Intro:
I’ve previously reviewed Fiio’s planar headphone, the FT5. While I appreciated their build quality and comfortable design, the sound quality left me somewhat underwhelmed at its price of US$450. It seemed aimed at a niche market, which may explain its unique tuning.
This time, we’re looking at a more budget-friendly model: the FT1. These closed-back headphones feature a substantial 60mm dynamic driver, wood enclosure, and velour-covered headband padding. On paper, everything looks promising! Early reactions from the community are also very positive—a fair bit of hype you might say. So, I bought a pair myself to find out if they live up to the hype.
For the full suite of measurements, see the final section of the article.
Specs & Comfort
Price: US$ 149/ AU$ 239
Driver size: 60 mm ø
Transducer type: dynamic
Sensitivity: 113 dB/Vrms @1kHz
Impedance: 36Ω @1kHz
Connector: dual 3.5 mm TS
Weight: 340 grams
Clamping force: light
Comfort: 9/10
Measurement & Sound
link to the frequency response measurement & more comparisons
Tonal balance:
Overall, the FT1 offers a pleasing, easy-to-listen tuning, with powerful bass and clear midrange. The level of fidelity is impressive—almost like studio heaphones, but with an enjoyable bass tilt that adds warmth. While soundstage isn’t exceptionally wide, the sound feels natural and coherent as a whole.
The bass is clearly emphasised, delivering a satisfying rumble. The boost is mostly clean, although there’s a touch of mid-bass adding warmth and body to the midrange. Certain bass-heavy tracks might sound a bit boomy, but it’s rarely overbearing.
This colouration may be welcomed for a lot of modern music, gaming, and cinematic audio. It doesn’t come at the expense of the midrange, which is impressively tuned with clarity and articulation. More on this below.
The mids are exceptionally well-tuned. They are clear, articulate, and slightly forward. Vocals and instruments are rendered with impressive accuracy, striking a fine balance between body and articulation. It manages to avoid a common pitfall of many closed-back headphones: an excess in the upper-mid harmonics (ie. 2-3kHz), which often leads to an unnatural clang and glare in midrange instruments like the piano.
If one were to nitpick, there’s a subtle emphasis in the presence region, similar to what’s found in the E-MU Teak. This can occasionally introduce a hint of forwardness and grain, but it’s a minor issue, as the added bass punch tends to balance it out. Altogether, the FT1’s level of midrange fidelity is impressive, rivaling the best mid-fi headphones such as the HD6XX and the Sundara.
As for the highs, the FT1 avoids harshness and is generally smooth and clean. There’s a slight emphasis in the upper treble that brings some added sparkle and ‘zing’ to certain instruments. Poorly mastered vocals might come with a bit of extra hiss, but the bass warmth prevents this upper-treble energy from becoming overly prominent. While the FT1’s treble extension isn’t extraordinary, it’s more than adequate for a closed-back headphone, avoiding a flat or overly damped sound.
Other qualities:
When it comes to spatial qualities, the FT1 is impressive for a budget closed-back headphone. While the soundstage isn’t expansive, it doesn’t feel particularly confined. Imaging is also notably dimensional for a budget product, with a decently holographic feel. That said, the E-MU Teak still provides a more natural and expansive soundstage.
In terms of clarity, the FT1 performs admirably. Its linearity across frequencies supports this strength, even with the extra bass warmth. The sense of resolution competes well against similarly priced and even higher-tier models, rivalling the HD6XX. It outshines most closed-back classics, including the Sony MDR-7506, AKG K361, and Beyerdynamic DT700 Pro X. While the Moondrop Para (US$299) still leads in resolution at this price point, as an open-back planar with a leaner sound signature, it may not be a fair comparison.
The FT1’s dynamic qualities is also good, especially its macro-dynamics. Bass hits are powerful, and the rumble is palpable. Micro-dynamic detail, ie. the subtle contrast in quieter passages, is slightly less pronounced, but it’s more than acceptable at this price point. For a significant upgrade, you’d need to step up to models like the Denon AH-D5200 or the E-MU Teak.
