HIFI Diary: How to Write a Good Review? How Is a HIFI Review Actually Done?

Third Revision

Final revision. With the launch of the community testing platform, and after many rounds of iteration and thought, the BLOG owner finally confirmed the evaluation system. Below are the cross-device subjective scoring and evaluation-dimension references used when building this system. They were chosen partly as a matter of the BLOG owner’s personal taste, and partly because each is a leader in its own field with strong representativeness.

Reference	Balance	Instrumental	Vocal	Resolution	Density / Soundstage	Imaging	Dynamics
	The most subjective item; examines the ratio of instrumental to vocal and the refinement of tuning.	Mainly examines the four pillar timbres: piano, violin, metal/brass, and drums.	Mainly examines three dimensions: full male vocals, and soaring or mellow female vocals.	Discernment and separation under complex multi-channel arrangements.	Soundstage and density are mutually reinforcing.	Examines the positional accuracy of sound sources, as well as physical issues like channel imbalance.	Includes macro-dynamics and micro-dynamics.
iBasso DC-Elite	6	6	7	6	5	5	6
HIFIMAN Svanar Wireless	5	5	5	5	6	5	5
Lotoo PAW Gold Touch	7	7	8	7	6	7	7
STAX X1000	6	6	6	5	5	5	5
Edifier N300	5	5	5	5	5	5	5

Second Revision

To better calibrate the accuracy of each scoring dimension, from 2026 onward the subjective/objective parts of the scoring will be planned in finer detail, so that future cross-device comparisons will be more referential.

	Character	Sound Quality	Frequency Balance	Resolution	Density	Soundstage	Dynamics
	Ratio of instruments to vocals, and the refinement of the tuning	The four pillar timbres: vocals, piano, violin, and metal/brass	Overly bright or harsh treble, hollow or torn mids, muddy or uncontrolled bass	High-level resolution (large ensemble tuttis) and low-level resolution (triangle, shaker, harp)	Vocals/instruments full and solid, with a sense of energy	Divided into vertical and horizontal soundstage; also includes a separation score	Includes macro-dynamics and micro-dynamics
6	Ratio is off-balance	Only 1 of the 4 pillar timbres is normal	2 or more frequency bands out of balance	Unsatisfactory at both high and low levels	Produces hollowness, airiness, or dryness among various negative impressions	Horizontal scale clearly smaller or larger than normal; vertical scale clearly cramped	No dynamics at all
6.5	Vocal-to-instrument ratio is roughly normal	Only 2 of the 4 pillar timbres normal	Only 1 of the 3 bands is normal	Only high- or low-level performance is normal	Produces one kind of negative impression (hollow, airy, or dry)	Horizontal scale smaller or larger than normal; vertical scale somewhat cramped	Some dynamics, but thick or ill-defined
7	Ratio is normal	3 of the 4 pillar timbres normal	The 3 bands can be properly appreciated	Normal at both high and low levels	Density normal	Horizontal scale normal; vertical scale handles pop music	Normal dynamic scale
7.5	Tuning is distinctive and self-consistent	All 4 pillar timbres normal	Can convey any one of airiness, transparency, or a black background	One of high/low-level performance is excellent	Can convey one of fullness, thickness, or coherence	Horizontal scale normal; vertical scale handles chamber music	Powerful impact
8	Tuning has unique expressiveness but is not balanced enough	1 class of instruments is stunning	Can convey any one of airiness or a black background	Excellent at both high and low levels	Can convey multiple impressions such as fullness, thickness, and coherence	Horizontal scale normal; vertical scale handles large ensembles	Extremely powerful impact
8.5	Tuning has unique expressiveness and is balanced enough	2 classes of instruments are stunning	Can convey multiple impressions such as airiness and a black background	One of high/low-level performance is stunning	Conveys strong satisfaction such as thickness, steadiness, or cohesion	Some aspect reaches a sublimated level	Not only excellent dynamics, but micro-dynamics are also impressive
9	Becomes a brand consensus, representing the extreme of a style	3 classes of instruments are stunning	The 3 bands fuse perfectly and are stunning	Stunning at both high and low levels	Conveys strong, multiple satisfactions of thickness, steadiness, and cohesion	Fully reaches flagship-surpassing level	Not only excellent dynamics, but micro-dynamics also reach flagship-surpassing level

The new scoring no longer ties to price, removes value-for-money from the equation, and adopts a “shortest-stave” (bucket-effect) scoring. Take “resolution” as an example: if high-level performance is terrible (6.5 points) but low-level performance is excellent (7.5 points), the BLOG owner will score that item 6.5 in the end. In other words, the new system is very unkind to lopsided specialists. So if you want a more accurate review, be sure not to look at scores alone — always read the BLOG owner’s specific comments. Secondly, from 2026 onward, the front-end hardware used for reviews will basically be fixed, and the cross-comparison property of the new system will further raise credibility. Therefore, you can consult all devices that have participated in reviews here, or download the spreadsheet and import it into the scoring tool for more intuitive cross-comparison.

