FiiO FH1 Dual Hybrid IEM--A Basshead's Delight

Pros - •great value and affordable pricing
•good sound quality and technical performance for the price
•control
•well-done midrange and treble; midrange and lower + middle treble timbre; lower midrange bleed mostly avoided despite very strong bass
•super elegant and premium design/appearance as well as finish; build quality; accessories
•fit, ergonomics
•two included cables

Cons - •strong bass levels only for those who really want it; really strong bass emphasis will not fit to everyone’s personal preference
•sub-bass can appear a bit unfocussed at times

Spoiler: Le German preamble before le English review

Vorwort:

Waren hybride In-Ears im letzten Jahrzehnt praktisch noch nicht existent (mir fällt im Zeitraum vor 2010 lediglich der Ultimate Ears Super.fi 5 EB als hybrides Modell ein), hat sich dies mittlerweile grundlegend geändert und hybride Neuerscheinungen findet man auf dem Markt mindestens genau so häufig wie ausschließlich mit dynamischen oder Balanced Armature Treibern bestückte In-Ears.

Eine hybride  Neuerscheinung ist auch der in vier verschiedenen Farben erhältliche FiiO FH1, der preislich in der oberen Hälfte des zweistelligen Eurobereichs positioniert und mittlerweile auch bei Amazon erhältlich ist.
In welchen klanglichen Bereichen sich der günstigere Dual-Driver, der trotzdem mit wechselbaren Kabeln (und davon gleich zwei Stück) ausgestattet ist, vom teureren Triple-Driver F9 Pro unterscheidet, kläre ich unter anderem in dieser englischsprachigen Rezension.

Introduction:

When FiiO announced the F9 Pro, they also unveiled another hybrid in-ear, the FH1, which utilises one titanium-coated 10 mm dynamic driver per side along with one Balanced Armature.



The FH1 while priced lower, in the two-digit dollar range, however also offers removable cables (MMCX system) and comes with two of them – one with an integrated remote control, and one with a balanced 2.5 mm TRRS plug termination.

In what ways does it differ from the F9 Pro? And how does it sound and perform in general? Well, that’s what I find out in this very review.


Full disclosure: I was provided with one sample of the FiiO FH1 in-ears free of charge for the purpose of an, as always, unpaid, honest and unbiased review that reflects nothing but my own impressions and wasn’t given any directions/guidelines, no matter how it would turn out.


Technical Specifications:

Price: $74.99/€89.00 (in Germany)
Type: Hybrid In-Ear
Drivers per Side: 2 (1x dynamic driver, 1x Balanced Armature (Knowles 33518))
Frequency Response: 20 Hz – 40 kHz
Impedance: 26 Ohms
Sensitivity: 106 dB/mW
Maximum Input Power: 100 mW
Detachable Cables: Yes, MMCX
Available Colours: Black, Blue, Green, Red


About hybrid In-Ears:

As you can already see from the technical specifications and introduction, the FiiO FH1 is a little different from most In-Ears produced in the past decade and doesn’t only rely on dynamic or Balanced Armature transducers for sound reproduction, but combines both in one shell.

Most In-Ears use dynamic transducers for audio playback which have the advantage of covering the whole audible spectrum and achieving a strong bass emphasis without much effort. Valuable dynamic drivers are often said to have a more bodied and musical bass that has a more soft impact and decay and lacks of the analytical character that BA transducers are known for. On the downside, in contrast to headphones with other driver principles, dynamic transducers often have a lower resolution.

Higher-priced and especially professional IEMs mostly use Balanced Armature transducers, which usually have got a higher resolution than dynamic drivers, are faster, more precise and have got the better high-level stability, which is important for stage musicians that often require higher than average listening levels. On the downside, it is usually somewhat difficult (although not impossible) to cover the whole audible spectrum with just one single BA transducer, and a strongly emphasised bass is often only possible with multiple or big drivers. Some people also find In-Ears with BA transducers to sound too analytical, clinical or cold (in several active years in a German audio community where I wrote multiple reviews, gave dozens of purchase advice and help, from time to time I heard people that got into BA earphones for the first time using these attributes for describing BA earphones, especially their lower frequencies).