Conclusion and value:
Priced at US$149 / AU$239, Fiio has positioned the FT1 aggressively in this price range. It delivers impressive sound quality across the board, backed by excellent build quality and a generous set of accessories. For those seeking a neutral-to-warm or bassy tuning, the FT1 is an easy recommendation. Few headphones around this price offer serious competition, let alone closed-back ones. While the E-MU Teak and Denon AH-D5200 may provide advantages in soundstaging and dynamics, they aren’t fully sealed designs and come at significantly higher prices.
As such, the FT1 is one of the few products I’d recommend without hesitation. Even the same for non-audiophiles, as it brings a well-rounded experience for music, gaming, and general media consumption alike. This time, the hype feels warranted indeed, and I look forward to seeing Fiio continue on this path.
Pros: Well-balanced tuning; powerful bass paired with clear midrange and highs; engaging and easy to listen to; solid technical performance that punches above its price; high-quality build with premium materials; generous accessory bundle.
Cons: Minor unevenness in the upper mids and treble;
Value Grade:
Notes on EQ
This headphone needs minimum EQ to sound neutral. It can still be improved, though.
My personal EQ setting for this headphone:
Preamp: 0.0 dB
Filter 1: ON PK Fc 140 Hz Gain -2.5 dB Q 2.000
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 1500 Hz Gain -1.0 dB Q 2.000
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 5150 Hz Gain -3.0 dB Q 3.000
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 13500 Hz Gain -4.5 dB Q 3.000
If your goal is to EQ the response to match the Harman Target, consider the AutoEQ function provided by Squiglink as a convenient starting point. I personally recommend customising the filters to better suit your own hearing, especially in the treble. While the AutoEQ provides a useful baseline, individual adjustments can opften significantly improve your listening experience.
MEASUREMENTS
Frequency Response Average (unsmoothed):
The response is obtained by an average of 5-6 positional variations. The FR shown on the graph is unsmoothed.
Comment: Excellent tonal balance overall. The main issue lies in the unevenness at 5kHz and 13kHz, where you might hear some peaks.
Positional Variation:
This graph illustrates how headphone placement on the head affects perceived tonal balance: with the ear positioned at the top (blue) and bottom (red) of the front chamber of the headphone. The FRs shown on the graph are unsmoothed.
Comment: The FT1 exhibits some inconsistencies in frequency response when its positioning is adjusted on the ear simulator, especially in the higher treble range. This could lead to greater variations in perceived sound between different listeners or listening sessions.
Leakage Tolerance:
This graph demonstrates how leakages to the front volume can result in FR change. The FR shown on the graph is 1/12 octave smoothed.
Comment: Like most closed-back headphones, the FT1 shows a typical bass droop when the seal is broken, even though it is not severe. To get the most out of its bass response, ensuring a proper fit and seal is essential.
Impulse Response:
The impulse response test measures the initial response, overshoot, and decay of a transducer upon receiving a signal.
Comment: the FT1 displays a normal impulse response – nothing out of the blue here.
Channel Matching:
Channel matching graphs do not relate to the perceived sound profile. A specialised configuration is used in this test to capture differences between channels, mitigating interference from positioning on the rig and the asymmetry in the GRAS pinnae design, a legacy of KEMAR. The left (blue) and right (red) channels are measured using a flat plate coupler with an IEC60318-4 ear simulator.
Comment: Channel matching on this particular unit is very good, which may contribute to imaging precision and the clarity of spatial cues.
Total Harmonic Distortion & Group Delay:
Supplied per request. For Group Delay charts, peaks/dips around 9kHz and up should be ignored as they are generally caused by the pinna, not the headphone. Note that the IR function setting for the Group Delay charts have been modified and should not be compared to previous versions. These measurements are conducted in quiet, normal room conditions (as opposed to an anechoic chamber), meaning there may be some influence from ambient room and external noise. These results should be considered a preliminary assessment of performance, primarily for identifying major issues, and do not reflect the best-case performance scenario.
Comment: The FT1 performs very well at 94dB. Nothing to worry about here.
Electric Phase & Impedance:
The above graph shows the measured impedance (green) and electric phase (grey).