First Revision

Over the past few years, the tracks the BLOG owner uses for reviews have changed round after round. Some time ago, to better present the dimensions considered in the reviews, and drawing on Liu Hansheng’s “Twenty Essentials for Audio,” the BLOG owner wrote the article How to Judge/Describe Sound Quality? A Detailed Explanation of HIFI’s Various Test Dimensions. And to better show some of the thinking behind the reviews, the BLOG owner wants to chat about the stories behind testing — what preparations are made for every review, and to give the process and basis of the reviews. One more thing that must be said: since this blog has always written reviews, every product inevitably gets a score. But across a long span of time, it’s easy to notice that some clearly mediocre products got high scores while some flagship products scored modestly. This is mainly because each product’s score necessarily referenced its price; it was an independent rating of performance premised on that price. In the vast majority of cases, unless an article directly compares them, scores between different articles are not directly commensurable. I hope readers can understand this.

Original content:

0. Experience. The core of doing a good review is improving one’s discernment and professional level. The BLOG owner lives in Guangzhou, China, home of the famous Xinghai Concert Hall, where he has attended roughly 200+ concerts, plus dozens more in other cities. As a hobby, the BLOG owner writes lyrics and has participated in some music recording and production. On instruments, he has learned piano, guitar, harmonica, and flute — all half-baked. On headphones, over the years he has owned and listened to the likes of 1266, 009, Utopia, W5000, 007, RS1i, T1, HD800, HD650, D1001, M1, and K701. On speakers, the current setup is a Genelec system. On electronics, he has played both tube and solid-state, been at this for a decade or two, and the current system totals about 100,000 yuan. On ears, he passed the “golden ears” test ten years ago — definitely not possible now. Retaking the test in 2023 he could only reach -33dB.

1. Hardware and software preparation. The BLOG owner’s review environment changes over time, but it basically simulates the environment the device itself is aimed at. For example, portable DACs like dongles are generally tested on an iPad or an ordinary laptop, matching how buyers actually use them. On software, since streaming prevails and the BLOG owner himself relies heavily on QQ Music for daily listening, most tests on phone/tablet/laptop also use QQ Music for online listening. For more important and expensive gear, the BLOG owner listens on a dedicated PC-HIFI machine with HQPlayer to guarantee a better output environment.

2. Ear-burning (getting used to the sound). Unlike burning in equipment, the most important thing after buying a new device is actually burning in your ears. Spend some time each day listening to it, switching between different headphones, speakers, and environments. Tinker more — satisfying your own curiosity while letting your ears adapt to the device’s sound. Sometimes a new device sounds uncomfortable at first, not necessarily because the device is flawed but because it differs too much from what you usually listen to. The human ear is a wondrous thing: even a style you can’t accept at all, after a week or two of continuous listening, you’ll basically get used to it. Only once you’re free of negative feelings can you do the review properly.

3. Adjusting the test environment. The environment is very important; different devices, per their characteristics, have very different needs. TWS earphones, for instance, sound quite different over Bluetooth on different devices. Or a USB-transmitting device can sound quite different on a tablet versus a phone. Or some small speakers change character with different placement and sound isolation. That said, the BLOG’s review philosophy still sticks as close to reality as possible; for some entry-to-mid products, considering that most users may not have a perfect environment, the BLOG owner may ultimately compromise and build the review environment around one platform that sounds better.

