FiiO M3K – Worthy of its name

At the beginning of 2016 I had the pleasure of testing the smallest Hi-Res capable DAP on the market, the FiiO M3. I was pretty enthusiastic about it as the sound was exactly what I was expecting, it had great battery life, however the plasticky case and the sloppy and hard to follow UI ruined the final experience for me. What could be an extraordinary and a very recommended DAP turned into an ordinary device due to not taking very serious the important aspects that define a portable DAP: first physical impressions, first SQ impressions and of course the easy to use interface.

The brand new M3K promises to solve all the problems raised by us

Let’s get the job done and check if the manufacturer kept his word.

Build quality & Design

Without a doubt in the development cycle of M3K a big emphasis was put on design and at finding the right selection of materials in its construction.

This time around the case is entirely made of anodized aluminum and the front panel is made out of tempered glass for a superior scratch and shock resistance.

From my point of view M3K looks much more elegant, simple and modern than its predecessor.

Physically it is smaller than X1-II but a bit bigger than M3, here’s a photo of the three siblings.

M3K together with other 2 devices represent the smallest Hi-Res DAPs we have tested that I consider to be truly portable and pocketable comparing to other heavy weight category of DAPs we have tested in the past.

M3K feels great in the hand and can be easily operated one handed due to the touch panel on the front and to all buttons conveniently moved to the left.

Besides the On/Off, R/F and Play/Pause buttons there is a standard 3.5 mm phone jack on the bottom, a microSD card slot and a microUSB jack for data transfer and charging.

M3K doesn’t have internal memory, music can be stored only on the microSD cards, theoretically up to 2 Tb cards are supported, we used a 128 GB Sandisk Ultra with great success.

The sexy rotary volume wheel found on the more expensive devices has been abandoned and changed with 2 simple volume buttons for two reasons: very limited internal space and production costs. After all, M3K is an entry-level DAP who does not want to disturb your budget too much.

The IPS screen has a diagonal of 2″ and a 320 x 240 pixels resolution, it looks clear and bright, the colors are alive, the view angle is better than I expected. One important thing for me is that the album covers are natively displayed as a square, a small thing that was missing and bothered me on both the old M3 and on the X1-II.

I also enjoyed the small details (new in the FiiO portfolio) that sometimes makes the difference between a good device and a refined one, such as the Hi-Res logo is no longer just a sticker glued on the back of the device but it is laser engraved directly on the aluminum surface. Another interesting thing is that during the playback of a lossless file in the lower right corner the SQ logo (for sound quality) will be displayed, the HR logo appears if a Hi-Res file is being played, the DSD logo for playing a DSD file and if a simple lossy file (such as mp3) is played no other logo will be displayed. This way I will know in advance the quality of the track being played without checking it in the „view track info”.

For now there is nothing to reproach, it looks good, it can be easily used by one hand and above all the build quality plunged way ahead compared to the unit it replaces.

Under the Hood

The chosen CPU is the Ingenic X1000/E clocked at 1 Ghz that will handle the UI and all its functions and due to a simple OS this CPU is more than enough. M3K responds fast, boots almost instantly, clearly faster than M3, than X1-II and much faster than any Android-based DAPs of any manufacturer.

The UI itself runs smoothly if a PCM lossy or lossless (16 or 24 bit) is being played … however on DSD material it is another story, where I felt it responds slower to commands and generally the UI slows down quite a bit. If you own a vast collection of DSD material I think it would be a wiser choice moving to a better DAP that moves faster on such files as FiiO M7.

At the heart of audio decoding the AK4376A is doing a really fine job as it is much more advanced than the one found on the M3, it is even more advanced than Ti PCM5242 found on X1-II and on X3-III.

AK4376A is part of a newer generation of digital to analog converters specially made for portable audio devices. Besides the actual audio decoding this chip also incorporates the final stage of headphone amplification without the need of additional op-amps, an ideal choice for having a clearer and purer sound.

Connected to a PC/Mac the little M3K can work as an USB DAC as well that will be instantly recognized by the OS. USB connection is Asynchronous type for a better jitter immunity.

At the development of M3K, the dedicated line out, digital out and Bluetooth emitter were dropped in exchange of a new feature – a digital voice recorder, on the upper part of the case a small mesh like hole can be seen that represents the microphone. M3K can record in a lossy and lossless format.

By far the best part is the battery life; in stand by mode it will work up to 38 days and when listening to music at normal volume levels it will rock your ears for 24 hours straight!

This is the most impressive battery life I’ve seen on a Hi-Res DAP followed by that of M7 with autonomy of 20 hours.

Internal headphone amp is part of the AK4376A SoC and therefore does not impress as much as the FiiO X Series players do. M3K offers up to 42mW in 16 Ω and 25 mW in 32 Ω. As a reference with the FH5 IEMs from FiiO I can’t go more than 35 volume (from max 60).

