Quick Review: MOONDROP Space Travel 2023 True Wireless Stereo ANC Earbuds (MD-TWS-022)

The wireless audio market is a highly competitive one, and my personal hypothesis has been that in order to survive, the majority of products generally sound at least decent. I really put this one to the test recently with the OTTO Pastel which far from perfect – in fact, I would only recommend it to those who are not critical at all about their listening and would be happy to listen to a cheap mono radio playing in the corner of a room. But that was only AU$17 for a set of over-the-ear headphones with ANC which is a big stretch, financially speaking.

But that test was inspired by an earlier acquisition, fuelled by the OzBargain mantra of “buy now, ask questions later”. Rewind to late November 2024, to this posting which promised a pair of MOONDROP Space Travel ANC Bluetooth earbuds for just shy of AU$29, all inclusive. In the past, I’ve been burned by listing where sellers confused ENC with ANC – the former being a form of noise cancelling, but of the captured audio from the microphones instead of cancelling the noise you might hear (which is the latter). But this listing was genuine and MOONDROP are a fairly well known name in the Chi-Fi scene for offering pretty well tuned IEMs. How would this budget offering fare?

Unboxing

The product being named “space travel” is somewhat space themed, but I’m not sure exactly how. The box it comes in is shrink wrapped with a clear plastic cover on the front showcasing the charging case holding the earbuds. The transparency does remind me of the clear electronics craze of the late 90s, when clear Nintendo Gameboys were all the rage. But then again, the off-white beige plastic also reminds me of the 90s.

The back of the box lists the full specifications of the unit – including Bluetooth v5.3 connectivity, AAC and SBC codec support and 4 (earbuds) + 12 (case) hour battery life. The item has a barcode number of 6972585501491.

The case is definitely aesthetically unique and the design does optimise space and keep things simple, without such affordances as a full lid to cover the case or multiple indicator LEDs. On the front is just one indicator LED which shines to indicate charging and changes colour to indicate critical battery.

On the back is the MOONDROP logo in orange, but otherwise, the case is a pleasing contrast between clear and off-white beige.

The stems are visible and accessible from the sides, as the only way to extricate the earbuds from the case.

The top is open to the elements, albeit with a nice touch in the clear plastic moulding which clearly shows the left and right indications.

Power comes in from underneath, which also lists the key specifications including 37mAh 3.7V battery in each earbud and 380mAh 3.7V battery in the case. The unit carries FCC, CE approvals, with the FCC identifier of 2AY45-MD-TWS-022 filed by their legal entity, Chengdu ShuiYueYu Technology Co.,Ltd. (a literal phonetic transliteration of the three Chinese characters that appear in their logo, representing water, moon and rain). From the internal photos, this unit uses a Bluetrum BT8892E chipset (presumably a close relative to the BT8892A).

Also included are three other sizes of tip and a USB-A to USB-C charging cable.

In terms of paperwork, a thick multilingual manual booklet is included, alongside a QC inspection card, an illustration of the suggested way to wear the earbuds and Chinese support and tips leaflets.

The earbuds have left and right indicators printed on them in orange, with a grey and orange colour scheme and a mecha-style angular graphics along the back of the stems. The stems themselves have a rounded square profile, with the top having a noticeable seam.

The earbuds have holes and slots, the rear slots likely for the feedforward noise cancellation while the front ones may be used for a bit of bass extension. The holes towards the bottom may be used for call audio microphones. The earbud tips are made of the standard black silicone, but the cross-section of the aperture is a larger ovular shape rather than round as in most other TWS earbuds.

The charging contacts, of which there are two, are positioned on the bottom of the rounded-square stem. These are contacted by pogo pins recessed in the charging case, with a magnet providing the downward force to keep the earbuds in the case and against the charging contacts. I’d have to say that they are quite striking – in a world where most earbuds are rounded rather than angular, and black rather than beige, this really does stand out.

User Experience

On the whole, it would seem the Space Travel TWS set suffers some of the common drawbacks of low-end, cost-optimised designs. The first is that it simply doesn’t remember the last mode it is used in – it always boots up in “normal” mode, requiring two long presses to get it into ANC mode (my preferred mode). This may also be a “feature” to try and prolong battery life, which I found a little more limited than more serious products. Another commonality is that the maximum volume is relatively limited and while it does play loud enough for my liking, there’s not much headroom for those who really like their music loud. On the upside, this should be a positive for avoiding potential hearing damage.

When it comes to the user interface, I’d have to say that the touch controls are well implemented and are not too sensitive. Stray activations are pretty rare in my experience. The voice prompts by “Mitsuki Yuki”, their Vtuber character, are probably something that will divide users. It’s not entirely intuitive, with “Hmm” meaning normal mode, “Hey” meaning transparency mode and “Shh” meaning ANC mode. But instead of shh, it sounds more like “Sheeee”.