Handphone/USB-C+Dragontail	PC/USB2.0	PC/USB3.0	PC/USB-C+Dragontail	Notebook/USB3.0	Notebook/USB-C+Dragontail	ipad/USB-C+Dragontail
5	5.5	6.5	7	7	8	6

4. Choosing review tracks. In most cases, review tracks must be ones you are familiar with — ideally ones you’ve been listening to most recently. There are still certain requirements: the recording quality must be excellent, it shouldn’t be too obscure (ideally something a portion of people can resonate with), and it should correspond to the specific item being tested. Out of the BLOG owner’s private preference, he prioritizes tracks with short intros, little variation in style, and less noise. Finally there’s the streaming quality issue: most of the review tracks actually have files ripped from the BLOG owner’s own purchased originals. If streaming and the rip differ little, streaming is still preferred. When using HQPlayer, self-ripped or trustworthy official audio files are always used.

5. On review writing. Starting 2025, the BLOG owner’s reviews shifted from product-focused to music-focused. Every product review, besides discussing the device’s sound, also recommends great music as much as possible. HIFI should not be cold hardware, but warm music. Putting all the emphasis on equipment is putting the cart before the horse. So the BLOG owner would rather, each time you finish a review, recommend some excellent music — and together with the recommended gear, build a complete music-review experience. At the same time, the BLOG owner also gathers all recommended music into a standalone post each quarter. If you’ve happened to read this far, the BLOG owner strongly recommends opening the Music Diary column to see the recommended tracks.

Original Content

Expired content. What follows is this post’s past content; most of the tracks are no longer used as review tracks and are kept only as an archive.

<1>. Male vocal (deep, gentle)
Song: One more time, One more chance, Artist: Masayoshi Yamazaki (山崎まさよし)
This track’s recording quality is average, with rather obvious post-production traces, but fortunately it’s a guitar solo plus vocal with the vocal quite prominent, and the singer is seasoned with a strong sense of the era. As the theme of the animated film 5 Centimeters per Second, it moved countless people back then, and the lyrics struck a deep chord with the BLOG owner — a passable candidate for testing emotional male vocals. In fact there are many options in this category, such as Leslie Cheung, Beyond, Mao Buyi, and Anguan, whose familiar tracks are numerous.

<2>. Male vocal (strong, hard-edged)
Song: 敢爱敢做 (Gan Ai Gan Zuo), Artist: George Lam (林子祥)
George Lam’s songs are surely familiar to everyone. The song “A Man Should Better Himself” accompanied a generation of Chinese people growing up, and this “Gan Ai Gan Zuo” has better recording quality than most versions of the former, with Lam’s distinctive style, a sonorous voice, and ample drum impact. Also, male vocals are easily affected by low-frequency instruments (mainly due to overlapping frequency bands) — especially drums; if not handled well they mask each other, and slightly worse recordings make this more apparent. There are many similar tracks, by Alan Tam, Hacken Lee, Dai Quan, etc., but given the current state of Chinese male singers, the BLOG owner thinks George Lam himself remains the best fit.

<3>. Female vocal (deep, gentle)
Song: Koibumi (恋文 / Love Letter), Artist: Yanagi Nagi (やなぎなぎ)
There are many candidates here; a huge pile of Japanese female voices fit. This is not only cultural difference — more importantly, Japanese recording quality is generally higher than domestic (much higher). Koibumi was chosen partly because the backing music is light and the vocal prominent, making the subtlety of the vocal emotion easier to hear and better suited to repeated comparative listening; partly because the recording quality is genuinely excellent and full of emotion, easy to move a listener. Of course, reviews aren’t static; depending on the BLOG owner’s mood, many other test tracks are chosen too.

<4>. Female vocal (strong, soaring)
Song: 大火 (Da Huo / Great Fire), Artist: Jess Lee (李佳薇)
Soaring female high notes are surely thrilling, but actually the BLOG owner dreads this part — repeated comparison is punishing to both ears and spirit. Recommended here is Jess Lee’s “Great Fire,” music with power hidden in its calm. The singer’s range is wide; though she lacks Mariah Carey’s towering whistle register, her emotion is rich and carries the delicate emotional turns unique to Asian singers. Compared with pure vocal technique, the BLOG owner prefers this style of female voice.

<5>. Male-female duet
Song: 送你一朵小红花 (Giving You a Little Red Flower, Live), Artist: Hu Haiquan (胡海泉) / Xie Chunhua (谢春花)
Earlier, the BLOG owner liked to use Yang Zongwei and Zhang Bichen’s “Liang Liang” for duet tests, but after hearing “Giving You a Little Red Flower,” he switched immediately. Its good recording, minimal background interference, prominent vocals, and the singers’ outstanding performance make this track a perfect match in every respect. The older Hong Kong/Taiwan classics are numerous, but their recording quality by today’s standards is not great, and QQ Music isn’t a high-quality platform either. Duets mainly test the harmony between the two voices, which to some extent reveals the system’s three-band balance.