Comment: The FT1’s impedance curve is flatter than a lot of moving coil headphones. This ensures a more consistent response when paired with amplifiers of different output impedance ratings.
END OF THE ARTICLE
Disclaimer: This review is not sponsored or endorsed by any business or related entity. The headphones reviewed are my own unless stated otherwise. Any links or recommendations included are purely informational and do not involve any financial affiliation or endorsement on my part.
How do these compare to the Meze 99 Classics and Neos? Do they seem like they’d have issues with repairability?
Unfortunately I haven’t owned the Mezes so I can’t really make an informed comparison. The Mezes were too bassy for my taste when I demo’ed them, though.
Fair enough, thank you still!
I’m really interested in the repairability aspect of these, since I’m looking to get some headphones to last a few years. I’ve heard some mixed opinions about FiiO as a whole.
Sound-wise I keep hearing that the FT1 are better aswell, more controlled bass yea.
No worries! Yea there are reports of the headband having issues but they seem to have fixed it. That said the FT1s haven’t been around for long enough so we’re not sure how they hold up in the long run.
Better distortion than hifiman planars ? with built in bass boost ? Interesting.
Do earpads seal well ? The opening looks a bit smaller i’m worried it might fit like on ear.
These are closed-back dynamic headphones so I’d say that’s not a surprise 😉
The ear pads seal pretty well and are over-ear (65x45x30mm approx).
Thank you for the review. I’m eager to buy FT1, but my ear is sensitive to 10-15khz/upper treble, like air sound of cymbal ssh ssh. Is it safe for me to buy FT1 and not using EQ?
Cheers mate. The FT1 does in fact have a bit of excess energy in that region. But because it also has quite a bit of bass, that excess shimmer (about 3dB or so above ‘neutral’) is generally not an issue for most listeners. That said, if you’re very sensitive to that region, I suggest trying them before buying, as it can be a bit much for you without EQ.
Thank you again. Keep up the good work.
Hey! I loved your review of the FT1. I’m someone who’s loved music since I was a kid and now I’m starting to produce music. I’m looking for a good closed-back headphone. Do you think the FT1 is better than the DT 700 Pro X for music production? I’m hesitant because I know DT headphones have a good neutral sound for production, but when I saw positive reviews like yours about the warm sound with pronounced bass (which is my musical taste) of the FT1 and its quality comparable to DT’s, I became increasingly tempted to buy it. What do you prefer in this case? Greetings from Brazil! o/
Hey there! I’m glad you liked the review. I am not a huge fan of the DT 700 Pro X personally. They do have an overall balanced tone, which is fine, but I find the upper mids quite forward and the treble somewhat elevated and uneven. I wouldn’t necessarily say the FT1 is more neutral than the DT 700 Pro X, but I do think it’s more enjoyable to listen to.
Are you planning on using EQ? If you are, I’d definitely recommend the FT1 as it’s just a more capable headphone overall. The sense of impact and stage is just so much better than the DT 700 ProX.
One thing to keep in mind though is how you tend to be with your gear. The Beyer headphones are very durable and built solid. While the FT1 is also nicely built, the nature of its wood and suede materials might not hold up quite as well over time.
Hello Sai!,
How does the Fiio ft1’s compare to the dca aeon closed x?
Hey! The Aeon CX gives you a cleaner, more detailed sound, though the treble can be a little sharper on its own. If you use the included tuning inserts they smooth out a bit (or you can just EQ it)
The FT1 has way more powerful bass presence and punch. The midrange is pretty much a tie: the FT1 is fuller, and the Aeon CX is more neutral and linear.
Value wise, the FT1 wins, no contest.
which would be better for a person who wears glasses with thin arms?
Ah then that’d be the FT1. The Aeon CX is more sensitive to leakages while the FT1 shows less rolloff when seal is compromised.
Hello Sai, love your work! Any plan on also reviewing Fiio’s update/upgrade of the FT1 – the FT13? Cheers!
Glad you’re enjoying it! Yep you can expect the review in a week or so. 😉
Hi Sai, is the Fiio FT13 review still coming? I don’t see it in the “Upcoming Articles” column. Cheers!
Yeah lol I haven’t updated that column in time.