To their credit, the unit does support AAC codec, as claimed, which would make these a good choice for Apple as well as Windows 11 usage, while only some Android phones have AAC support – the above was from my Poco F3. This is perhaps a good option to have, even if the audio quality is marginally above SBC, as it seems to have enhanced connection stability. I found coverage in AAC mode to be excellent – covering the inside of my house from end to end (transmission distance ~15m) through walls without dropouts. Even outside, I can get another 4-5m before the audio starts to stutter, so it easily exceeds the claimed range, in line with most Bluetooth v5.3 devices.

Audio quality would be the greatest strength. For such a low cost TWS pair, my expectations were that it would sound like the OTTO Pastel to some degree, but instead, I found it sounding a bit more “midrange” in its clarity. The bass is present and well controlled, the mids are warm but clear. The treble is where things break down a little, being a bit nervous, suggesting some inconsistency, but it certainly is not a fatiguing listen in the same way the OTTO Pastel was. It truly seems a big achievement to get this level of clarity at this price using a single dynamic driver. As you will hear later, the microphone also works quite well.

But that’s counterbalanced by the fact that the fit in my ear canal was a bit difficult, requiring a bit of rotation to get it to sit nicely and seal, without being irritating. The boxy stem of the earpiece can become apparent at some angles. But when it does seal, it sounds quite acceptable. The other main “gotcha” is the feedforward-only ANC which works decently with lower level indoor ambient noise, but seems to be overwhelmed when actually outside and commuting. As a result, I would consider it more as a “bit” of help, but not quite anywhere near what combined feedback and feedforward ANC solutions can achieve. If the wind hits your ear just right, the wind noise can be a bit distracting. It’s not isolating in the same way that the QCY Melobuds Pro was, but it doesn’t claim to be in all fairness. At least I didn’t experience any errant whistling or feedback.

Transparency mode did work, but was somewhat noisy and a bit loud for my liking. The lack of adjustability is a small downside – but I usually prefer pulling the earbud out (as uncomfortable as it might be) as it’s usually better manners and the multiple long-press fumble to switch between the ANC -> Normal -> Transparency mode just isn’t going to work most of the time.

The design of the case, while certainly helpful to the theming of the product and keeps things basic, does unfortunately mean that dust and dirt can enter. Without a lid, the earbuds rely on magnets to secure them in place and there is a chance (although slim) they could get jostled out of place in transit in a bag. I found the most difficult part of use to be the inserting and removing the earbuds from the case – while the stem has a square profile, there is no “track” in the case to keep it aligned with regards to tilt, so it may tilt out of the way and not go into the pogo pins. Likewise, extraction of the earbuds is achieved by sliding up on the stem, which is the only exposed surface in the right orientation, but the thin width means that you really have to get the fleshy ball of your finger to do this.

The single LED on the charging case, interestingly, is actually well implemented in my opinion. It glows white consistently while charging and if you insert one earbud at a time, it blinks to acknowledge charging that earbud. When the case is low, it shines orange-red and if you place earbuds into an empty case, it blinks red to indicate this. While you won’t know the charge level of the case precisely, given you can only get around four full charges from the case, it’s not such a big issue. The fact the charging port is on the bottom may allow dirt to accumulate, but it’s not a major issue either since the magnets do keep the earbuds in even if the case is rotated.

MOONDROP Link

For MOONDROP products, they are supported through the MOONDROP Link application, also known as just MOONDROP. At present, the app has fairly middling ratings of just 2.5/5 stars on Google Play, but it is a fairly basic app.

Installed on my phone, it can find the Space Travel set, showing a bright image when connected and a dull image when not connected. The visual aesthetics are fairly neat.

Unfortunately, the app’s capabilities are somewhat limited – this may be due to chipset limitations of this particular model, but tapping into the device homepage, we have the ability to adjust the volume, enter the EQ settings and open the user guide. When it comes to equaliser settings, there are only three settings to choose from, with no custom setting available. I found the “Reference” default mode to be most to my liking, it being quite close to what is often considered a “consumer” sound signature with a little bass emphasis.

Then I discovered it was possible to configure the touch settings by pressing on the image of the earbuds themselves. This allows some limited customisation, but if I recall correctly, it didn’t seem possible to completely disable the touch functionalities (which is something I often like to do).

No account is required to use the app, although you can choose to register one if you’d like. The settings page has few things of note – the setting page only allows you to configure night mode, language, enable a floating-window mode, configure auto-connection and music sync (not pictured). The Product page is more for promotion of their other featured products – hey, a Hoyoverse collaboration featuring Robin from Honkai Star Rail. I’m sure that will appeal to some players … but I’ll pass. I guess I just don’t love my waifus enough (chuckles quietly).

