Sound Analysis.

I already mentioned about running an experiment with 100hr burn in to compare the cables, so all my sound impressions were collected after 100hrs of keeping Xelento playing in a loop.

I found Xelento to have a slightly v-shaped signature with a smooth natural tonality. While low end portion of the sound is clearly elevated from sub-bass and through mid-bass, the upper mids and lower treble balance it out where sometimes I even forget about the bass impact. While tonality is smooth and natural with an organic timbre of the sound, it never becomes veiled or muffled, the sound always stays clear and detailed. Not analytically micro-detailed or with a super crisp clarity, but just a natural revealing clarity.

Starting with a bass, the sub-bass goes deep, with a velvety rumble that makes you feel the bass, yet it’s not distracting or overwhelming (even considering the lifted quantity). The mid bass has an average speed, typical slower attack of analog dynamic driver with a little faster decay which makes overall bass feel articulate and well controlled, no spillage into lower mids. Lower mids are slightly above neutral, adding healthy doze of body and warmth to the sound, but not too much, thus the signature feels slightly v-shaped. Upper mids surprise you with a great retrieval of details, though it’s not on micro-detail level. They are warmer and smoother, have more organic natural tonality, nice transparency, though not very transparent or layered since that’s driven by treble which is not as airy or super extended. Treble is well defined, crisp, but not too bright, even despite a little peak around 7k which just adds to definition/clarity, and in line to keep the natural tonality of the sound without adding too much brightness or harshness.

Soundstage is wide, above the average, wrapping around you from left to right, while depth extends a few rows in front of you but not too much out of your head, giving some intimacy to the sound. With an excellent width, you also get a great imaging with an accurate placement of instruments and vocals around you, a natural positioning of the sounds.

I did mention already the tuning doesn’t have the greatest layering and separation due to a smoother natural tonality and not as much airiness, but every instrument and vocals are clearly separated and distinguished with the sound never becomes veiled or congested.

Pair up.

With an impedance of 16 ohm and sensitivity of 110 dB, Xelento is easy to drive from many portable sources to sound “loud”, but if you want the performance to scale up to its full potential – you need to give it more power, especially if you want the bass to hit harder and to be more articulate.

Micro iDSD – expanded soundstage (very wide staging, above average depth). The sound is very smooth and detailed, not super revealing or resolving, but very natural organic tonality with excellent retrieval of details. Sound sig is more balanced, with bass being not as elevated and some of the upper frequency peaks being smoother. With higher gain, bass hits harder.

LPG – very expanded soundstage (wide staging that wraps around you, depth is above average). The sound is more v-shaped with a harder hitting very articulate layered bass that goes deep with a nice sub-bass rumble and faster mid-bass impact, neutral lower mids, more revealing yet still natural upper mids, and well defined sparkly treble.

AK120ii – expanded soundstage (wide staging with more staging depth). The sound signature is more balanced with the bass being a little less elevated and upper mids/treble being smoother, more organic, with excellent retrieval of details but not as layered or resolving. The synergy is very natural, organic.

X5iii – expanded soundstage, though width/depth is a bit less in comparison to other sources. Here, the bass hits harder than in some of the other sources, maybe even slightly overpowering the rest of the frequencies, making sound sig to lean more toward being L-shaped. Bass is bigger, more analog, warmer, and a little slower, but still has a beautiful dynamic texture. Lower mids have more body and upper mids, though a bit pushed back, are clear and detailed in a natural organic way. Even so this sound sig is a little different, here I really enjoyed the power of Xelento bass.

i5 – very expanded soundstage (wide staging that wraps around you, above average depth). Sound sig is back to being more v-shaped with a hard hitting deeply extended sub-bass and strong fast impact of mid-bass, very articulate bass, neutral lower mids, very clear detailed upper mids with a natural revealing tonality, and well defined sparkly treble.

Opus#2 – very expanded soundstage (wide staging that wraps around you, above average depth). Sound sig is also closer to being v-shaped with a deep textured rumble and faster mid-bass impact that hits hard, yet very articulate and well controlled. Lower mids are closer to neutral, while upper mids have a natural revealing tonality with excellent retrieval of details. Treble is well defined, crisp, and with a little more airiness in comparison to some other daps.

