, like the Xenyx with its 15 volts.
This trait is common in low budget large diaphragm condensers. Now the part you've all been waiting for — the sound! In direct comparison, the CL8 in cardioid mode has a somewhat sharper and clearer sound while the SC is fuller it also picks up more low-frequency ambient noise components, hence the low-cut switch and might appear slightly muffled even though it still retains a bit of a treble peak.
I've seen some measurements of the multipattern version SC, its frequency response actually appeared to be quite flat and down to below 30 Hz no less, while the CL8 spec sheet shows a slight tilt and a quicker decay starting at about 50 Hz, indicating that FET bias isn't as high-impedance as it could be , so I presume the SC is the more honest here. It's not a "hyped" sound but should respond well to EQ. Actually I prefer its sound when it's pitted against the bigger, more expensive SC, which struck me as more along the lines of the CL8 sonically.
Noise level, by contrast, is substantially lower in the t. It's about 5 dB in the spectrum, might be even more subjectively. The CL8 has always seemed slightly hissy, not a great deal better than the dynamic Q2U on a decent input. Its hiss has a somewhat harsh, grainy quality, the SC's is much softer and almost drowned out by room noise. I'm guessing it's similar to the SC's, which measured dB A.
Going by spectra, I have kind of been suspecting that the CL8 has an electronic highs boost, which would boost input noise along the way. Pop noise suppression in the CL8 appears to be very limited, with a relatively coarse grille and what appears to be a very thin mesh inside; the diaphragm is rather plainly visible.
By contrast, the SC employs more comprehensive internal screening, and you have to catch the diaphragm from the right angle to catch a glimpse of it. Unsurprisingly, it also is quite a lot less sensitive to plosives. Perhaps someone figured that the buyer of such an inexpensive mic would shy away from the extra cost of a pop screen. So it's a slight supercardioid. In sum, I have been quite impressed with how well the t. You probably won't be tempted to sell a Neumann for one or a Sennheiser MK4, or even an AT , but still, it is a perfectly usable microphone.
Address the resonance issues with some elbow grease, and you should have a winner. The shock mount is a real shocker though. Incidentally, my sample came with the latest version of the spec sheet, so I am pretty sure that it is not older than a few years and ought to be representative of current production.
Now to put things into perspective, there is in fact plenty of competition at this price point:. Attempting to measure speaker power amplifier performance can be all kinds of fun. First of all you'll find that results using a consumer sound card will be marred by all kinds of noise, and then there's the problem of getting levels down so you can measure at decent power output without frying your input, not to mention having to come up with a dummy load. Well, looks like we're going to need an attenuator.
Now the output of our amp is often going to be unbalanced — so do we use an unbalanced voltage divider to give, say, dB and impedance balance that…. The answer is quickly reached by applying a common mode in-phase ground-referred signal to both input nodes on the left-hand side in a circuit simulator, and then determining how much common mode gets through.
The balanced attenuator, no doubt. Note that the shield connection is absolutely required — remove it, and the full common-mode signal gets through again.
Fiio E11 Review
Sort by Author Post time Ascending Descending. View Original Size. Rotate image Save Cancel. Breaking news: See More.
KZ - ZS10 Pro
The adjustable arch is a design used in some stabilizers to change the weight ratio - more or less bottom heavy. The lower the weight from the Gimbal, the more weight it should be able to support. Judging by the weights and distance, it should have no problems flying the 5lbs. Currently the Amazon product page has a special promotion for the free cleaning kit. For those that don't want to sync audio in post you may attempt to plug a microphone like a Rode VideoMic, LAV mic, or Wireless Mic Receiver directly to the camera's 3. One problem is that the camera's internal preamp is known to be fairly noisy if you have to boost the signal. The solution for better audio is to use an external preamp before feeding the signal back in to the camera and turn the camera's internal levels down to almost zero. So here's an interesting question that comes in that might get your wheels spinning.
Amp for AKG Q701s
What happens if an engineer who's into noise and analog circuitry is a bit of an audiophile with emphasis on headphones and music nut as well? Well, this page, duh. Since it features none of the fancy functionality of the Web 2. This entry has moved.
FiiO E10K and E11K – Premium sound for a tiny price
The rise of mobile music devices, like MP3 players, smartphones and tablets, has mostly been for the better. Today's audiophile can store literally thousands of songs their pocket and enjoy them with just a few taps of a touchscreen. If you're serious about music, however, you may be disappointed by the audio quality your mobile device manages — particularly when paired with high-end headphones. The solution is to pair your mobile device with a portable headphone amplifier, a small device that can greatly improve your listening pleasure. I'm sure you've heard the term amp before, but you may have never needed to learn about what it does.
MEE Audio EP-DD53P-BK-MEE M-Duo Dual Driver Enhanced Bass In-Ear Headphone
Visit the FiiO Store. Return this item for free. Free returns are available for the shipping address you chose. It feels almost like the Fiio unit has made a complete circle in terms of design. The A1 is a far more similar design to the E5 than the E6.
The Mini3 has some significant problems mainly related to its 3 channel channel design. Using a similar 3 channel approach FiiO seemingly copied the Titanic complete with the big hole. So I gave in and decided to review it after all.
Fiio A1 Portable Headphone AmpRELATED VIDEO: REVIEW: Fiio E11 Headphone Amplifier [Kilimanjaro]
Do I need one of these? Probably not, but that stopped being a major factor of. I am reasonably sure that the built in mic is a coordinated function for use with the Apple iPhone only as this amp was designed specifically for the iPhone. Shopper I have Fiio e
Everyone loves Fiio. Just look at their Facebook or check Head-Fi. The Chinese company is known for its budget friendly setups and they are genuinely nice people who really listen to the community. Lately they have even been targeting the high resolution market with their X5 DAP. Today however we take a look at the updated version of their successful E11 amp.
I remember the moment when I first time listened to a FiiO E10 together with my friend Savu and both had quite a shock. Connected to a HD and later to a HD it sounded very nice at that time for an absolute tiny price that drove top of the line Sennheiser headphones decent enough. Apart from that it looks basically the same, same brushed aluminum design. New chip is an interesting one for many reasons.