I basically have a good sense of the FT3 now and am just writing it up. I’m also waiting on something else: Fiio said on Headfi that they’ll be providing an earpad adapter for them. I might grab that and do more pad rolling before dropping the full review.
Yeah, I read that. Interesting how some people prefer the FT13’s new cable on the FT1 and the FT1’s cable on the FT13. Well, I’ll just keep waiting for the review then. I hope it’s more positive than Resolve’s 🙂 Cheers!
please review denon d7200
Maybe one day… they are a bit dated now I wonder if Denon will be announcing a successor
Do you think these JZ Sheepskin pads for Fostex would sound good?
https://a.aliexpress.com/_EIaTPsm
There’s a round one and an oval one but I’m not sure which would sound better. I think headphoneer reviewer had round ones, but oval ones look more like ft1 stock ear pads.
Based on your experience with pads what difference would oval vs round have on the sound?
Would the ovals be bigger than FT1 stock too?
Thanks
Hi Sai,
Love your reviews! I was wondering if you plan on reviewing any Dan Clark Audio headphones like the E3 and/or the Noire X? Seems like everyone loves those but I’d love to hear your thoughts on them!
Thanks, I appreciate that! I’ve definitely been keeping an eye on the E3 and Noire X as they’ve been getting a lot of love. I’d like to cover at least one of them soon, just depends on when I can get my hands on a pair. Will keep you posted!
Hey great review!
About your pad swap measurements squig’s. The Jz w1000 pads, what model jz are they? i got some round angled sheepskins with large round opening and just trying to find measurements of similar. thanks
Thanks! The Jingzhi W1000 pads I used are similar to the stock ones on the Audio-Technica ATH-W1000 – non-angled, 105mm circular with a round cutout, fairly thin at around 20mm, and made with lambskin. Hope that helps.
What do you think about the fiio ft1 with ft1-A pads? Is it better than the original tuning. Are there any other pads that improve the sound better than the stock pads?
I actually prefer the stock pads. The FT1-A pads make the tuning more V-shaped, but the stock sound is already that way, so it ends up feeling a bit overdone. Overall, I think the stock pads strike a better balance and are still my go-to.
Hi Sai. No problem, I actually own two open back headphones, the Hifiman Ananda OG and the Sennheiser HD560S, both slightly eq’d.
I just wanted to have an additionally closed back wired headphone. For wireless use I have a set of Valco VMK25 ANC from Finland, which should not be known where you live.
BR, Stefan.
I see, you’ve got a great lineup there! Yeah, I’m not familiar with the Valco – don’t think it’s available here in Australia… maybe in Austria!
In Austria for sure, haha.
They sell mostly direct in Finland, and then in Germany. Valco says the Germans must be crazy for that. Finish humor is quite special, as you can see on their webpage…
My initial enthusiasm for the FiiO FT1 has waned somewhat.
The sub- and mid-bass have always been too pronounced for me, but I was able to get a pretty good handle on this with EQ. What bothers me more and more, however, is that if I move or tilt my head just slightly, the bass on this side becomes much more pronounced and louder.
I think this is due to a change in the pressure on the head and the associated change in the sealing of the ear pads.
In any case, it is quite annoying for me. I don’t know this with open-back headphones, probably also due to the open design.
BR, Stefan (Bavaria/Germany)
Hi Stefan, good to talk to you again. I haven’t personally experienced that issue with the FT1, but I don’t have long hair or wear glasses that could affect the seal. But yeah, open-backs tend to be better in this regard since they’re less sensitive to slight changes in seal.
Hello Sai.
Well, my hair is practically non-existent, haha, and the effect described occurs both with and without glasses.
However, I probably have a rather small head and the FT1 sits rather loosely on me. I am one of those people for whom a Hifiman Ananda or a Sennheiser HD6X0 or the HD560S are perfect comfort wise. Others like to complain about the comfort because it is too tight on their head.
Ah, gotcha. If the FT1 sits loosely on you, that could definitely be the issue. If you’re otherwise enjoying the FT1, you might try adjusting the headband or experimenting with thicker pads to improve the fit. Otherwise, an open-back might indeed be a better long-term solution for you.