Beyerdynamic Xelento Remote Review – Inviting, Intoxicating

Comparisons –

Campfire Audio Vega ($1099): The Vega is more V-shaped with bigger bass and more present treble. However, it also has even more vocal clarity so some have called it W-shaped due to the way its midrange draws attention. The Vega extends just as well, if not a hair more and as it has more sub-bass than the Xelento, it sounds more physical and muscular. Meanwhile, lesser mid-bass emphasis results in a low-end that is still full, but not warm. The Vega is similarly very well controlled, it is slightly more defined on account of its more neutral tone. Upper-bass is also less present and it feeds naturally into the lower-midrange where the Xelento has a bigger dip to combat its warmer low-end. The Vega has a vocal presence bump but it has less midrange presence overall as it lacks the upper-midrange emphasis of the Xelento, instead implementing attenuation to aid smoothness before its brighter treble.

The Vega still sounds very clear on account of its lower-treble emphasis, and clarity is aided by its more neutral tone, sounding more transparent. On the contrary, it doesn’t sound quite as refined, with fairly frequent over-articulation. It is also much more aggressively detailed and also slightly more detailed within its foreground, though its instrumentation is thinner. The Vega’s middle-treble is similarly present which aids air. It employs an uptick of upper-treble emphasis to enhance its similarly strong resolution, sounding more energetic with greater sparkle. The Vega has slightly more resolution and its stage is a touch more spacious. This is heightened by its stronger separation due to its more neutral tone.

Hyla CE-5 ($940): The CE-5 is very slightly more balanced but also brighter in its voicing by a fair degree. It has similarly flawless sub-bass extension, combined with similar emphasis though its mid and upper-bass are both substantially less emphasized, creating a more neutral tone. The CE-5 isn’t as full and warm, but it’s more controlled, more defined and more detailed in general without sacrificing engagement. The CE-5’s lower-midrange is also less present so its midrange is substantially thinner, in addition to being thinner than neutral. It has a sizable centre midrange emphasis that grants it greater vocal presence than the Xelento.

And, as its upper-midrange is similarly forward while its tone is more neutral, it sounds more extended and even clearer. The CE-5 has a crisper treble response with emphasis centred more around 6KHz, it sounds slightly thinner, but it’s also more detailed. The CE-5 has a darker background but it retains air through its stronger extension and greater upper-treble presence. Its micro-detail retrieval is higher in addition to being more aggressive in its presentation yet it sounds simultaneously cleaner. Both have great soundstage expansion and both are width biased, though the CE-5 has a little less width in exchange for greater depth. The CE-5 is more separated while the Xelento images slightly better.

DSC08853

Sennheiser ie800S ($1000): The ie800S is more balanced and brighter in its voicing. It has similarly strong sub-bass extension but slightly less emphasis and it’s a lot more linear through its mid and upper-bass sounding more tonally neutral rather than warm. Combined with strong control, the ie800S is more defined and tighter than the Xelento though this isn’t always apparent due to its smoother texture. Both earphones have a sizable dip in the lower-midrange, however, the ie800S has less warmth to imbue body; sounding a touch thin where the Xelento sounds full-bodied and warm. On the contrary, the ie800S has more vocals presence and is substantially more transparent. Both deliver similar clarity, the Xelento having noticeably greater upper-midrange presence and extension. Meanwhile, the ie800S sounds a touch more refined and smooth due to upper-midrange attenuation, creating greater density.

On the flipside, the ie800S has a more pronounced lower-treble emphasis, sounding crisper but also thinner. The Xelento has more organic treble instrumentation, but though both are similarly well-detailed overall, fine details are more apparent on the more aggressive ie800S. Another prime difference is with regards to upper-treble where the ie800S has substantially more emphasis, making it a little airier and also bringing micro-detail to the fore. However, its background isn’t as clean as a result. Both expand very well, the Xelento has a wider soundstage while the ie800S is more rounded with greater depth. Both also image well, though the ie800S is more separated on behalf of its more neutral to small note size.