DX200 – very expanded soundstage (wide staging that wraps around you, above average depth). Sound sig is between balanced and v-shaped with a deep textured rumble and fast mid-bass punch, hitting hard and still being articulate and layered. Lower mids are closer to neutral, upper mids are actually more revealing, still natural but not as smooth as with some other sources, being more analytical with a better layering and separation. Treble is crisp, detailed, very well defined.

M2s – expanded soundstage, the width and depth are above the average, not super wide like with other daps. Sound sig is more v-shaped due to a more lifted bass and more upfront upper mids/treble. Bass hits hard with a warm analog tonality, not as articulate as some other daps but it feels like it has the deepest extension. Lower mids have more body, upper mids are very clear and detailed, smooth but with more energy, more upfront. Treble is crisp and well defined. I think in this case with higher output impedance of the source the bass impact went up.

Comparison.

In the following comparisons, I will refer to Xelento as “X”. As you can see, I put Xelento against a wide variety of earphones, ranging from a single dynamic driver to extreme multi-BAs.

X vs Vega – X has a wider soundstage, while depth is similar, maybe with X projecting sound a little further; with bass, they both have an elevated low end but in X you have more sub-bass and a touch less mid-bass impact while with Vega you have less sub-bass and stronger mid-bass. Also, X mid-bass has a little shorter decay which gives the bass more control and slightly better separation from lower mids. With lower mids, Vega has more body with thicker sound while X lower mids are leaner, north of neutral but still leaner in comparison to Vega. Both have a detailed clear upper mids with a natural tonality, X mids have a slightly more forward presentation in a relative comparison to Vega, but that could also be relative to low end impact which perhaps pushes Vega upper mids a little back. With treble, you hear the difference where even with Vega’s better extension and more airiness the tonality is brighter and harsher in comparison to a more natural smooth yet well defined crisp X treble which is more under control.

X vs the Answer – X has a wider soundstage, while depth is very similar; X has a little more sub-bass and a more articulate faster mid-bass, while Answer bass is slower, with longer decay and less control which makes it spill a little into lower mids. My pair of the Answer was re-cabled with TWau cable which boosted low end a little, but it also made bass looser. Lower mids are thicker in Answer, while X is closer to neutral in comparison, still with plenty of body and better separation of mid-bass from upper mids. Due to the Answer’s slight spillage into lower mids, the sound is a bit veiled (though could be also due to the cable). X upper mids have more clarity and better retrieval of details while still staying natural in tonality, while Answer has even smoother upper mids with the less retrieval of details. Both have a well defined crisp treble, but Answer has more airiness and crunch while X treble is smoother.

X vs RE2000 – both have a very similar soundstage width, while RE has more depth, extends further; X has a deeper sub-bass and more mid-bass impact, while RE has a slight boost but nowhere near the same quantity as X, while the quality is similar, just scaled back. RE lower mids are leaner, probably right around the neutral level, while X is a little north of neutral with more body, but not too much. Upper mids in X are smoother, more organic, more balanced, while RE upper mids are more upfront, thinner, more analytical, and a little grainy. With treble, both have a well-defined treble, but RE extends further, has more airiness, and a bit harsher tonality where it sounds a bit sibilant with poorly recorded tracks.

X vs RE800 – X has a wider soundstage while the depth is very similar. With a bass, RE bass is close to neutral while X is lifted with both deeper sub-bass extension and more articulate harder hitting mid-bass. Lower mids are more neutral in RE, while X is slightly lifted with more body. Upper mids are smoother and more organic with a more natural revealing tonality, while RE upper mids are more lifted and pushed forward, thinner and more analytical and harsher in tonality. X treble is well defined, but smoother, while RE800 treble is crisper, airy, more extended and with hints of sibilance.

X vs RE600 – X has a wider soundstage while the depth is similar. RE bass is more neutral and sounds closer to RE800, so the same comparison applies to X bass. With lower mids, they are both slightly north of neutral with just a perfect amount of body, both X and RE600. With upper mids, the tonality is similarly smooth and organic, but X has a better retrieval of details, more layered, more transparent. Treble is also similar, being not as extended, with a controlled airiness and not too bright, though X is a little crisper in comparison.