Tests

The first thing I tested was runtime under the basis of audio playing at a comfortable volume for commuting, connected to my Poco F3 in AAC mode, with ANC turned on. On a single earbud charge, the playtime was 3h 30m in the right side and about 3h 43m in the left side which is a notable discrepancy. This is slightly below the claimed four hours for the earbuds.

However, when we include the charging case into the equation, the total playtime from everything fully charged to everything fully empty reached 15h 49m. This compares closely with the claimed 4h + 12h = 16h total advertised on the back of the box. This is still somewhat less than more expensive wireless earbuds can offer – many are pushing close to twice as long runtimes, but at this price, compromises have to be made.

With regards to charging, the whole arrangement went from flat to full in just shy of two hours at 1h 56m. The peak charging current was 330mA, with the delivered charge being 552mAh at 5V suggesting even more charge delivered than the official battery capacity (even when assuming a linear charger circuit). This discrepancy may be due to the fact the unit runs its LED continuously while it is charging. Nevertheless, this result supports the claimed capacity as being genuine.

Direct Link: mdst-mictest.mp4

With regards to the microphone, I tested it in my semi-noisy fanned environment and it fared relatively well. The noise cancelling is evident and so is some slight (potentially) Bluetooth-related losses. But the voice comes through very well – intelligible, not excessively “swimmy” or “robotic” as some “AI” noise reduction algorithms have a tendency to do, and relatively complete with regard to spectrum considering the Bluetooth 16kHz mSBC limitations. I’d have to say this is a good result.

Conclusion

While this is one of MOONDROP’s low-end sets, I was still impressed by what it could do for its price. It didn’t nail the ergonomics of the case, the comfort of fit, nor the sealing of the earbuds in my ear canal. The ANC would be considered mediocre at best, easily overwhelmed by the likes of commuting noise, but is better than nothing. But when I did get it sealed, the audio was very well balanced and the result sounded fairly honest (especially considering their published graphs). The bass is present, not overwhelming, while the vocal region is nicely represented. The treble is a little “nervous” and inconsistent – but that’s what their graphs said it would be. It still sounds great for the price and a whole lot sharper and clearer than the OTTO Pastel did.

Of course, if you’re critical about your audio, this is not going to be your choice of product. But if you’re on a budget, it’s an entry-level price for performance that punches above its weight class. Best of all, the microphone also works well.

Other key downsides have to do with the limited battery life and the case that has no lid closure and thus can be a dust magnet or an earbud-losing hazard. To expect no compromises at this price-point would be unfair, but I think the compromises MOONDROP have chosen are not dealbreakers. To me, this set is good enough to be a take-along back-up in case my favourite set is somehow flat or left behind somewhere. Even though they may be a bit old now (based on the “2023” in the name), they will still get the job done.

But more than anything, I suppose it teaches me that perhaps some brands still clearly care about sound quality more than others … and even though this is an entry-level product, it’s left behind a great impression. I still can’t believe I got it for AU$29 all inclusive … although that’s probably a price you won’t be able to find today.

Posted in Audio, Tablet | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Repair: Mechanical Keyboard Chatter (ft. Gigabyte Aivia Osmium)

If you do a lot of typing, you probably would have upgraded to a mechanical keyboard. The travel and tactile/auditory feedback from mechanical keys are a joy, while also reducing fatigue by giving fingers a good amount of travel to decelerate rather than bottoming out on a membrane keyboard in the hopes of guaranteeing a key registration.

Since 2009, I’ve been a mechanical keyboard convert and I don’t regret it one bit, given how much typing I do as a part of my study, research, coding and blogging. They’ve been my peripheral of choice – I only tolerate rubber dome membrane keyboards when I “have to” (e.g. out and about on a laptop, or at work using their equipment).

Everything had been going relatively well with Cherry MX switches being considered the “standard” of the time, with a claim of 50 million press lifetimes. I’m not even sure the joints of my fingers could hold up. A typist at 100 words per minute, assuming five presses per word, typing everything onto one key would last close to 70 days of continuous mashing. Given a full size keyboard has over 100 keys … and I couldn’t possibly be typing that fast for that long, I thought that a mechanical keyboard would pretty much be buy it for life. That was … until it wasn’t …

The Problem & Claimed Fixes

The problem is called “chatter”. This refers to the multiple input which is registered on a single keypress. The origins are ultimately electromechanical – likely due to a combination of bounce in the contacts, dust, films or foreign particles affecting contact quality, wear of mechanical parts (possibly contributing the dust) and interactions with the controller or firmware debouncing algorithm. The result is that typing swiftly can result in words looking like “wwords” or “wowrds” or “thata” or “ppress”. Repeated keys can occur so rapidly to be next to one another, other times they are separated by long enough that rapid typists can get a key in-between. Commonly chatter manifests as doubling of a keypress, but severe chatter can cause triple or even more registrations of the key.