Hybrid IEMs unite the positive aspects of both driver principles and use one dynamic transducer for the lows reproduction and at least one BA driver for covering the midrange and highs, wherefore the often as “musical” described bass character remains and the BA transducers add resolution, speed and precision to the mids and highs (, at least in theory) – and that’s what the FiiO FH1 does with its technology. It is addressed to those people who perceive the clinically-fast character of BA transducers as unnatural and prefer body, impact and weight, but want to keep the mids’ and highs’ resolution, nimbleness and precision.


Delivery Content:

Despite being FiiO’s lowest priced hybrid model, the package design and included accessories are definitely not bad at all – even quite the opposite is the case – and one will not only find the in-ear, but also two sets of cables (1x single-ended 3.5 mm with in-line three-button remote control and microphone, 1x 2.5 mm TRRS), two sets of silicone ear tips (narrow and wide bore) in three different sizes, and last but not least a very sturdy carrying case (FiiO HB1) inside the cardboard box.




Looks, Feels, Build Quality:

One of the largest design/build differences between the FH1 and F9 Pro is that the more expensive triple-driver’s shells are fully made of metal whereas the dual-driver’s are made of plastic but have a sound tube/nozzle that is made of metal (brass). And oh boy, that design of the FH1 looks gorgeous in person! The metallic blue shells, surrounded by a silver frame, together with the brass nozzle really give the FH1 a somewhat royal, premium appearance.



While the heavier metal shells of the F9 Pro appear more valuable and are also designed more uniquely, one cannot deny that having plastic shells has also got its own advantages since they won’t feel as cold in winter and are lighter. And besides that, the FH1 doesn’t appear cheaply made at all but looks and feels nicely sturdy, and it has the advantage of being available in four different colours whereas the F9 Pro is only offered in one.



The large carrying case, called HB1, is pretty nice as well since it is softly padded on the inside to protect the in-ear well, and it has got a nice design, too.

If you are familiar with DUNU’s more recent in-ears, you will likely immediately recognise FH1’s standard remote/mic cable, as despite lacking braiding/twisting compared to the other included cable with 2.5 mm TRRS plug termination, it is very soft and super flexible, and therefore among the best, if not the best, non-twisted cables on the market.
Apart from directly above the y-splitter, there is good strain relief, but unfortunately no chin-slider.
The ear guides are pre-shaped, flexible silicone tubes without any memory wire. They automatically adjust to the ears’ radius.

The MMCX plugs sit firmly and tight in the sockets, and what I find nice are the matching coloured side-markers on the cable and the ear pieces themselves.
The remote control itself is also really nice since the volume buttons are easy to distinguish. Additionally, it doesn’t require much force to push them, yet definition is really good and not too soft.


Comfort, Isolation:

Thanks to the general shell design that was made popular by Shure and Westone, the FH1 sits ergonomically in one’s ears and most people should be able to wear it for hours without experiencing any discomfort – and that’s definitely also true for me. As the shells are made of plastic, the ear pieces will also not feel cold upon insertion in contrast to in-ears whose shells are made of metal on the inside, such as the F9 Pro’s.



Thanks to the nice cable, microphonics are close to being inexistent but could be even lower if the single-ended cable had a chin-slider.

Noise isolation is, as expected given the FH1 is vented, not on the same level as with in-ears that have closed shells, however it is still somewhat higher than average and therefore isolates somewhat more than the F9 Pro (free/unblocked front cavity vent) even though both in-ears seal properly in my ear canals.


Sound:

For listening, I mainly used the iBasso DX200 (AMP1 and AMP2 module) and FiiO Q1 MkII. The FH1 was always used with the included single-ended cable during comparisons and listening.

Only the largest included silicone tips (red stem, wide bore) were used for listening and all comparisons.