X vs D100 – X soundstage is a lot wider, while depth is the same. D (Dharma D100 iem from Lotoo) bass is elevated but not on the same level as X. X sub-bass goes deeper, and mid-bass is faster and more articulate, and overall X has a better low end control. Lower mids are a bit thicker in D100, while X is above neutral, but still a touch leaner. Upper mids are also more revealing, layered, transparent in X vs D100 being smoother and a little thicker in comparison. D100 treble is crisper in comparison to X and has a little better extension, while X has an overall better definition.

X vs U18 – a very similar soundstage expansion in terms of width, while U18 has just a little more depth. With bass, both have a deep sub-bass extension and articulate mid-bass, but X sub-bass quantity is lifted more and mid- bass is slower in comparison to U18. Lower mids are similar, slightly above neutral with plenty of body added to the sound. Upper mids are in both iems have a natural smoother tonality, but U18 is more revealing, more layered, and with improved micro-detail retrieval. With treble, both have a well defined crisp treble, but U18 extends further and has more airiness.

X vs ES80 – a very similar soundstage expansion in width, with ES80 having a touch more depth. While ES80 bass is more neutral in quantity, X has a deeper sub-bass with more rumble and a lot more mid-bass impact. Going to mids reveals more similarities with slightly above neutral lower mids where ES80 is just a touch leaner, and natural detailed upper mids with lots of clarity where ES80 just has a little better layering and separation. Treble is very similar, well defined, crisp, where ES80 has just a little more airiness. But nothing is night and day, and the biggest difference is the low-end quantity which is clearly dominating in X.

X vs K10UA – while X has a wider soundstage expansion, both have a similar staging depth. K10 sub-bass goes deep but has a little less rumble quantity, mid-bass impact in K10 also strong but X still hits harder, with more quantity. Both have a similarly articulate and well controlled bass, though K10 is just a little faster (attack and decay) while X bass is somewhere between a typical BA vs DD performance. Both have closer to neutral lower mids that add body to the sound, and very detailed natural upper mids where X is a little smoother while K10 is a little brighter and with a little better layering. Both have a well defined crisp treble, but K10U lower treble is brighter and has a little better extension and more airiness. K10 fine-tunes X sound by balancing out a bit the low end and heating up a bit upper frequencies.

X vs T5p2 – a very similar soundstage expansion, though I’m hearing X with a touch more width and T5 with a little more depth. Bass is very similar in quantity (I’m using T5p2 with alpha leather pads, so there is more impact), but X bass is a little more articulate, faster, and has better control, while T5 bass is a little slower and has a bit less articulation. T5p2 lower mids have more body, adding a little more warmth to the sound, while X lower mids are leaner in comparison. With upper mids, T5p2 is a little warmer and fuller while X is a little brighter and more revealing in comparison. With treble, both have a great definition, but T5p2 is crisper, with more airiness and better extension (T5p2 earcups have 5mm port on each side, so that helps). 

Conclusion.

I mentioned this already in one of my previous reviews, design of single dynamic driver flagships feels like a lost art. While single DD iems and earbuds are among the most common budget earphones, not too many manufacturers can pull a true single DD flagship design. Beyerdynamic accomplished that by scaling down their award-winning Tesla driver technology of full size headphones into a small IEM. I read that Beyer engineers were able to make T8iE/Xelento annular magnet, which is a driving force behind Tesla driver, 16 times smaller than the one used in T1 model. And we are still talking about “Made in Germany” product, hand assembled at Beyerdynamic manufacturing facility, and backed by their solid 2-year guarantee.

So, what makes Xelento unique? For me it was smooth, natural, and still resolving tonality with a quality of bass slam you would expect from its older full size siblings. Xelento enhanced bass might not be for everyone, and that’s where the tip-rolling fun begins to find a perfect combination of the seal, the comfort, and the sound tuning with a desired bass quantity without sacrificing resolution. Perhaps that’s a reason why Beyer paid extra attention to include many custom size/shape eartips. The shell design has a very impressive ergonomics, with Xelento being one of the few iems which I can wear in my ears even with my head down on the pillow, though I wish its oval nozzle would be a little longer. Xelento is so comfortable, you will forget of even having them in your ears, and once the music starts to play, you will forget these are IEMs because they sound like full-size flagship headphones.

---

Manufacturer website: Beyerdynamic, available on Amazon.