We subjected the Fairphone 4 to our rigorous SBMARK Audio test suite to measure its performance both when recording sound using its built-in microphones, and when playing audio through its speakers.
In this review, we’ll break down how it fared across a variety of tests and several common use cases.
Overview
The Fairphone 4, like the previous models in this eco-conscious line, is modular and configured so that users can easily replace the battery and some other parts by themselves. Parts and raw materials are sourced responsibly as much as possible, according to the company. Running on Android 11, the device is powered with the mid-range Snapdragon 750G chipset and is ready for 5G. On the audio front, the device has two speakers, one in the top center and one in the bottom right. Among its peers in this price range (around 650 euros), its overall score was among the lowest, reaching a 53, which corresponds to the score of the Vivo X51 5G. In playback, the Fairphone 4 is functional. Balance is good and voices are generally intelligible. But timbre is very mid-range focused – low-end is desperately absent and high-end isn’t great either – and at maximum volume the artifacts become noticeable. As a recording device, the Fairphone 4 works with some flaws in most use cases. But the device’s memo app was deeply flawed in all use cases and attributes, reducing the overall score. In some cases, the recordings were simply incomprehensible.
Key audio specs include:
- Two speakers, one top center, one bottom right
- No earphone jack, but there is a USB-C port
Reproduction
Pros
- Decent overall space performance
- Fluid and non-aggressive treble, which make the vocal content intelligible
- Good balance in all use cases
Cons
- Lack of support for 24-bit audio
- Very midrange focused tone, lacking low and high end extension
- Occasional resonance in the low mids, depending on the content
- Maximum volume induced distortion and pumping, reducing the spectrum on the low side
Registration
Pros
- Correct envelope in noisy scenarios (high sound pressure level).
- Correct balance when recording indoor video
Cons
- Very poor stamp in memo recording
- Poor handling of noise cancellation
Test summary
Learn about SBMARK audio tests: For scoring and analysis in our smartphone audio reviews, SBMARK engineers perform a series of objective tests and undertake more than 20 hours of perceptual assessment under controlled laboratory conditions.
(For more details on our reproduction protocol, click here; for more details on our registration protocol, click here.)
The following section collects the key elements of our exhaustive tests and analyzes performed in SBMARK laboratories. Detailed performance evaluations in the form of reports are available upon request. Do not hesitate to contact us.
How the audio playback score is composed
SBMARK engineers test playback through smartphone speakers, whose performance is evaluated in our labs and under real-life conditions, using apps and default settings.
As a playback device, the Fairphone 4 ranks in the lower end of its price range. In terms of tone, the highs are positive, even if they lack high-end. Remains smooth, clear, non-aggressive. The midrange is sometimes square and resonant in the low mids, giving clarity to the vocals. The kick and bass information is not well reproduced at all. The lack of low-end extension is the most obvious flaw in this attribute. When playing and watching the moves, the lack of low-end extension compromises the punch feel. The dynamics in general are below par. The attack is soft in most use cases. Bass accuracy is surprisingly adequate when gaming, listening to music or watching a movie. In the spatial attribute, the Fairphone 4 exhibits a limited amplitude, barely extending beyond the physical dimensions of the device, and localizability is not well defined. On a positive note, the balance is well centered and the perception of distance is spot on. Voices in movies and voice content are in the position of the screen. When playing, spatial performance is average and localizability does not affect gameplay. At maximum volume, the device does not get “hard”, but the compression tends to amplify the low-end extension and accentuate the midrange focused tone. The first volume step is barely distinguishable. The device didn’t score well in the artifacts attribute either. Distortion emerges at high volumes, accompanied by a noticeable pumping. Technically, aliasing and frequency resonances are recurring problems.
Hear about the playback performance of the smartphone tested in this comparison with some of its competitors:
Stereo expansion of the Nokia N95
Here’s how the Fairphone 4 fares in playback use cases compared to its competitors:
The Timbre score represents how well a phone reproduces sound across the audible tonal range and takes into account bass, midrange, treble, tonal balance and volume dependence. It is the most important attribute for reproduction.
The Dynamics score measures the accuracy of changes in the energy level of sound sources, such as the precision with which a bass note or the impact sound of drums is reproduced.
Secondary attributes for spatial tests include identifying the position of a specific sound, its positional balance, distance and amplitude.
The volume score represents the overall volume of a smartphone and how the volume gradually increases and decreases based on user input.