Frequency response measurements can be found here: […]

The measurements were performed with my Vibro Labs Veritas coupler.
Below is the information about the measurements with that coupler:

Please note that my measurements weren't recorded with professional equipment but with my Vibro Veritas coupler that was pseudo-calibrated to more or less match a real IEC 711 coupler’s response with applied diffuse-field target, hence the results shouldn’t be regarded as absolute values but rather as a rough visualisation.
Especially at 3, 6 and 9 kHz, there are sometimes greater deviations from professional plots – but for a general, rough comparison between various in-ears and a rough idea of how they sound, the results are sufficient, and in the mids and lows, they are even (very) accurate.


FR included tips



FR effect on blocking front cavity vent



vs. 1More E1001 (front cavity vent blocked on both (FiiO = blue, 1More = yellow))

Tonality:

FiiO includes two sets of silicone ear tips – one with a wide bore, and one with a narrow bore. Just as expected and also shown on the measurement graphs linked above, the narrower bore tips reduce the upper treble emphasis somewhat, so if you personally find the upper treble, even though its elevation is nicely happening in the higher range, to be just a tad too strong, they are probably the way to go.
I personally used the FH1 with the included larger bore tips.

Covering the dynamic woofer’ front cavity vent (, which is by the way true for pretty much all dynamic driver and hybrid in-ears,) will increase bass quantity quite noticeably. Depending on your individual ear anatomy, this vent might be either free or fully blocked – in my ears, it is fully blocked. And I suspect that this might be the case for most people, since this vent is pretty close to the nozzle where it’s more likely to be blocked completely compared to the F9 Pro where it’s sitting a bit closer to the body.

If the FH1’s front cavity vent isn’t blocked due to your ear anatomy, you will get a still impactful but not heavy bass lift of around 7 to 10 dB compared to an in-ear that is diffuse-field flat in the bass, such as the Etymotic ER4S/SR. However, if that vent gets blocked due to your ear anatomy, which is, as I said, quite likely, you get a whopping bass and especially sub-bass elevation that is around 17 dB!
Yep, that’s a bass elevation that will please bass heads who are out for quality, since the FH1 definitely delivers quality when it comes to bass emphasis – despite being heavily lifted, the bass doesn’t overshadow the mids and doesn’t unnaturally thicken the low mids. In fact, the lower mids are only moderately thickened by the strong bass emphasis hat slowly starts around 700 Hz and peaks around 40 Hz, in the beginning true sub-bass. And since it doesn’t roll off at all below that, you get an eardrum-rattling sub-bass emphasis.
Sure, especially the warm midbass but also lower root aren’t shy at all (they really aren’t, trust me), but it is the strong, turned-up-subwoofer-like sub-bass that is the powerful star of the show.

If you are a (sub-) basshead, the likelihood that this in-ear will be a true delight for you is really high.

With a heavy bass elevation, a bloated, overly thick lower midrange is what only few people want, and fortunately the FH1 avoids just that. With a bass emphasis this strong, a bit of bass bleed isn’t completely avoidable, but in case of the FiiO, there is luckily not too much of added lower midrange warmth, and it sounds pleasant, only moderately on the warmer side, and avoids lower midrange bleed and especially bloat.
Vocal timbre in general is done really well – as it is natural. Besides the bit of added, pleasant lower midrange warmth, mids have got correct timbre and lack the bright upper midrange lift the F9 Pro has for example, wherefore the FH1 sounds realistic in the midrange and higher piano notes as well as trumpets are reproduced realistically.
Central mids have got a bit of a bump that was added so that the midrange doesn’t lose presence compared to the heavy bass lift and bright upper treble. And as a result, voices are never pushed into the background or thinned out even with busy, bass- and treble- oriented tracks.