Graphical User Interface (GUI)

New UI is much more friendly compared to the old M3, it’s simple and intuitive.

You can browse by folder (I used this the most) and by categories such as by artist, album, genre and by playlists. Custom playlists can be created as well which I always do.

The most important audio setting can be found in Play Settings, I see that there aren’t any gain settings.

Few shortcuts are present as well without touching the screen, and the Play/Pause button can be reprogrammed to do another function, I do recommend checking the manual for all extra things that can be done.

To this moment the GUI (together with the one of M7) represent a big step forward, it is extremely user friendly and intuitive, I need exactly 2 touches to play a song after the device boots up.

This is an interesting one, lets check what it can really do.

Audio Performance

Firstly M3K was tested solo in a portable setup and as an external DAC in a desktop setup and later on it was compared to M3 and to X1-II. I used it with hybrid IEMs as well as with portable dynamic headphones.

I had an attempt to use it with Sennheiser HD660S but without adding a proper portable amp in the acoustic chain I couldn’t drive them properly.

Let’s be serious, M3K was not designed to drive desktop class headphone and as such cannot do such things.

Instead the FiiO FH5 hybrids were driven excellent, volume was about in the 30 to 35 position (from maximum of 60) and on Sennheiser Momentum 2.0 (the over-ear ones) volume position was on 45 from 60.

Power reserve is there, it drives more than decently any portable headphones, including balanced armature based IEMs.

Oh, by the way M3K with BA IEMs is among the very few DAPs that can boast with a very low level of hiss or any type of noise. The background noise is inaudible on ultra-sensitive FH5! The old M3 as well as the X1-II cannot match it in this regard.

I do get that FH5 will be probably be overkill for this device but it is nice to know that M3K is completely free of noise, I personally know few guys that want a small DAP to use it with BA IEMs in the gym or when jogging.

Frequency response is quite linear, without massive gaps or rises.

The biggest improvement towards older M3 is that the sound is no longer hysterical, cramped and too laid back.

M3K sounds more open, smoother and much more detailed.

Overall the sound breathes well, it doesn’t have a well spread and deep soundstage, however it doesn’t sound claustrophobic (as it was with the old M3).

There is a decent amount of air between the notes, the mushiness present on the mobile phones is nowhere to be found, a sign that the Cross Talk is much better than that of a mobile phone.

Soundstage is not incredibly large but it is wide enough to listen to an orchestra and feel on stage with your favorite artists. Acoustic barriers as notes hitting an imaginary wall can still be heard. Overall sounds are heard mostly around my head and not just inside my head as mobile phones do.

The sound impresses more with its depth than with its width or height.
There is a short gap until the next note is heard, during which time the outline of each musical note can be appreciated more.

Probably the most important aspect of the little M3K is that it sounds clean and detailed.

Few weeks ago I was shocked of how good a simple Bluetooth receiver can sound; I’m speaking about the BTR3 that sounded almost like a desktop setup. I have the same feeling with M3K, these two are very alike. Not surprisingly because both devices are using the same DAC chips.

On M3K the sound goes towards a linear experience, a very honest sound that doesn’t want to interfere in the freq.response. In this regard M3K is very different to M3 and even to X1-II.

M3K together with M7 are showing the new direction that FiiO is embracing and by that I mean an airy and crystal clear sound signature.

As a result M3K doesn’t offer the warmness and tenderness that older generation of FiiO devices had (X1-II, X3-III), the emphasis is not put on bass and midrange presence but more on the sonic experience as a whole.

It is interesting that M3K mates really well with majority of earphones regarding of sonic signature it carries. Sound coloration together with M3K is minimal and most of the times you’ll hear the mastering coloration or of the headphones themselves.

I will not analyze the frequency response divided into bass, midrange and treble because there is a very good tonal balance between the three and none of them stands out.

The high level of detail retrieval and the airy presentation will always lead to good dynamics and to a faster transient response.

M3K again shows that older FiiO sound signature is long gone, the slower and romantic presentation is no more and it is being replaced with a faster transient response. Every note sounds more agile creating a better impact on the eardrums at the same time having a better control without overflowing the neighboring frequencies.

In this sense M3K surpasses the performance of more expensive DAPs such as X1 II and X3-III.
Slowly but surely I understand that FiiO transits to a new sound and somehow to a new beginning, the new M3K, M7 and very soon M9 go shoulder to shoulder in the same direction.

Comparisons

Old school M3 VS New School M3K

From the first touches I realize that M3K is part of a higher class.

Absolutely everything is improved: the build quality, the fit and finish, the interface is much faster and simpler, the battery life and last but not least the sound quality.

M3 sounds crowded and artificial somehow. M3 gives a feeling that it is struggling too much to sound good, it doesn’t have a good flow also. M3 is not binding the notes in a natural way, that smoothness present on higher quality DAPs is nowhere to be found. For a simple portable DAP M3 does a good job but if you have any audiophile standards then M3 is completely out of the question.