In my case, my main keyboard (a Gigabyte Aivia Osmium with Cherry MX Brown switches) had persistent chatter across a few keys which were really affecting my quality-of-experience. The chatter on “P”, “H”, “O” and “A” rank fairly high in the character frequency list in English, resulting in quite a few corrections in my typing (and a few e-mails with interesting typos). This would’ve been okay, if it were not for the fact that “backspace”, “space” and “return” had begun to chatter intermittently – depending on which angle they were struck at. This resulted in even more frustrations when it came to correcting typos and occasionally committing actions in scripts (e.g. “press enter to continue” ended up proceeding two steps, rather than just one). This started to get dangerous.

As a mechanical keyboard fan, my other ol’faithful Daskeyboard Professional (my first mechanical keyboard with Cherry MX Blue switches) didn’t fare much better. It had the opposite problem – the “Y” key started to register only intermittently – so as to “ignore” my presses at least half the time. This could be due to oxide, dirt or an insulating film building up on the key contacts. Despite all of this, I wouldn’t trade away the mechanical keyboard typing experience and go back to rubber-dome membrane keyboards, unless I absolutely had to.

This isn’t a totally unknown issue, but it’s the first time I’ve experienced it myself. Looking online, people have seemingly remedied the issue by drowning the switch in isopropyl alcohol and cycling the switch rapidly. Others have been able to press down on the switch and blast it with air to clean it out. Finally, others have said that using a contact cleaner like DeOxit solved the problem for them. I gave them all a try, but the only result I got was perhaps an improvement for a day or two. Nothing was permanent.

A Software Fix?

Given that the result is multiple key-press inputs, it would be possible to filter the repeated keystrokes, right? That’s what a number of keyboard chatter blocker tools aim to do. I gave the Frenetic LLC Keyboard Chatter Blocker a try.

The tool is small and featureful, allowing the configuration of chatter delay per-key and logging the chatters which were blocked.

The statistics tab is able to show just how many chatters were detected per key, but also indicates the number of keypresses per key. When running this for a while, it’s interesting to note just which keys are being used more than others.

The configure keys tab allows for individual key chatter thresholds to be configured. Alternatively, a global chatter threshold can be set, which means every key would be filtered.

There is the capability to disable the filter for certain programs – perhaps to avoid compatibility issues or problems with anti-cheat, but I’m not sure I can trust this. After all, this program does modify keyboard inputs. Thinking about it, as a piece of software that intercepts all keyboard input, I’m not sure I like that idea in the first place (although I suspect the software is “clean”) – it’s almost like having a keylogger …

There are some other settings which change how chatter is measured and allowing for accumulated statistics.

At the time of publication, the latest version was 1.19. On the whole, I think the software is quite a good effort – it does remove the chatter. But the problem, as a fast typist, is that I couldn’t find a reliable chatter threshold that could filter the chatter without filtering out legitimate double-presses. This created new typos where words like success would turn out as suces. I also didn’t like the potential of having something that could be logging keystrokes in a way that might open up security issues or cause anti-cheat bans. I would have loved for a convenient, free software solution that works, but alas, that was not to be.

Biting the Bullet – Saving the Patient

Come Friday this week, I just got so frustrated I started tearing down the keyboard with a keycap puller. I couldn’t take it anymore … as time-consuming as this was, I wasn’t giving up on the keyboard.

The keyboard in question is a Gigabyte Aivia Osmium, a relatively mainstream mechanical keyboard hailing from 2013 originally purchased to be paired with my secondary Intel 4th-generation desktop. It saw relatively light amounts of use until the last two-and-a-half years when I pressed it into everyday service with my primary laptop-based workstation. Even though it wasn’t at all cheap when I purchased it (around AU$200 from MSY) as mechanical keyboards were considered premium products and innovations such as keyboards with socketed swappable switches had not yet come to the fore, the fact it has lasted over a decade has made it worthwhile. It’s still over 90% functional, so why throw it away?

To be sure I didn’t get the wrong key, I coloured the stems of the bad keys with black permanent marker.

Disassembling the keyboard involves taking out four screws and then prying the case halves apart. The plastic itself took a bit of work to separate and some clips snapped – perhaps after 10 years, the plastic got a bit brittle. Nevertheless, releasing the PCB also requires unplugging the USB 3.0 extension cable, the USB 2.0 and audio combination cable from CON1 and also desoldering the shield drain wire from the PCB.

One potential cause of chatter is bad PCB joints. A crackly joint can certainly manifest itself as an inconsistent switch signal similar to a crackly contact. But a look at the keyboard itself shows relatively nice, regular lead-free solder joints. No signs of cracks or bad joints, although there is evidence of flux residues, none of which were causing critical issues.