The highs above 2 kHz even take a moderate step back and are on the more relaxed side, just to come back with a vivid, bright elevation between 10 and 12 kHz that highlights cymbals and helps the in-ear to have some brightness to counterbalance the strong bass lift while avoiding sibilance and harshness.
As that upper treble/beginning super treble emphasis is rather wide than narrow, cymbals are a bit on the spread, slightly metallic side though, but also rather soft than harsh in their attack.

- - -

The more consumer-oriented, v- to w-shaped FH1 is an in-ear that is clearly not on the shy side in the bass at all and delivers a thumping, impactful, heavy elevation in the sub- and midbass that mostly avoids midrange bleed. Speaking of the midrange, its timbre is nicely natural with just a bit of added lower midrange warmth, and thanks to a moderate bump, it doesn’t lose presence compared to the lows and highs that are on the inoffensive side but hold enough of countervailing upper treble brightness so that the FH1 is a fun but harmonious sounding in-ear that avoids artificiality as much as it is possible with a heavy bass like that.

Resolution:

One could think that, due to its very strong, heavy bass, the FH1 might struggle to deliver a clean and focused presentation. But that is, most of the time, not the case.
While the dynamic bass driver has undeniably got a dynamic driver character to it with the typical impact, attack and somewhat longer decay compared to Balanced Armature woofers and is on the somewhat softer side in general, its bass control is quite splendid and good despite the weight and heaviness the lows carry.
Notes still decay reasonably fast, and the softer attack only leads to a less focused, tendentially blurry presentation with really fast tracks while still mostly avoiding muddiness. Nonetheless, sub-bass definition could be ultimately, in relation to the midbass, a bit clearer since true sub-bass notes can appear somewhat unfocussed.

The popular (and, if the vents are blocked on both in-ears, quite comparably tuned and comparably bassy) 1More E1001 triple-driver in-ears have got a comparably strong (although ultimately still slightly milder and less heavy) sub-bass emphasis if their inner vent is blocked due to one’s ear anatomy, which is the case in my ears. Nonetheless the FH1 has still got the superior bass speed and control in comparison, which is also true for the mids and highs when it comes to transparency.
While the E1001 might sound a bit more open and spacious as a result of its elevated, clarity-generating upper midrange lift, the FH1 outperforms it when it comes to control, small details and resolution in general wherefore I didn’t even bother to include the E1001 in an in-depth, written head-to-head comparison in this review.
The FH1 also handles its bass elevation audibly better than the NuForce NE800M.

Generally, the FH1 is an in-ear that is quite convincing on the technical side for its price class.
Midrange resolution and speech intelligibility are good, with generally quite clean transients. Lower midrange details are however slightly masked by the bass.

The FiiO’s highs are clean and crisp with good note separation, although ultimately on a slightly lower technical level compared to the more expensive F9 Pro.

Soundstage:

The FH1 is an in-ear that has neither got a really remarkable or a bad soundstage – it’s more on the average side, however with fairly pronounced expansion to the sides, and manages to already leave the base between my ears.
There is not much spatial depth to my ears, however some front projection can still be perceived and is noticeable with a rather good ability to discern close and rather far elements as well as those in-between. Nonetheless it is a definitely rather width- and separation-driven than layering- and depth-focussed presentation.
Imaging is quite good too, and the “empty” space between instruments is pretty clean.

---------

In Comparison with the FiiO F9 Pro:

For this head-to-head comparison, the F9 Pro was used with the included white silicone tips that have the least amount of treble emphasis, whereas the FH1 was used with the included wide bore silicone tips that have the most amount of treble. Nonetheless the F9 Pro is undeniably the brighter sounding in-ear out of the two, by quite a bit.
The differences in accessories and finish/design/build were already depicted further above.

While the F9 Pro could be, sonically, described as tuned for a balanced sound that is heading more into the brighter, tendentially aggressively revealing direction, the FH1 features a frequency response that is more consumer-pleasing with a noticeably stronger bass emphasis and heavy sub- and midbass, along with a countervailing upper treble lift that highlights cymbals.