M3K sound smoother like notes are tied with silk thread, the transition from bass to midrange and later to the treble is felt more natural and more pleasant to the ears. Sound is more expansive, deeper and much clearer. M3K is also more detailed and will extract more information from your favorite tunes.

On Hi-Res material it is even a bigger difference, M3K simply spreads its wings on such files.

It is clear that M3K can already be classified as a DAP towards audiophiles, it has everything it needs: sound was above expectations and battery can easily last for a week if I listen for 3 hours a day.

Red pill M3K VS blue pill X1-II

X1 is a bit heavier, a bit bigger and navigation is a bit cumbersome, I prefer the up and down scrolling on the M3K compared to the circular scroll a la iPod. X1 battery life is weaker, it can be used with wireless headphones that will not work on M3K, instead M3k has a voice recorder built-in.

X1-II is also a bit more expensive and build quality is almost identical between the two.

Sound wise X1 its even smoother; it has a very special liquidity on slow music, sounds more melancholic and will grab my feeling more often.

On the other hand M3K sounds much faster, has quicker decay of notes and overall is more agile in its presentation. Between the two M3K is a faster guy, the sound has higher dynamics on M3K than on X1 and will impress more on rhythmic and modern music.

Transparency is slightly higher on M3K as well as the detail retrieval.

M3K is a bit more linear somehow without being clinical, boring and uninteresting, as a comparison X1 is emphasizing the midrange and bass response. Anything you listen to on X1 you will always hear the bass and midrange first, on M3K no particular frequency is being outlined, M3K is closer to reference in my opinion.

X1-II sounds more extended on width, and a little more airy, there is a greater void between the notes, while with M3K I can better appreciate the outline of each note, musical notes are clearly more defined.

M3K sounds closer to the listener, without being cramped.
For my music preferences M3K is more impressive, but I realize that on slower tunes X1-II will win every time.
Pick your poison!

Conclusions

For some reasons M3K exceeded my expectations, it is small and truly portable, its strong like a brick and has a very attractive price.
It doesn’t have a radio and doesn’t work with Bluetooth headphones, but the sound that I’ve heard easily rivals the more expensive DAPs out there. I decided to not compare it with its bigger brother X3-III because it could upset the owners of said device, I will only mention that the M3K can challenge X3-III any time if only the single ended headphone output (3.5mm) is taken into consideration and not the balanced one.
M3K outright shattered the old M3 who has been in KO since the beginning of the article. Although I felt M3 was not really worthy of the FiiO name, M3K is worthy of its name!

PROS:

• Modern design, solid build quality
• Neutral sound without being boring or clinical
• Has a good tonal balance between musicality and acoustic qualities
• Presence of a USB DAC and voice recorder
• Total lack of hiss or background noise
• Drives with ease portable headphones
• Deep and well spread soundstage
• Mega attractive price point

CONS:

• Lack of a balanced output, dedicated line-out and of the Bluetooth
• Limited power output for desktop headphones

Associated equipment:

FiiO M3, M3K, X1-II, X3-III, FH5, Sennheiser HD660S, Momentum M 2.0, HeadAmp Pico Power

Sunt deja cateva luni de cand detin un adaptor BTR1 de la FiiO, de care sunt destul de impresionat. Recent am zis sa incerc si noile μBTR si BTR3 si m-am gandit ca ar fi o idee buna sa fac un test comparativ intre cele 3.

Daca va intreabati  ce sunt mai exact aceste mici aparate si ce  anume fac ele, atunci raspunsul este destul de simplu: ele transforma castile normale cu fir in casti wireless.

Raspunsul mai amanuntit este ca ele fac mult mai mult de atat, ele ofera cele mai noi tehnologii Bluetooth precum Aptx-HD si LDAC, inglobeaza un amplificator de casti dedicat si doua din ele folosesc si un DAC dedicat. Ele pot transforma telefonul Dvs ordinar intr-o sursa audio de calitate amplificand o pereche de casti.

Design si Specificatii

BTR1

Avand in vedere ca BTR1 s-a lansat acum cateva luni, FiiO nu a incorporat cele mai noi chip-uri Qualcomm, cel gasit in BTR1 este CSRA64215 care suporta doar standardele SBC si AptX.

BTR1 de asemenea foloseste un DAC dedicat pentru decodarea audio, cel folosit este AKM AK4376. Amplificatorul intern de casti ofera in jur de 15mW putere intr-o sarcina de 32 Ω, puterea oferita este suficienta pentru majoritatea castilor portabile.

Capacitatea bateriei este de 205 mAh ce ofera in jur de 8 ore de utilizare intensiva.

Corpul BTR1 este in totalitate metalic ce ii convera resiztenta  sporita la zgaraieturi.

Unicul minus este folosirea conexiunii microUSB in locul USB type C gasit pe celelalte 2 dispozitive.

μBTR

Noul microBTR este mezinul familiei, cel mai usor si cel mai accesibil aparat din cele 3.