Here are some sound pressure levels (SPLs) measured while playing our sample recordings of hip-hop and classical music at maximum volume:
| Hip-Hop | Classic | |
| Fairphone 4 | 75.4 dBA | 71.2 dBA |
| Oppo Reno6 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) | 73.9 dB | 68.8 dBA |
| Oppo Finds X3 Neo | 76.5 dBA | 71.8 dBA |
The graph below shows the gradual changes in volume from minimum to maximum. We expect these changes to be consistent across the range, so that all volume levels match user expectations:
The Artifacts score measures the extent to which sound is affected by various types of distortion. The higher the score, the less noise you notice. Distortion can occur due to the sound processing in the device and the quality of the speakers.
How the audio playback score is composed
SBMARK engineers test the recording by evaluating the files recorded on reference audio equipment. These recordings are performed in our labs and in real-life conditions, using apps and predefined settings.
As a recording device, the Fairphone 4 ranks at the absolute bottom in this price range with a score of 45. Of all the devices tested for recording, it is also close to the bottom. In the timbre attribute, the problems vary from application to application. When shooting life video (rear camera) in an interior space, the tonal balance is correct despite the lack of warmth in the vocals, the highs are good, but the mids sound hollow, with the lack of low mids. In the urban scenario, the voices sound really shrewd, focused on the high mids and high treble. In the selfie video the tonal balance is functional, but the timbre is focused on the high mids as in the life video. When it comes to the memo app, the recordings are really inadequate due to poor file layout. The rumors are barely understandable. There are no high notes, just a sloppy midrange. In dynamics, the signal-to-noise ratio is correct in life and in selfie videos. In the memo app, still a problem, the envelope is badly damaged. Explosives aren’t sharp at all. In the high SPL scenario (an electronic music concert), the envelope is correct despite slight compression that hinders fast transients such as snare drums. In the spatial attribute, localizability is correct in video applications, although the audio scene is rather narrow in real video and non-existent in selfie video. The Memo app is once again a disadvantage: localizability and amplitude are not initial elements and the distance rendering is not realistic. As for the artifacts, St.Like clipping was noticed on the high SPL scenario and screaming voices in video applications. In the background attribute, Noise cancellation is activated after 10 seconds of recording in noisy environments with one of the video applications. This completely compromises the return of the background, which becomes muffled and not at all natural. When using the memo app, the wallpaper is simply non-existent due to the poor quality of the recordings. A bright spot – the background is displayed correctly in the home scenario.
Here’s how the Fairphone 4 fares in use case recording compared to its competitors:
The Timbre score represents how well a phone captures sounds across the audible tonal range and takes into account bass, midrange, treble and tonal balance. It is the most important attribute for registration.
The Dynamics score measures the accuracy of changes in the energy level of sound sources, such as how accurately the explosives of a voice (p, tek, for example) are reproduced. The score also considers the Sound-to-Noise Ratio (SNR), such as how loud the main voice is compared to the background noise.
Secondary attributes for spatial tests include identifying the position of a specific sound, its positional balance, distance and amplitude on recorded audio files.
The volume score represents the normalization level of the audio on the recorded files and how the device handles noisy environments, such as electronic concerts, during recording.
Here are the sound levels recorded in the audio and video files, measured in LUFS (Loudness Unit Full Scale); as a reference, we expect loudness levels to be higher than -24 LUFS for recorded content:
| Encounter | Life video | Selfie video | Memo | |
| Fairphone 4 | -39.2 LUFS | -27.7 LUFS | -25.4 LUFS | -32 LUFS |
| Oppo Reno6 Pro 5G (Snapdragon) | -21.6 LUFS | -16.6 LUFS | -15.4 LUFS | -17.1 LUFS |
| Oppo Finds X3 Neo | -19.3 LUFS | -17 LUFS | -16.4 LUFS | -15.7 LUFS |
The Artifacts Score measures the extent to which recorded sounds are affected by various types of distortions. The higher the score, the less noise you notice. Distortions can occur due to the sound processing in the device and the quality of the microphones, as well as user handling, such as the way the phone is held.
Hear about the artifacts in this excerpt, which was recorded in a fast-paced home environment:
Background evaluates how naturally the various sounds around a voice blend into the video recording file. For example, when recording a speech at an event, the background should not interfere with the main voice, but should provide context for the surrounding environment.
Start a new Thread