AK T8ie MKII ($1000): Comparison between these two earphones is quite interesting as they are tuned quite differently but end up sounding fairly similar in many regards. Both extend very well down low, reaffirmed by heightened sub-bass impact. However, the T8ie has substantially less mid-bass in favour of slightly greater upper-bass and lower-midrange presence. As such, it doesn’t sound as warm and full, instead pursuing a more linear, subtly warm presentation. Its midrange is also considerably more linear, though again, both actually sound quite similar; the T8ie’s extra lower-midrange counteracted by lesser upper-midrange presence and the Xelento’s bigger bass filling in for its more steeply attenuated lower-midrange.

Still, as the T8ie is more even, it is more consistently voiced and more realistic in timbre. The T8ie also lacks the same lower-treble emphasis, erring on the smoother side. As such, it is less over-articulated, however, it is also less detailed by a fair degree. The Xelento follows up with greater upper-treble presence that draws out more micro-detail and generates greater air, sounding more open, especially in conjunction with its more forward upper-midrange. The Xelento has a larger soundstage by a hair. The T8ie MKII has a more layered midrange and its imaging is slightly better.

Campfire Audio Atlas ($1299): The Atlas is similarly tuned, but with a larger bass response and its lower-treble emphasis lies higher up. The Atlas extends just as well, but has even greater emphasis throughout its entire low-end, most notably with regards to sub and mid-bass. It has a sharper lower-midrange attenuation to combat its larger low-end, creating a midrange that is well-separated and isn’t too warm. However, the Atlas also has a bigger centre midrange emphasis, so its vocals are just as present, slightly more so in the case of male vocals. Both have a gradual upper-midrange climb, the Atlas is slightly more extended here so it sounds less dense and organic through its midrange than the Xelento.

The Atlas also has greater treble presence and its emphasis centres around the 6KHz region. As such, its treble isn’t quite as well-bodied, but it’s also a lot more aggressive and crisper. Both have a similarly present middle-treble, with pleasing air and shimmer. However, the Atlas both has stronger extension and greater upper-treble presence, creating a slightly brighter background with superb micro-detail retrieval and resolution. Both earphones are very spacious, the Xelento is a touch wider while the Atlas is rounder like the ie800S. Both also image well, the Xelento is slightly more consistent and coherent while the Atlas is more separated as its tone isn’t as obviously warm.

 

Verdict – 

Consumers will likely turn up their nose at the Xelento’s 4-digit asking price, while enthusiasts will clutch their Campfires, 64Audio’s and Nobles donning the warm, consumer-friendly Xelento “too mainstream”. Though it surely is a model with wide appeal, any concerns of dilution are severely misguided. Because the Xelento makes no sacrifice in quality to achieve its frankly awesome ergonomics. And yes, its tuning may be warm and geared towards the masses, but it’s also one of the best-executed examples of this tuning style I’ve tested yet.

DSC02672 + Blur.jpg

It’s full and bassy, but also exquisitely controlled. Its midrange is lush and full-bodied, but not to the detriment of clarity. Its treble is especially well-considered; with well-present details and strong extension despite fatigue and sibilance being a complete non-issue. The Xelento therefore effectively achieves its purpose; bridging the gap between consumer practicality and audiophile sensibility. Those looking for a warm, full-bodied sound without the muffle and congestion will find the Xelento versatile and TOTL in every regard.

SHARE.

ABOUT AUTHOR

Ryan Soo

Ryan Soo

Avid writer, passionate photographer and sleep-deprived medical student, Ryan has an ongoing desire to bring quality products to the regular reader.

RELATED POSTS

One Response

  1. Excellent review. I had two custom ciems in a similar price range. I have never liked the customs as much as I do the Xelento. It is an incredible In-ear that begs for good sources and works with a lot of different music. I absolutely love them with the mandarin tips.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent posts

Sponsors

Categories