Sincer, piticania nu este recomandata audiofililor inraiti pentru  ca nu are un DAC dedicat, performant si nici un amplificator de casti potent. Ofera numai 10mW in 32 Ω iar autonomia este in jur de 9 ore datorita bateriei de 120 mAh.

Cu toate acestea, μBTR fenteaza batranul BTR1 cand vine vorba de capabilitatile Bluetooth folosind chip-ul Qualcomm CSR8645 care ofera un codec suplimentar, cele suportate sunt: SBC, aptX si AAC. μBTR mai are si NFC pentru al imperechea cu dispozitivele compatibile printr-o singura atingere, comod nu-i asa?

Imi place destul de mult cum arata, este simplu si elegant, plasticul alb este placut la atingere, de apreciat este faptul ca au trecut pe USB type C pentru incarcare.

BTR3

BTR3 e complet alt animal fata de restul deoarece suporta toate formatele wireless precum: AAC, SBC, AptX, AptX LL, AptX HD, LDAC, LHDC si HWA!

Totul se datoreaza celui mai performant Bluetooth chip de la Qualcomm: CSR8675. Regasim de asemenea FNC pentru cuplajul printr-o singura atingere si acelasi USB type C. Lumina de desubtul sticlei frontale indica codecul Bluetooth folosit. Se pare ca telefonul care il folosesc (Xiaomi Mi Mix 2) transmite semnal AptX HD (lumina galbena) care este mai mult decat bun in opinia mea.

BTR3 foloseste un DAC de inalta performanta, mai exact este vorba despre AKM AK7376A, este mai avansat decat cel folosit in BTR1. Raportul semnal / zgomot (SNR) este mai ridicat si are o plaja dinamica (dynamic range) mai extinsa.

Are de asemenea un amplificator de casti ma puternic oferind 25 mW putere intr-o sarcina de 32 Ω. Capacitatea bateriei este de 300 mAh iar autonomia este de 11 ore.

Comparativ cu celelalte 2 dispozitive foloseste un microfon “cVc noise cancelling” ce anuleaza unele zgomote, l-am testat personal in diferite locatii si functioneaza foarte bine.

Probabil cel mai mare avantaj fata de restul este ca BTR3 poate fi folosit ca un DAC extern pe USB pentru calculatorul Dvs. Odata conectat la PC apasati butonul de pornire de 3 ori pana lumina logo-ul FiiO devine alba, semn ca modul DAC USB a fost activat.

BTR3 are si el corpul metalic insa este infasurat cu un strat de sticla 2.5D oleofobica rezistenta la amprente. Pentru mine BTR3 arata cel mai “sexy” si suna cel mai bine comparativ cu celelalte doua.

O descoperire placuta

Inainte de a va dezvalui rezultatele testelor comparative doresc sa mentionez o functie interesanta pe care am escoperit-o.

Daca detineti un televizor inteligent atunci cel mai probabil are si un adaptor Bluetooth. Detin un smart TV Sony din generatia 2017 si unul din generatia 2014, ambele au conexiuni Bluetooth. Cat de bucuros am fost cand am descoperit ca toate cele 3 aparate functioneaza cu televizoarele din dotare.

Pe langa muzica sunt si un mare amator de filme iar dupa ce familia se duce la culcare mai vizionez cate un film sau doua. Pana la acest moment utilizam boxe la volum scazut pentru a nu deranja frumoasele adormite, multumita adaptoarelor Bluetooth FiiO pot viziona filme cu orice set de casti doresc.

BTR1 si BTR3 au condus cu usurinta o pereche de casti inchise Sennheiser Momentum 2.0, chiar si castile deschise HD660S au avut destul volum si autoritate.

Un prieten apropiat detine setul Bluetooth Sennheiser RS185 pentru a viziona filme seara tarziu, insa pe mine nu m-a impresionat atat de mult, castile suna destul de aglomerat, transparenta nu este la un nivel ridicat si uneori pot suna destul de murdar.

Folosind HD660S impreuna cu BTR3 toate problemele mentionate mai sus dispar, combinatia suna aproape la fel ca si un sistem desktop bazat pe auditia in casti.

Pentru acest scop μBTR e destul de bunicel folosind casti portabile, din pacate nu poate pilota casti mai mari cum o fac cu usurinta BTR1 si BTR3.

Performanta Acustica

μBTR

Voi incepe cu μBTR avand in vedere ca este foarte usor de setat si din perspectiva calitatii audio e mai putin impresionant.

Suna destul de Ok, nimic nu iese in evidenta si probabil cel mai important aspect este ca nu suna deloc rau. Per total semnatura sonica e destul de liniara, fara denivelari pe spectrul acustic, suna mai mult decat adecvat pentru majoritatea castilor de dimesniuni mici si portabile.

