Technical Performance
The soundstage of the FT5 does not offer exceptional width and depth, resulting in a presentation that feels somewhat congested due to the mid-bass dominance. While the staging is good, it feels a bit boxy, so it is not comparable to higher-end models in terms of spaciousness. Although the width is decent, the stage needs more depth and length to qualify the FT5 as a headphone with an excellent soundstage.
The stereo imaging is good and clean for the price. It provides a good focus, but the upper bass and lower mid-range are a bit too thick, which affects the clarity of the sound. The leather pads help to reduce this effect, but it’s not eliminated.
Overall, the balance of the headphone is ideal except for the mid-bass hump which can be a little too much. The mid-range has a warm and musical touch, but it may be a bit too warm. The headphones deliver consistent and coherent sound, and the transition from the mid-range to the treble area is impressive. The mids sound full and musical, while the treble area is well-controlled. This results in a nicely balanced presentation and musicality in the mid-range and treble. However, the bass to mid-range transition is not as smooth.
The headphone has a good detail retrieval which makes most nuances and details audible when used with a sufficient desktop setup. The combined imaging performance is quite impressive due to its good resolution. However, the FT5 lacks transparency, dynamics and PRaT, which makes it less impressive in terms of mid-range clarity. Nonetheless, the overall control of the FT5 is excellent. Even at high volumes, there is no harshness, sibilance, distortion or related problems.
Comparisons
FiiO’s first serious attempt in the headphone market, the FT3, is a good first product which has nice technical qualities and an enjoyable sound. In terms of package it is identical and the build quality is similarly good. I think the FT5 looks much better design-wise and a touch more comfortable on my head.
For sound, the FT3 is also a warm headphone with good bass focus and smooth treble. Its soundstage is a bit narrower, and the treble is not as extended or definitive as the FT5. Mid-range is thicker in the FT5 with good tonality but the FT3 is not far away in that department at all, as I think it has a nice tonality too. The main advantages of the FT5 are staging and treble performance, whilst they perform similarly good everywhere else in my opinion.
A popular planar choice, Hifiman’s Edition XS is an impressive headphone, particularly for its bass response. The bass in the XS is fantastic for the price range, with great texture, decay and impact. It’s better textured with better PRaT against the FiiO offering. The FT5 gives the bass in a heavier way with harder delivery but longer decay and less control.
The mid-range is more resolving and clear with the XS, whilst the FT5 lacks pure transparency and also doesn’t have the same transparency as the XS. They both have similar success in the treble, with both having nice definition and articulation, except for the softer nature of the FiiO, which can play well for soft sound lovers. Soundstage performances are also not that far apart.
Other than sound, the materials of the FiiO are more impressive. However, Hifiman is more comfortable in my opinion.
The Sundara Closed-Back, with its gorgeous wooden earcups, looks more impressive than the FT5. On the comfort side, it also fits better to the head, at least in my experience. FiiO’s packaging is much more impressive though.
Sundara Closed-Back gives great slam, kick, rumble and recovery in the bass department, and the FT5 loses that part because of its too-dominant mid-bass response. These two both lack mid-range spaciousness and clarity, but to me, the Sundara C is a bit more detailed.
In the treble, the Hifiman performs well with better articulation and brightness, but the FT5 has a smoother delivery, especially in the lower treble region.
Sivga’s new Luan is a very impressive headphone for the price. FiiO’s packaging in general is more impressive and to me, the Luan looks more like an audiophile piece versus the industrial look of the FT5. It is also lighter and more comfortable thanks to dynamic drivers. It also doesn’t have a plastic part in its build.
Luan has a more open, spacious and cleaner sound versus the heavy and warm sound of the FT5. Luan’s bass is tighter with quicker decay with good texture. However, it is a neutral type of bass which doesn’t add any juice to the bass frequencies. It has cleaner mids as well, thanks to a more controlled mid-bass. Treble once again is softer in the FT5, giving a more enjoyable cymbal performance. It also has a bigger soundstage against the Sivga.
Sivga’s SV023 is even better than the Luan with a similar lean and flat sound presentation, but better dynamics, staging and imaging. So against the FT5, it’s a clear winner with the same price bracket in my opinion. FiiO’s advantage might lie in terms of watching movies or playing games, where it can provide deeper and more texture bass. Other than that, the SV023 is definitely the cleaner and more transparent sounding headphone in my view.
Conclusion
The new FiiO FT5 is a great addition to the planar market, and it’s exciting to see FiiO entering this space. However, there are some areas where improvements can be made, particularly in the mid-bass region and mid-range clarity. While other aspects of its sound are very good, the competition in this market is tough. The FT5’s large planar driver provides excellent bass quantity, dynamics, mid-range fullness, and natural treble with good definition.
In my opinion, the FT5 has even greater potential with this driver, if FiiO can address the issues I mentioned. Additionally, the design choices could be reworked to create a more audiophile style, rather than a general consumer brand style. That said, these are just my personal thoughts. I also believe that bigger and deeper ear cups are needed to provide a more comfortable listening experience.
Pros:
- Great packaging
- Fantastic build quality
- Good design
- The cable is better this time
- Warm, lush sound
- Well executed treble
Cons:
- Comfort isn’t great
- Mid-bass needs work
- Mid-range should be cleaner
- Sub-bass is missing
Page 1: Info, Package, Design, Build, Comfort
Page 2: Sound Quality