<6>. Soundstage and positioning
Song: 声场测试 (Soundstage Test), Artist: Guangzhou Woodwind Quintet
A short recording made specifically for testing soundstage — brief, refined, and the laughter at the end is the essence. On a speaker system, this test is especially precise. Most importantly, it was recorded from the conductor’s podium, allowing very accurate control of the two things usually hard to assess: distance and space. This could be elaborated at length. Take the HD800, for instance: many say it has a huge, boundless soundstage, but that is precisely its greatest flaw. The BLOG owner has hundreds of live symphonic listening experiences across different seating areas and floors, and has participated in symphonic recordings, so he clearly understands that the so-called sense of distance and boundary is actually controlled by the people throughout the recording chain. A violin section, for example, generally gets one clip mic per desk plus two or three upright mics to the side — already luxurious. The recorded sound simply contains no distance information relative to the audience or the conductor. In post-production, the producer adjusts the final presentation according to his own ideas, “placing” different recordings in suitable positions to assemble a symphonic recording. Hence, with different ideas, the final distance and boundary effects differ greatly. So it is both inaccurate and unreasonable for a reviewer to judge a system’s soundstage by taste alone. In other words, having every track sound like a large soundstage is an extremely unreasonable tuning philosophy. Back to this test track: it is recorded by an array of mics positioned at the conductor’s stand, inherently containing distance and position information, fixing the coordinate system and giving soundstage and positioning evaluation a reference basis.

<7>. Resolution, layering, EDM
Song: 雪琥珀 -snow amber- (Remix), Artist: yukina / GET IN THE RING (みぃ)
An old friend of the reviews and one of the BLOG owner’s most respected tracks. QQ Music’s file for it isn’t great, so sometimes the BLOG owner uses his own rip. Setting aside QQ Music’s influence, Snow Amber, as an EDM track with rich arrangement and complex structure, is a track that easily squeezes a system. Generally, rendering the whole track smoothly, unharshly, and with complete detail is very difficult; many poorly matched systems struggle to separate the layers, swallowing detail — some systems even blend the vocals together. The BLOG owner has tested this track on a CH three-piece system costing over 500,000, confirming it makes an even stronger impression on higher-end systems. So although the track is genuinely obscure, through long testing it has remained a reference.

<8>. Instrumental, piano, violin
Song: 天空の悲恋歌, Artist: TAMUSIC
The BLOG owner likes using TAMUSIC’s recordings for tests, partly because of their insistence on improvised, live recording, and partly because their mature recording approach made their tracks outstanding and consistent for their era. This “Song of the Sky’s Sorrow” even triggered the BLOG owner’s regret-tears on first listen 233. Because it is improvised, there are quite a few meaningless repetitions and the development feels somewhat drawn out — but one must admit that the excellent recording and decent instrument timbre make the whole track sound smooth, natural, and weighty, stirring excitement for the music. The piece is entirely piano and violin, the two most frequently appearing and widest-ranging instruments. So its performance accurately reveals a system’s capability in two very important scenarios: instrumental timbre and small-ensemble tutti.

<9>. Control, space, large ensemble
Song: Má vlast – II. Vltava “The Moldau”, Artist: Zubin Mehta / Israel Philharmonic Orchestra / Bedřich Smetana
First it must be said that QQ Music’s recording of this is not great; this version was chosen mainly because it’s the CD the BLOG owner himself listens to, with a dedicated rip. Large-ensemble testing is generally exhausting. Some friends like to pick on a single instrument in a passage to criticize a system, but if you only need to criticize one instrument’s frequency-band issues, you could entirely use a small ensemble or a solo piece — there’s no need to bother with large-ensemble music. So whenever large-ensemble music is used, what’s being tested is surely the system’s overall control: whether each instrument is playing appropriately, whether the conventional components — string section, wind section, harp, timpani, piano — can be spatially distinguished, and whether the sound both layers and grounds itself. These are what the BLOG owner must carefully discern. In this track, for instance, the strings and winds first intertwine to depict the two headwaters of the Vltava, thin streams eventually converging into a great river. This is a very sensitive track, requiring not only deep familiarity with the piece but also an original view of what each section means. Simply put, it requires musical culture, rich imagination, and life experience to accurately describe the effect the track presents on a system.