Va avertizez ca oferind maximum 10mW putere nu este capabil sa conduca casti mari dar se va descurca decent cu cele portabile. Pentru unele casti intra-ureculare va avea o rezerva destula de putere, pe altele se va auzi un his in surdina. De exemplu are his pe castile FiiO FH5 care se aud destul de incet, dupa ce dau play imi este foarte greu sa il mai detectez.

Raza Bluetooth este destul de buna, am lasat telefonul in fata PC-ului si am inceput sa ma plimb prin casa cu castile conectate la μBTR pentru a testa puterea semnalului BT. La o distanta de 5 m separat de un perete din beton, conexiunea mergea brici, la al doilea nu a rezistat si s-a deconecta, la 9 m distantanta intr-un spatiu deschis incepea sa aiba deconectari repetate, puterea semnalului BT este chiar suficienta in opinia mea.

Folosind servicii de streaming precum Tidal Hi-Fi de pe telefon a functionat destul de bine dar din nou nimic nu iese in evidenta, cu siguranta nu va impresiona un audiofil avid insa va suna decent pentru un ascultator casual.

L-am scos afara pentru o fuga sanatoasa de 5km avand telefonul in buzunarul drept si μBTR atasat de tricou. Folosind Tidal Hi-Fi si facand streaming de muzica lossless am avut cateva deconectari  scurte(am numarat 4) intr-o ora. Folosing muzica lossy stocata in memoria telefonului am avut mult mai putine deconectari, am avut exact doua in aceeasi perioada de timp.

Consider ca μBTR s-a descurcat decent si per total mi-a lasat o impresie pozitiva.

BTR1

BTR1 l-am testat pentru o perioada mai indelungata si va pot spune mai multe despre el.

Desi nu are NFC, USB type C si codecul AAC castiga mult teren cand vine vorba de performanta acustica. In opinia mea suna mult mai bine decat μBTR la orice capitol.

BTR1 are un amplificator de casti sensibil mai potent, castile mari vor suna mult mai tare si nici nu  vor intra in clipping la 100% volum. Datorita DAC-ului dedicat aparatul suna mult mai spatios, mai adanc si mult mai aerisit pentru ascultator.

Daca μBTR suna prea calm si lesinat pentru electronica rapida si rock, BTR1 rezolva complet aceasta problema sunand mai rapid, mai plin, mai carnos cu urcurusi dinamice  mult mai impresionante.

In opinia mea din toate cele 3 aparate BTR1 are cel mai cald si carnos sunet.

Se datoreaza frecventelor medii care sunt pozitionate mai in fata, asa ca toate vocile si instrumentele bazate pe corzi vor atrage atentia ascultatorului mult mai des. Niciodata nu m-am gandit ca un receptor Bluetooth poate suna atat de musical si plin de substanta. Pana acum sunt indragostit de BTR1.

Hisul nu se mai aude pe castile normale si nu e o problema nici pe sensibilele FiiO FH5.

Datorita raspunsului in frecventa al FH5 sub forma literei V – BTR1 ajuta mult aceste casti cu ale sale medii impinse in fata, astfel FH5 devin mai liniare si mult mai muzicale intr-un fel.

Basul cat si inaltele suna mai curat, in sfarsit basul nu mai suna ca din butoi iar inaltele au sclipiciul necesar unei auditii critice. Extremitatile de jos cat si cele de sus sunt mai prezente acum si pot fi auzite cu usurinta pe melodiile corecte.

Am fugit de multe ori cu BTR1 conectat la telefon. Cand faceam streaming de muzica lossless prin Tidal Hi-Fi rareori am avut deconectari, semnalul este mai puternic si mai stabil decat cel al μBTR dar este mai mult o presupunere decat un fapt real. Daca foloseam fisiere lossy stocate pe memoria telefonului posibil aveam o singura deconectare (pe o milisecunda) sau niciuna in decursul unei ore.

Intr-un spatiu deschis BTR1 rezista pana la vreo 11 m iar avand un perete de beton intre emitator si receptor semnalul rezista pana la ~7 m.

Cand foloseam televizorul pentru a viziona filme puteam lejer sa ma plimb prin casa in cautarea unor calorii fara a avea deconectari deranjante.

BTR1 a ridicat stacheta si mi-a intrecut asteptarile in materie de receptoare Bluetooth.

BTR3

Saltul calitativ de la BTR1 la BTR3 a fost mai mic decat cel de la μBTR la BTR1.
In afara de aspectul fizic, de toate codecurile si tehnologiile BT si de capabilitatile DAC-ului USB, sonic BTR3 suna putin mai bine, mai curat, mai detaliat si mai tare decat BTR1.

Cea mai mare diferenta este ca BTR1 suna mai cald si mai carnos pe cand BTR3 suna mult mai liniar si neutru cu toate castile testate.

Frecventele medii nu mai sunt impinse in fata si sunt pe aceeasi linie cu restul frecventelor, totul suna mai curat si mai clar.

Conturul notelor este mai delimitat pe BTR3 si circula mai mult aer intre note.