Like pretty much all front-vented in-ears with a dynamic bass driver, both in-ears will have a noticeable bass increase if that front vent is covered due to one’s individually different ear anatomy. In my ears, the F9 Pro is sitting with mainly free, unblocked vents, whereas the FH1’s front vents are blocked – how can this be given that both in-ears are shaped almost similarly? One reason, although not the main one in my case, is that the F9 Pro’s inner side of the shells is slightly bulkier, rounder, whereas the FH1’s is a little flatter. The other, and main reason in my case, is that the two in-ears’ vents are located in a slightly different spot (closer to the body on the F9 Pro and closer to the nozzle on the FH1), so even though both in-ears are positioned pretty much identically in my ears, the FH1’s vents are blocked whereas the F9 Pro’s remain mostly free. And since the FH1’s vents are in this spot, they seem more likely to be completely blocked in most users’ ears.

As a result, the FH1 is noticeably bassier than the F9 Pro in my case. Also blocking the F9 Pro’s front cavity vents on purpose, both have almost similar levels of sub-bass at 20 Hz, with the FH1 still dominating a bit. However, in the rest of the sub-bass, the midbass, the upper bass and the lower root, it is the FH1 that still clearly dominates with ca. 4 dB stronger levels, resulting in a still bassier and somewhat fuller side in the lows on the FH1’s side even if both in-ears are used with blocked front cavity vents.

Midrange tuning is quite different on both in-ears – while the F9 Pro has got a bright, clarity- and female vocal-oriented upper midrange elevation, the FH1 has got an audibly flatter midrange with the undeniably more correct timbre. Despite being behind the highs and lows in level, the FH1’s midrange isn’t in the background or thinned out since it’s got a moderate bump wherefore singers keep their proximity in the mix.

The treble on the two in-ears is presented quite differently too, and frankly more realistic and tamer on the FH1. While the F9 Pro generates more perceived clarity and air due to its upper midrange/lower treble elevation that however also shifts its vocal timbre to the leaner side, the FH1 is more even in the middle treble where the F9 Pro could ultimately have more evenness, so all in all the FH1 has got a more realistic and more even treble response in comparison.
Both in-ears have got an upper treble peak, but the difference is that it’s happening at a higher frequency on the FH1, pushing it further from the problematic 6 to 8 kHz range, and making it sound less intrusive and a bit softer.

- - -

While the F9 Pro is tuned for those who are looking for tonal balance and added clarity, the FH1 is more consumer-appealing with its stronger bass lift. At the same time however, the FH1 also features the more correct timbre in the mids and is less spiky highs.

- - -

Even though the FH1 is quite a bit more elevated in the bass, speed, attack, decay and especially control are almost similar, and it is remarkable how well that dynamic driver performs with an elevation like that.
Midrange resolution is where the F9 Pro has got a bit of an edge, making the FH1 sound slightly constrained and a little less transparent in comparison, however both are reasonably close and the main difference comes from the F9 Pro’s clarity-generating upper midrange lift, nonetheless that just-described difference holds true for the lower mids.
Treble resolution is relatively close as well, and the only thing that the F9 Pro does a little better in a head-to-head comparison is note separation that appears slightly better focussed and a bit cleaner.

- - -

When it comes to soundstage, the FH1 portrays a bit more width to my ears while appearing otherwise quite similar, which also goes for instrument separation, layering and imaging precision in general.


Conclusion:



The FiiO FH1 is an in-ear with great build quality, excellent ergonomics and fit, a beautiful, premium design, and good accessories for its price class.
If its front cavity vent is blocked, which seems to be quite likely for most people due to where it’s located, it outputs a strong, heavy bass elevation that does however not bleed into or overshadow the midrange which still has got good presence in the mix and especially features a realistic, mostly neutral timbre, coupled with a generally rather inoffensive treble that has got a bright, countervailing elevation in the upper highs that ultimately still manage to avoid sibilance.
Resolution and control are also good, so if a heavy but mostly controlled bass is your thing, FiiO’s FH1 looks like a great and still rather wallet-friendly option.