Perhaps my biggest incentive to do the repair, aside from the inconvenience of the chatter itself, was the fact I had some of these Cherry MX Blue switches left over from a project that I could re-use (on the right). An extracted switch from the patient is on the left – the Cherry text on the Blue looks suspicious, but this was sourced through Mouser, so I hope it is truly genuine.

I was glad that the keyboard uses the black-framed older Cherry MX switch design, as the clear bodied switches don’t seem suited for LEDs in the same configuration. But a look at the back shows that the Aivia Osmium uses the keyboard plate to secure the keys into position and doesn’t rely on PCB fixation pins. As a result, I used flush side-cutters to trim off the fixation pins, but ordering the correct type in the first place (MX1A-G1NN) would have been better. That being said, given the reduced cost of such mechanical keyboards nowadays (under AU$100), even buying a small quantity of switches would cost a good fraction of what a whole new keyboard would cost especially when considering the shipping, which would make such a venture uneconomical when considering the time requirement of the repair. Having spare old switches to throw at it really made it more palatable to do it … but also the satisfaction of knowing that I’m not throwing away something that works, that I’m familiar with, that I like and that is still 90% functional. Perhaps another option is to buy cheap clone switches and use those instead, but I would then be concerned about lifetime (as disassembly is a pain in the butt).

To make my life easier, I used black permanent marker to ring around and “cross out” bad switches to identify which switches need replacing. To remove and replace them, I used a soldering iron, desoldering bulb, desoldering wick, leaded solder and a pair of tweezers.

My procedure involved:

  1. Flowing fresh solder over the two LED legs to join them together. This would reduce the melting point (mixing leaded solder in) and allow for a single iron tip to heat both legs at the same time.
  2. Reflow the LED solder and yank the LED out from the other side of the PCB with tweezers slowly. This allows the LED to come out cleanly with minimal damage.
  3. Clean the LED pads by using solder wick and/or the desoldering bulb.
  4. Flow fresh solder on each of the switch pins. They’re too far to connect together, so they have to be desoldered one at a time.
  5. Heat up a single joint until it is quite liquid, then use the desoldering bulb to clean it thoroughly. As the hole and pad are very big, this makes cleaning out the solder even easier.
  6. Repeat for the other joint. Once both joints are clear, use the set of tweezers to verify both pins are free from the PCB by wiggling on them.
  7. Once clear, push down on the locating peg on the rear to pop the switch through the front plate.
  8. Install the new switch into place (trimming off the PCB locating pins) and solder down the two pins.
  9. Install the LED ensuring orientation matches the others on the board, then solder it down.

All done, the result doesn’t look so clean because I used Multicore 362 solder with no-clean rosin-flux. This results in amber residues that do not have to be cleaned – so I’m leaving it as it is, along with my permanent marker scrawls.

The resulting key switch swaps would probably irk many people … but I think this makes for an interesting board.

I also took a quick look around the board – this corner seems to have a Genesys Logic USB 2.0 hub and a Freescale MC9S08JM16 microcontroller.

Near the scroll wheel is a Cypress CY7C64215 EZ-USB E3 controller with a separate MXIC 25L4005E 4Mbit serial flash. Modern keyboards would have everything inside a single ARM microcontroller.

One thing I was particularly pleased about was that all the LEDs still worked after the transplant. The LEDs themselves didn’t have a flat on the negative side, so I had to rely on the shape of the “legs” to determine which way for them to go in. The LEDs can also be somewhat heat sensitive as well – but that being said, I rarely use the key backlighting, so even if it didn’t make it, I would have been okay with it.

A Peek Inside the Old Switches

Before I throw away the old switches, I decided to open one of them up to look inside. After all these years, I’ve not looked inside one …

… and I’d have to saw it is quite underwhelming. Most of it was empty space with a spring for the plunger that pushes on the switch contacts which occupy the top of the screen. The cross-point is a small, literal “cross” point.

The switch itself is just the tiny bump in the springy metal – just that part has a flash of gold over it.

That mates with this bump on the other plate. Keeping costs low by reducing the amount of gold used, while the small contact area should make for a reliable connection. Curiosity answered!

A Decade of Repair …

While I do have quite a few soldering irons, I’ve ordinarily used my Tenma (rebadged Atten) hot air station from 2014, which makes it a decade old. In that time, I’ve used it for building circuits, repairing products, doing work from home, desoldering parts and more. Everything from connectors, through-hole and SMD … it’s done it all and without having any parts replaced.

So after ten years of use and a lot of repairs, its time is numbered. The tip has now “thinned” in the middle, becoming more thermally resistive, but even worse is the retaining barrel which has started to split and corrode at its end. This results in a tip that is loose, potentially even on the verge of falling off the front of the iron.