Performanta inaltelor e buna, poate chiar prea buna caci cateodata impreuna cu FH5 sunetul poate devein obositor pe termen lung, insa cu Momentum 2.0 este exact ce a prescris doctorul. Inaltele sunt putin evidentiate insa doar putin.

Prezenta codecurilor Aptx HD si LDAC au facut o diferenta mai mare decat anticipam, mai ales cand faceam streaming de muzica lossless. Telefonul meu se pare ca trimite semnal AptX HD iar pe playerul FiiO M7 am testat codecul LDAC. In ambele cazuri streamingul de muzica lossless a sunat identic cu conexiune prin cablu, un rezultat excelent in opinia mea.

Cand am folosit microfonul intern al BTR3 purtand o conversatie pe telefon, apelantul mi-a spus ca aude mai bine vocea mea si a celor din parc dar nicidecum alte sunete. Se pare ca tehnologia cVc noise cancelling si-a facut efectul, cu toate acestea ar trebui sa stiti ca va bloca majoritatea sunetelor in afara de voci, daca oamenii din jurul Dvs vorbesc, apelantul ii va auzi si pe acei oameni… deja vad cum SRI-ul comanda un lot de BTR3…J

Intr-un spatiu deschis BTR3 a avut cea mai stabila conexiune iar la o distanta mare de telefon, un perete din beton nu va deconecta aparatul.

In timp ce jogging si faceam streaming de muzica, sau redam direct din memoria telefonului nu am avut deconectari, in rare cazuri am avut una.

Totusi, avand in vedere ca un telefon inteligent are o multime de sunete, notificari, aplicatii s.a.m.d. cateodata se va auzi un scurt distors in momentul in care mai multe sunete sunt redate concomitant.

De asemenea am testat BTR3 in modul DAC USB conectat la un PC, a fost recunoscut instant aprinzandu-se lumina alba pe ecranul dispozitivului. A sunat la fel de bine ca si prin LDAC sau AptX HD insa fara intreruperi sau pierderi de semnal.

Din motive inexplicabile suna putin mai tare in modul DAC USB decat prin Bluetooth, nu imi explic ce se intampla, suna putin mai tare pe cablu dar nu cu mult.

A functionat ireprosabil in modul DAC USB, aplicatia desktop Tidal l-a recunoscut instant si il puteam controla precum un DAC USB normal.

In toate cazurile BTR3 s-a purtat extraordinar, nu am ce sa-i reprosez.

Concluzii

Toate cele 3 dispozitive s-au purtat admirabil in timp ce faceam jogging, in fata TV-ului sau in miscare folosind streaming sau muzica stocata.

Mi-au placut in mod deosebit BTR1 si BTR3 pentru cat de bine au putut suna. Pentru casti tipatoare unde inaltele sunt ceva mai accentuate recomand BTR1, iar pentru castile ce au caracter sonor mai cald sau mai neutru BTR3 va fi o alegere mai buna.

Pentru ascultatorii casual, pentru cei care vor face fitness sau jogging μBTR este sufficient iar conexiunea BT e destul de stabila. Aparatul va avea his doar pe casti ultrasensibile sau pe hibride, pe casti normale (dinamice) nu se va auzi.

Scurt la obiect voi pastra BTR3 pentru nevoile personale, mi-a placut destul de mult jucaria.

Echipamente folosite:
FiiO μBTR, BTR1, BTR3, M7, FH5, Sennheiser HD660S, Momentum 2.0, Xiaomi Mi Mix 2

I should apologize first to FiiO as I have the BTR1 for few months already in my possession and I was immensely enjoying it for this past couple of months already. I received recently the μBTR and BTR3 so I thought why not do an informative review between all three devices, surely it will help some readers.

If you are wondering what exactly are the newest BTR1, μBTR and BTR3 devices and what is their purpose the answer is quite simple: they transform your regular wired headphones into wireless headphones.

The longer answer is that they do so Much more than that, they offer the newest Bluetooth technologies such as Aptx-HD and LDAC, they pack a headphone amplifier and two of them have a dedicated DAC inside as well. They could transform your ordinary phone into a high quality source powering a good pair of earphones.

Design and Specifications

BTR1

Since BTR1 was released few months ago FiiO didn’t incorporate the newest Qualcomm chips, the one inside BTR1 is CSRA64215 that only supports Bluetooth SBC and AptX.

BTR1 also uses a dedicated DAC for audio decoding; the one used is the AKM’s AK4376. The internal headphone amp offers about 15mW of power into a 32 Ω load, that is quite enough for majority of earphones.

It also has a battery capacity of 205 mAh that offers a battery life of about 8 hours.
BTR1 body is made out of metal, the clip is also metal that should endure a lot of stress.

I only don’t like that a microUSB connection was used instead of the newest USB type C found on the other two.

μBTR

The newest microBTR is the smallest of the bunch, lightest and most affordable variant of all three.

