Band: opinion spread · Dot: weighted average
Sources split, and this is the canonical electronics argument in miniature. One camp reports the K9 AKM measures and reads as neutral — that the converter swap is a spec-sheet event, not a sonic one. The other hears a consistent, repeatable character next to the ESS-chipped K9: warmer, rounder, less etched, more forgiving of poor recordings. Notably the two camps agree on the direction of the claimed difference; they disagree only on whether it is real.
Measured
FiiO publishes line-out THD+N below 0.00020% with SNR at or above 128 dB on the balanced output (0.00026%/127 dB from the 6.35 mm headphone jack), figures that sit at or past the point most listening can resolve. Nothing in the published data distinguishes the AKM version tonally from the ES9068AS K9.
vs. listeners — The numbers say both K9 variants are transparent; several reviewers who heard them side by side describe the same directional difference anyway. The most instructive evidence comes from the strongest believer: the r/headphones owner whose enthusiastic first impressions started the biggest thread on this unit was challenged to test it properly, swapped the DAC and amp sections between a K7 and a K9 AKM, and reported back that 'The differences are very subtle,' and that implementation and the power supply seemed to matter more than the converter. A heavily upvoted reply in that same thread put the skeptical case bluntly — 'It's a dead flat, dead silent 100% transparent device that has absolutely no impact on the frequency response of a headphone.' No published blind test settles it.
“This is a neutral DAC/amp with excellent tonal balance, unquestionable transparency and mirror-like fidelity.”
Ichos · Head-Fi
“the K9 AKM leans towards a warmer, richer signature DAC sound with a bit of coloration”
Headfonics