Perhaps it’s all the accumulated flux acidity and wet sponge usage has caught up to the rebadged AT8502D handpiece. Ten years of work – a lot more than I had anticipated it lasting when I purchased it.

Thankfully I had purchased a whole replacement handpiece when it was being cleared out from element14 on discount, so I have a new handpiece and tip for when this one finally fails.

But this has me reflecting back on my electronics journey just like the spool of wire guy, except for me, it’s more like my spools of solder(ing wire) and soldering iron tips.

Conclusion

Electromechanical devices, such as switches, have a lifetime due to the nature of moving parts. While the claimed lives are extremely long – often more than I could ever imagine my finger joints to be capable of, these lives are based on laboratory testing that likely does not reflect real-word usage where keys are being hit at different angles, at different speeds, bottoming out occasionally, in rooms filled with dust and vapours in the air. The result is that, over time, these switches may not provide a “clean” signal much like how an old radio’s volume control can crackle, resulting in multiple keypresses being registered on a single push, a phenomenon known as “chatter”.

There are software solutions that filter the chatter based on filtering out repeated keypresses received within a configurable time window. This may well be a solution enough for some users, as it requires no mechanical intervention and is essentially “free” (albeit, with the risk of falling afoul of anti-cheat detection software). But in my experience, despite tuning it, I found that chatter detection occasionally filtered out legitimate double-presses when typing quickly – and being able to type quickly and comfortably was the primary reason I went mechanical in the first place.

So like it or not, the real fix is a hardware fix, which can be somewhat costly in time and parts. It is possible on such soldered boards to change the switches with a soldering iron, solder, desoldering braid, a desoldering bulb or solder sucker and a set of tweezers. But the amount of time and patience required is probably something not everyone has. Making sure you have the correct replacement part is also important for the smoothest repair.

As I had some left-over Cherry MX Blue switches from a previous project, my repair resulted in a keyboard that now has mixed switches. This would be something that could be very annoying to some – the sound and tactile feel varies depending on the key. But for me, functionality trumps all and I managed to get back up and running, with the original LEDs re-installed for key backlighting as well. While I could have swapped around switches such that the replaced Blue switches were in more inoffensive positions (e.g. in the macro keys, freeing up their Browns to go into the main alphanumeric sequence), this would have increased repair time and risk.

Now that the keyboard is now back to operation, I just hope the other keys don’t begin to chatter anytime soon. But knowing the nature of electromechanical things, it is indeed a possibility and another repair (or perhaps a complete replacement) may ultimately be on the cards. But this had me thinking about just how many things my soldering station has helped me save, now that its iron and tip seem to be on its last legs.

That being said, I previously repaired my Steelseries Sensei mouse more than once due to “double-clicking” issues (which is basically “mouse chatter” or switch bounce). That repair has held up, but since I’m using a Logitech MX518 on my primary laptop set-up, this one too has developed an intermittent double-clicking issue after five years of use. I suppose this might be another candidate for repair (along with the DasKeyboard Professional), once it becomes consistent enough to be annoying. But I do look at my two “spare” mechanical keyboards thinking … when is the right time to “give up” on a patient and just let them die? Not today!

Posted in Computing, DIY, Electronics, Salvage | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Tested: XTAR Ultra 3500D AA Lithium Non-Rechargeable Batteries

Despite the proliferation of integrated lithium-ion and lithium-polymer batteries, the humble AA battery still has a role to play in various devices in and outside of the home. Ecological concerns mean that many of these batteries have been replaced by rechargeable varieties, but for picky appliances and for certain demanding or disposable applications, disposable cells are still preferable.

Alkaline AA cells are practically the norm, not the most inexpensive but perhaps the best value of the primary disposable cell chemistries. But despite having a good capacity, they have a number of key drawbacks including temperature sensitivity, loss of capacity under heavy loads, can be somewhat heavy and have a tendency to leak corrosive chemicals once depleted, which can damage battery terminals and devices. Their shelf life often sits at about five years.

Demanding applications often call for special “1.5V” Lithium AA batteries based around the LiFeS2 (lithium iron disulfide) chemistry. Such cells are lightweight, have even more energy than alkaline cells, won’t leak, work well even in cold temperatures, handle high discharge currents and store for long periods of time – ten years or more. The downside is a slightly higher initial voltage of ~1.8V which can be a problem for some sensitive devices, higher cost and limited availability.

XTAR’s products have made an appearance before, specialising in rechargeable lithium-ion batteries, 1.5V rechargeable lithium batteries and chargers. This time around, they’ve sent me their latest product addition – the Ultra 3500D, a non-rechargeable lithium AA battery with 3500mAh capacity and a fairly affordable price.

Thanks to XTAR who provided these batteries under the review challenge terms.

The Batteries

For this review, I received two packs of four cells. Each set of four is shrink wrapped together, with each set being placed into a zip-lock bag in my case.