Truth to be told it is not intended to be used by audiophiles and it does not have a dedicated DAC inside, nor a powerful headphone amplifier. It offers only 10mW into 32 Ω, battery life is about 9 hours thanks to a 120 mAh battery.

However where μBTR outsmarts the older BTR1 is the Bluetooth capability, it uses Qualcomm’s CSR8645 that provides additional codecs such as: SBC, aptX, and AAC and also has NFC for one touch pairing with compatible devices.

I like its looks very much, it is simple and elegant, white plastic feels nice to the touch. I also like that USB type C was used for charging.

BTR3

BTR3 is completely other animal compared to the rest as it supports all the wireless sound formats such as: AAC, SBC, AptX, AptX LL, AptX HD, LDAC, LHDC and HWA!

It all was possible thanks to the highest performance Qualcomm CSR8675 Bluetooth chip inside BTR3. It also has NFC for one touch pairing and the same USB type C as the μBTR. The Bluetooth light indicator underneath the front glass actually shows the exact audio codec it is being used. It seems that with my Xiaomi Mi Mix 2 the AptX-HD is being used (yellow light) which is good enough in my opinion.

BTR3 uses a high performance DAC chip, more exactly the AKM AK4376A, it is more advanced than the one found in BTR1 as it has a higher SNR number and a better dynamic range.

It also has a more powerful headphone amp inside as it offers 25mW of power into a 32 Ω load. The internal battery is a 300 mAh one that offers around 11 hours of playtime.

Compared to other two it uses a higher performance microphone with cVc noise cancelling technology, I tested it myself in various places and it works as intended.

Probably the biggest advantage over the rest is that BTR3 can be used as an external dedicated DAC for your PC. Once you connect it via the USB type C cable press 3 times the power button and the white FiiO logo will light up to inform you that DAC mode was enabled.

BTR3 has also a metal body but it is wrapped in a 2.5D glass with oleophobic coating that keeps the fingerprints away. To me BTR3 is the sexier device, it feels and sounds much nicer in my opinion compared to the other two.

A pleasant discovery

Before I start with the actual sound comparisons I should mention first a very nice feature that I discovered myself.

If you own a smart TV then probably it has Bluetooth capabilities as well. I own a 2017 Sony smart TV and how happy I was when I discovered that all 3 FiiO devices worked with my TV.

I am also a cinephile and when my family goes to sleep I tend to watch a movie or two. Until now I always lowered my speakers volume so I would not bother the sleeping beauties inside the house. Thanks to FiiO’s Bluetooth devices I can watch my movies with any headphones I want.

BTR1 and BTR3 easily drove my closed-back Sennheiser Momentum 2.0 and even the open-back HD660s with a really nice punch into eardrums.

A close friend owns the Sennheiser’s RS185 Bluetooth set for watching movies at late night but I never liked that particular set just because the RS185 headphones are not that great – they sound crowded, have poor transparency and detail retrieval and can sound muddy sometimes.

With BTR3 and HD660S all those problems go out of the window, it almost sounds like a desktop based headphone system.

For this task μBTR is quite good too with regular earphones; however it is not capable of driving bigger desktop headphones as BTR1 and BTR3 does.

Sound performance

μBTR

I will start with μBTR since it is very easy to set-up and from a sound quality perspective it is the least impressive from the rest.

It sounds Ok, nothing really stands out, but most importantly nothing is really screwed up. Overall sound signature is quite smooth, no major rises or dips can be heard, it sounds more than adequate with majority of my headphones.

Be warned that at maximum 10mW of power it is unable to drive any desktop headphones and will do an Ok job with portables. With some in-ears it is sounding too loud at times, with other IEMs it may hiss but not really bothersome. It has a small hiss with FiiO’s own FH5 but it is really faint and once the music starts playing it goes away.

Bluetooth range is quite good, I left my phone in front of my PC and started walking around the house to test the BT connection. At around 5m away and a solid concrete wall between us the connection was still going strong, another wall and I was getting dropouts, at 9 m outside in an open space I started getting drop-outs, its more than decent in my opinion.

Using my phone with lossless streaming services such as Tidal Hi-Fi it worked pretty good but again nothing really stands out, it will not impress an avid audiophile but it will work for a casual listener.

I took them out for a run of about 5 km with my phone in the right pocket and with μBTR attached to my T-shirt. Using Tidal Hi-Fi and streaming lossless tunes I’ve got very few drop-outs, I counted four short ones (more like pops and crackles) in one hour. With lossy music stored on my phone I’ve got much less dropouts, I’ve had exactly two short drop-outs during the same period of time in the next run.

I consider it more than a decent performance and so far I liked how μBTR performed.

BTR1

I have tested BTR1 the longest period of time and can tell you more about it.

Although it doesn’t have NFC, USB type C and AAC codecs it makes up in the sound quality department. In my opinion it sounds much better than μBTR in all aspects.

BTR1 has a higher performance headphone amp and demanding headphones will sound louder, it doesn’t clip at 100% volume either.
Due to its dedicated DAC chip it sounds much wider, deeper and everything is clearly layered for the listener.

If μBTR sounded too calm and smooth for fast electronica and rock, BTR1 resolves this issue completely as it sounds not only faster and greater dynamic swings it also sounds fuller and meatier.

Actually in my opinion BTR1 have the meatiest/warmest sound of all three devices.

It has a slightly stronger mid-range influence as it is positioned more forward, so all the voices and string instruments will catch your attention easier.
I never thought a Bluetooth receiver can sound so full of substance and musical. So far I’m in love with BTR1.

It hisses a little bit less than μBTR and it’s a non-issue with FH5 hybrids.

Due to a slightly V-shape frequency response of the FH5 – the BTR1 is actually helping FH5 with its forward mid-range and due to this fact FH5 became more linear and much more musical somehow.

Bass and treble sounds much crisper, at least bass is not one-note sounding anymore and trebles have the right amount of zing. Lower and upper extremities are now present and can be easily heard on the right tracks.

I ran with BTR1 too many times connected my smartphone. When streaming lossless files via Tidal Hi-Fi I’ve rarely got any drop-outs or pops, signal power is maybe a little bit stronger than that of μBTR but its more like an educated guess than a fact. If I was using lossy files stored on my phone I’d got maximum one drop-out in an hour of running or none at all.

In an open space BTR1 goes up to 11 m of strong connection and a concrete wall will not interfere up to 7 m or so.

When I was using my TV watching movies at night, I could easily walk around the house searching for some sneaky snacks and have no drop-outs at all.

In my opinion BTR1 raised the bar for me from what I was anticipating from a BT device.

BTR3

The move from BTR1 to BTR3 is not as big as moving from μBTR to BTR1 was.
Apart from looks, all BT codecs available, USB type C and USB DAC capabilities, sound quality wise BTR3 sounds a bit better, a bit clearer and a bit louder than BTR1.

The biggest difference is that BTR1 is a bit warm/meaty sounding and BTR3 is much more linear and neutral with all headphones I’ve tested.

The midrange is not that upfront and it is more in line with the rest of frequency response, everything sounds clean and clear.

The outlines of the notes are much clearer on the BTR3 and more air around the notes can be heard as well.

Treble performance is good, maybe too good sometimes, with FH5 it is a bit tiresome in the long run, but with Momentum 2.0 it’s exactly what doctor ordered.
Treble seems like a tiny bit emphasized but not by much.

The presence of AptX HD and LDAC codecs made a bigger difference than I was anticipating, especially when I was streaming lossless music via Tidal. My phone outputs in Aptx-HD and with FiiO M7 I tested the LDAC codec.
In both cases the BT streaming sounded indistinguishable from a wired connection, a really good result if you ask me.

When I was using the BTR3 Mic when talking, the caller told me he can hear clearer my voice AND all other voices around me from the park I was running in, but no other sounds. So the cVc noise cancelling technology is doing its work – however you should know that it will block all noises other than the voices, if people around you are talking, the caller will clearly hear them as well.

In an open space BTR3 had the stronger BT connection and with a concrete wall between us it was holding the connection better than the other two, it did hold 2 concrete walls at around 4 meters away!

When running, in both cases (streaming lossless music and using local stored lossy tunes) I didn’t get drop-outs, maybe one or two on very rare occasions.

However since a smartphone has tons of sounds, notifications, apps, so on and so forth It will pop and it will crackle sometimes when multiple sounds are being played (for example a notification is being played, a Whatsapp call occurs and streaming music in the same time).

I also tested the BTR3 in the DAC mode connected to my PC, it was instantly recognized. It sounded as good as with a LDAC or Aptx-HD connection but of course no drop-outs, no nothing.

I also heard a slightly louder sound in the DAC mode than in the BT mode. Can’t explain why that happens, it is just a tiny bit louder, so not by much.

It works as intended in the DAC mode, the desktop Tidal app sees it as well and controls it as a normal desktop DAC. It may sound just a little bit better wired in this mode but there is no denying it that in all cases BTR3 performed extraordinarily!

Conclusions

All three devices performed admirable on the run, in front of my TV and on the go listening to stored or to streamed music.
I particularly liked the BTR1 and BTR3 for how much better they sounded.
For brighter headphones BTR1 will be a better match and for warmer or neutral headphones BTR3 will be a better choice.

For casual listeners or non-audiophiles (read regular/normal people) μBTR is more than enough, AptX, AAC and SBC codecs are good enough and BT connection is quite strong. It will hiss only with multi-BA or hybrid IEMs and not at all with regular earphones.

Long story short I will be keeping the BTR3 for myself, I really like that one.

Associated equipment:
FiiO μBTR, BTR1, BTR3, M7, FH5, Sennheiser HD660S, Momentum 2.0, Xiaomi Mi Mix 2