5. Condensing and simplifying. After all the listening, the simplest yet hardest step is condensing it into words and simplifying it into speech. Often, bookish, showy review writing pleases no one; complex jargon doesn’t mean one’s musical attainment is high. On the contrary, most music majors don’t understand all those HIFI terms, yet their professional attainment generally far exceeds that of ordinary HIFI enthusiasts. So the BLOG owner chooses to condense some relatively complex concepts into simple words, and simplify abstract speech into something everyone can understand. This requires constant revision and word-by-word care before a passable review takes shape.

My System (Review Hardware)

The BLOG owner’s commonly used review system (updated 25.12.01)

<1> Environment / Power / Acoustic treatment
Breaker: DPK Doepke
Dedicated line: Prysmian 2+E
Wall outlet: Audio Replas RWC-2RU
Wall outlet: Monitor Acoustics AGP
Wall outlet: Eau Rouge SG-PS
Wall outlet: HUBBELL IG8300
Equipment rack: custom ebony + marble slabs
Power treatment: LBH Audio power purifier
Acoustic treatment: PAN’S Acoustic Blanket

<2> Main system (CD / vinyl / streamer + active monitors)

CD transport
Transport/Bridge: Accurate N1000
Power cable: Venture Grand Ultimate
Fuse: SR ORANGE
Isolation feet: KRYNA D-PROP
Clamp: ARTESANIA AUDIO DAMPER
Coaxial: Venture Grand Ultimate
Disc clamp: VIBRATO carbon-fiber disc clamp
XLR cable: Wireworld Platinum Eclipse 7

Vinyl turntable
Turntable: Audio-Technica AT-LP120XUSB
Cartridge: Ortofon 2M Red
Power: Tiger Fish 160W linear power supply
Power cable: Harmonic Pro Magic Power III AC-11 OCC Silver
DC cable: Tiger Fish Cardas-DC cable
RCA cable: HUBER SUHNER SF104E

DAC
DAC: Accurate D1000
Power cable: Venture Grand Ultimate
Fuse: Singxer Blue Elf
Isolation: KRYNA C-PROP
XLR: Wireworld Platinum Eclipse 7

CORE (PC)
CPU: AMD 7800X3D
Motherboard: Gigabyte B650E Ice Sculpture
ATX PSU: SAMA XP1000W Wukong Edition
Drive: Gloway Yi Series Flagship 4T
Power cable: Black God power cable
USB cable: Wireworld Platinum Starlight 7
USB card: Matrix Element H
DC power: Tiger Fish 160W linear power supply
DC cable: Tiger Fish Cardas-DC cable
Power cable: Harmonic Pro Magic Power III AC-11 OCC Silver
Player: HQPlayer / HQPlayer embedded

Network isolation
Switch: Netgear GS105 (MOD: linear power + SC-OCXO)
Network cable: Cell-Audio NC100
Feet: Cell-Audio feet
Clamp: Foshan rack-fame replica clamp

Preamp
Preamp: Quantum custom passive preamp
Isolation: KRYNA C-PROP / ARTESANIA AUDIO DAMPER
XLR cable: Venture Grand Ultimate

Active monitors
Speakers: GENELEC 8010a
Power cable: Sommer Ambience
Stands: Yue brand custom stands
Isolation spikes: AudioBastion M6
Isolation pads: AudioBastion X-PAD REF

<3> Small system (full-size headphones)

Player
Player: Lotoo PAW GOLD TOUCH (PAW Gold Touch)
3.5-RCA: AudioQuest ITA-5/5

Headphones (full-size)
Headphones: STAX X1
Headphone amp: STAX SR-272s
Power: Tiger Fish LT3042 battery power
DC cable: Neotech Amazon
Isolation spikes: KRYNA C-PROP / Cell-Audio feet (short version)
Clamp: ARTESANIA AUDIO DAMPER*2

<4> Portable system (in-ear / TWS)

Player: iBasso DC-Elite
OTG: Lotoo OTG cable / WAGNUS. Omni Sheep
Headphones: Nestsound ZERO
Headphone cable: Neotech AG/GD 26awg + OE Audio
TWS: HIFIMAN Svanar Wireless

<5> Recording system

Recorder: TASCAM Portacapture X8
Microphone: sE X1S / Dayton Audio EMM-6
Absorption screen: RF-X
Analog cable: SOMMER Epilogue
Acoustic treatment: PAN’S Acoustic Blanket