The battery is boldly marked with the brand and the 3500mAh claimed capacity. Alongside this, the jacket carries the RoHS and CE compliance marks, the website, an indication that the battery is Made in China, a set of caution statements, the key features in terms of temperature range and shelf life and a reminder that the cell is non-rechargeable.

The caution statements are occasionally a bit odd in their use of English expression. I particularly like one of the caution statements – “Keep children out of reach of the battery.” This is very much the opposite of what is normally said – which is to keep the battery away from kids. Still, I think we get the idea …

A look at the terminals shows a nipple positive surrounded by a black plastic insulating plastic cover sheet. The negative terminal has a raised flat but with an indentation in the centre which might help align cells when multiple cells are placed in a series.

“1.5V” Lithium AA Batteries?

The LiFeS2 chemistry cells aren’t ordinarily encountered due to their cost. Energizer Ultimate Lithium (L91) is perhaps the most widely known example of this type of battery and is perhaps the most consistent performer to beat. Their advertising makes it clear that it is the longest lasting AA battery – which is a bit of an unfair comparison when everything else was alkaline. The cost for this is an eye watering AU$24.50 for a four-pack today.


Excerpt from Energizer L91 Datasheet

But the performance difference is clear. A look at the capacity graph on the datasheet shows how the capacity of the L91 is 3500mAh (same as the XTAR Ultra 3500D) and that the capacity remains relatively constant up to 500mA draw, only dipping slightly closer to 3200mAh by 1A. An alkaline cell starts off strong at light loads, approaching 2900mAh, but rapidly loses capacity having only about 1200mAh at 500mA and 1000mAh at 1A. In my experience, most alkaline cells really struggle to stay operating by 750mA of load. Looking at the other specs, such as the maximum discharge current of 2.5A, it’s clear that the XTAR Ultra 3500D is looking to match the Energizer L91 as a perfect replacement.

As a result, it’s clear that such lithium cells are most useful for high draw applications. But they have a host of other benefits as well, including long shelf life of 10 years or greater, twice as long as alkaline cells. This can be useful for emergency use applications or for low draw applications that you need to run for the maximum possible time between replacement. They’re also lighter and operate well over a wider range of temperatures, often between -40 to 60 degrees Celsius, thus can be important in some applications where weight is at a premium and the product may be outdoors (for example, surveillance cameras and hunting trail cameras). Finally, such cells also do not leak corrosive liquid as alkaline cells do when they are depleted. Even something like a humble Bluetooth mouse that travels with you everyday can benefit from being a bit lighter and having stable long-lived leak-free power. For high-value professional electronics, investment into such lithium metal cells can help protect the device against potential damage – think expensive wireless microphone systems, for example. Some sensitive devices cannot run on rechargeable cells due to reduced voltage or 1.5V lithium-ion rechargeable cells due to needing long standby times or being sensitive to ripple/noise are likely candidates to use lithium primary cells.

The only real downside, aside from cost, is a slightly higher initial voltage of 1.8V. In larger packs, this difference can add up and cause damage to some appliances not designed for their use. In the old days, filament-based Maglites could blow their bulbs as they were designed for the voltage drop of more ordinary cells under load. Now as most electronics involve some form of power conversion or regulation, this is less of an issue than it was in the past.

However, now there are other manufacturers including Golden Peak (GP), Varta, Bevigor and Ruizhi (to name a few) which offer such LiFeS2 chemistry cells to ordinary buyers and more competitive pricing. This means that buying lithium batteries shouldn’t feel quite as painful, although you’d still usually choose it for your most demanding applications where it offers you benefits over rechargeable batteries or single-use alkaline cells.

Performance Testing

The following is the result of testing all eight cells to a full 0.8V cut-off discharge under a range of circumstances. Discharge was completed using a B&K Precision Model 8600 DC Electronic Load using four-wire sensing and a ZKE Battery Rack. Temperature was controlled at 25 degrees Celsius using a modified car fridge of my own design.

As received, the battery weights averaged 15.8g but with a fair amount of difference between the lightest and the heaviest – 0.451g between them. The open circuit voltage varied about 15mV which is acceptable but one of them being below 1.8V was a bit concerning at first.

I performed discharges at a number of rates – 25mA for “ultimate capacity”, repeated twice using a heavy and a light cell to see the difference in capacity due to weight. Constant power discharge at 0.48W was also performed twice using similarly weight-ranging cells, as this was a test comparison used in my Great AA Alkaline Battery Test. Finally, a range of constant current rates were chosen for the remainder to provide some information about how capacity falls with respect to discharge rate.

A plot of the constant current results are as above. Interestingly, the results are extremely similar to that of the Energizer Ultimate Lithium L91 datasheet which claims 3500mAh through to 500mA discharge rate which is achieved here, tailing off to about 3200mAh at 1A which is slightly exceeded here. This indicates a level of performance that is just as good as the more expensive Energizer Ultimate Lithium. Above 1A, the capacity continues to fall – at 1.5A, it registered 3188mAh. At the maximum discharge rate of 2.5A, the capacity does take a beating – down to just 2530mAh.

Looking at the individual voltage curves, it’s clear how the voltage starts off at around 1.8V but falls rapidly to settle into the range expected by alkaline battery devices. The discharge curve is mostly smoothly declining in voltage over time.

The 25mAh discharge tests took six days to complete (each) and the results show a slight risde in voltage after an initial dip. For some reason, LI6 shows noisy voltage values towards the end of discharge – I’m not sure if that was due to a contact problem or a transient issue with the DC electronic load such as instability (which can happen after long periods of operation).

Discharge under 0.48W constant power yielded a run time of about 9.5 hours with only a small difference between the two cells, delivering 3403mAh and 3455mAh respectively. This type of discharge may seem innocuous at first as 0.48W would be 320mA at the nominal 1.5V, but a constant power discharge really kicks the cell when it’s down increasing current consumption as voltage falls, which hastens its demise. This results in a figure that’s a little less than the 3500mAh that might be printed on the label and less than even a 500mA constant current discharge (although some of this is also cell-to-cell variation).

The above is the same data, but plotted against discharge capacity with the constant power results also included in dashed lines.

Finally, the same data is presented with energy along the X-axis.

Under the Labels

Removing the labels, there did not seem to be any identifying marks on the shell or label as to who the manufacturer might be.

Removing the insulating sheet, the positive side terminal vents and seal can be seen. It all looks rather well made.

That being said, I recall having a lithium cell from a local distributor with a white insert on the positive and a negative terminal with the same feature. After digging about a bit, I think the closest candidate for a manufacturer would be Nanjing Ruizhi Technology Co., Ltd. who appear to be behind a number of brands on Amazon including RUIHU and NRT, and seem to also be the supplier for Soshine based on the fact all these products appear to have the same negative terminal design. However, all such cells are 3000mAh according to specifications, which is a very common specification, so either this is a custom improved product or perhaps it’s made by someone else entirely.

When it comes to 3500mAh claimed ratings, aside from the Energizer Lithium L91 and the XTAR Ultra 3500D reviewed here, the remaining competitors would be the Bevigor UltraNINMAX, EBL, Bonai and BlinksPower. Of these, none of them are an obviously identical cell, although the BlinksPower does appear to have the same negative terminal shape just with a white insulating insert (and may bear some connection to Ruizhi). The other cells lack much in the way of reviews or good photographs of the cell terminals to enable identification, while many are rebadged.

Nevertheless, this doesn’t take away from the fact the XTAR Ultra 3500D performed as well as it claimed to, easily matching the performance of the more renowned Energizer Ultimate Lithium L91’s datasheet specifications on capacity which makes it worthy of consideration.

Conclusion

In all, the XTAR Ultra 3500D cells performed as I would have expected based on their specifications. Constant current capacity testing at 25 degrees Celsius at 25mA revealed capacities of 3538mAh and 3564mAh. Under a heavier load of 500mA, 3501mAh was achieved. At 2.5A, a discharge capacity of 2530mAh is achieved. In all, this mirrors the performance claims of the Energizer Lithium L91 very closely making it a good replacement for users looking to save a bit of money but still have the ultimate lithium-level performance.

The only issue seemed to be some inconsistency in terms of cell weights (2.9%), suggesting the manufacturing quality control tolerances may not be as tight as they could be. However, after testing all eight provided cells, this doesn’t seem to have had a major impact on the actual results. As for shelf life, unfortunately, this is not something I could test.

If you’ve got some sensitive, hungry or precious devices such as outdoor cameras or professional audio equipment, or you’re already a happy user of Energizer Ultimate Lithium L91 and wished they could be a bit cheaper, then it might be worth considering the XTAR Ultra 3500D next time you shop for lithium batteries.

If you are interested in purchasing these batteries, you can find them on XTAR Direct, or via their Amazon AU storefront. While the batteries are a bit cheaper on XTAR Direct (AU$24.01 for 8pcs with a 10% off promotion at the time of publication), the shipping costs (AU$14.70) mean that it’s often better to go via Amazon (AU$33.99 with free shipping over $59 or with Prime) when ordering smaller volumes. However, shipping on XTAR Direct becomes free when purchasing seven packs or more, so it may make sense to stock up if you anticipate needing a plentiful supply.

Note that all links in this page are not affiliated. Please browse with peace of mind that I do not benefit from your decision to buy or not. Thanks to XTAR for providing this sample for review.

Posted in Electronics | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment