[Xinlisupreme]

Wolfram with the Loak T (CL) Purpleheart is really neutral, but it has quite a lot of treble energy, it is less meaty sounding than the MeetAlice, but it is worth a try with your Bocote. Might switch over to SnowAg and see how it sounds.



I have a Loak-TC and Loak-S (CL) Kalimantan Ebony coming in, will let you know how these compare with the Loak-TB

Can’t wait to read about Kalimantan Ebony on your LOAKs

 

[PhenixS1970]

While I anticipating arrival of Miroak-ii . How good is the stock cable? Been reading some good things about MeetAlice & Cadmus 8 wire. Only one I have at hand mmcx is PW Audio no10.

 

[tfenton02]

While I anticipating arrival of Miroak-ii . How good is the stock cable? Been reading some good things about MeetAlice & Cadmus 8 wire. Only one I have at hand mmcx is PW Audio no10.

After listening to Miraok ii I think you will need to cable roll to get more richness out of the DD. I'm not impressed with stock cable

 

[flu_fighter]

While I anticipating arrival of Miroak-ii . How good is the stock cable? Been reading some good things about MeetAlice & Cadmus 8 wire. Only one I have at hand mmcx is PW Audio no10.

The stock cable is functional , but yeah, you will definitely get a better performance with a cable roll.

Try it with the PW Audio no. 10 and see how it goes from there.

 

[Ace Bee]

After listening to Miraok ii I think you will need to cable roll to get more richness out of the DD. I'm not impressed with stock cable

Somehow I feel the stock cable is pretty nice. It is so lightweight and easy to carry, I have been carrying it inside my pocket and listening straight from phone - absolutely loving it. But what better cable do you recommend for it? I believe a silver-plated copper cable will be perfect...but since the cost of the IEM is about $330, I am not exactly willing to use any cable beyond $50.

The stock cable is functional , but yeah, you will definitely get a better performance with a cable roll.

Try it with the PW Audio no. 10 and see how it goes from there.

I don't think the No.10 will be a great idea. The No.10 smoothens and thickens note - not right for Miroak-II's already smooth sound signature.

 

[PhenixS1970]

Appreciate all your feedback guys , thanks.

 

[ThEvil0nE]

I was planning to pull the trigger on the Miroak 2 but bought a headphone instead, I know my bad, but will still end up getting a pair.
Anyway, are the Miroak 2 still power happy? The more power you push the better it gets? Same question goes to the LOAK 2 @Ace Bee as you have protos on hand.

 

[Ace Bee]

LOAK-2 Prototype Impressions​

Going to put down what I hear on the LOAK-2 prototypes, along with a comparison with the original LOAK-T(CL) Cocobolo.

OG LOAK-T(CL) vs. Prototype-1 (Cocobolo)​

The Prototype-1 sound seems to have a different tuning compared to OG LOAK, but not exactly an improvement. It has a slightly more emphasized bass region - both sub and mid. It immediately put a smile on my face. Textures are similarly well reproduced. However, this bass emphasis seemingly compromises the transparency by a tiny bit, but noticeable.
The midrange of the Proto-1 is a bit pushed back compared to the OG. The OG midrange sounds slightly bigger - but that might be because of the more forward nature. Midrange notes are slightly bigger in size on OG, but have slightly more depth and weight on Proto-1. Textures and details are comparable.
Treble is where the OG is better than the Proto-1. The Proto-1 treble is slightly more spicy, tonally a bit cold, and has thinner notes compared to the OG - sounds a bit unnatural. OG treble, although similarly bright, has a more natural tonality, energy, and note weight.
The soundstage of the OG is taller, so sounds a bit bigger. The Proto-1 soundstage has a bit more depth. Imaging is similarly good.

OG LOAK-T(CL) vs. Prototype-3 (Brass)​

Now, this is the true upgrade in my opinion. Compared to the OG, the Prototype-3 sounds better in every aspect. Bigger and more robust bass, bigger midrange, better transparency, more balanced and naturally tuned treble, improved textures and details, more well-defined notes with added weight and body throughout the spectrum, more enhanced soundstage in every direction, markedly better three-dimensional imaging, a very nice holographic presentation altogether.
Frankly, this is my favourite. I simply cannot get enough of it. Considering this still isn't the final tuning, I am very excited to know what is the final tuning going to be. Rest assured - I am going to upgrade my LOAK to a brass model only.

(Musashi san said that the Brass models were supposed to have vocals a step back as it was developed for instrumental Jazz. However, in my experience, it has the most delightful midrange out of all. Better defined, more natural body, similar texture and details - absolutely no compromise, only enhancement.)

OG LOAK-T(CL) vs. Prototype-2 (Open back) ​

Quite obviously, the Prototype-2 has slightly less body in the bass. However, the subbass still digs quite deep, and midbass slams are quite impactful. The slight reduction in bass body makes the soundstage more open and spacious. Separation is markedly enhanced. Midrange notes are slightly less edgy, bigger in size, and more refined. Midrange is noticeably more transparent. Treble also has better-defined notes, similar energy and extension, but better textures and details. Overall the presentation is significantly bigger and better over the OG, with slightly reduced bass body, but distinct presence nonetheless.

It's very hard to pick the better one between Proto-2 and Proto-3. Compared to Proto-3, the Proto-2 has an overall more open, spacious, and clean presentation. The textures, details, and note definitions are largely the same, very very minute differences that I could barely notice. Proto-3 has a fuller and more dynamic bass response. Proto-2 has more separation and better imaging. Proto-3 sounds more fun and engaging.

There are differences in physical weight as well: Proto-2 < Proto-1 < OG < Proto-3. Proto-3 is the heaviest among them, largely because of the added brass parts, because the titanium body seems to be lighter than the SS body of the OG.

The driver used in these prototypes has a Graphene diaphragm.

And lastly, would like to mention this disclaimer from Musashi san once more:

This earphone is a prototype for determining sound directionality and is not the actual LOAK2 (tentative name).

In reality, the casing has already been modified and is no longer 3D printed but CNC machined.

When LOAK2 is completed, the sound will likely undergo significant changes.

It's strictly a reference model for determining sound directionality.

There you go. Feel free to ask me any further question.

 

[Ace Bee]

I was planning to pull the trigger on the Miroak 2 but bought a headphone instead, I know my bad, but will still end up getting a pair.
Anyway, are the Miroak 2 still power happy? The more power you push the better it gets? Same question goes to the LOAK 2 @Ace Bee as you have protos on hand.

Most definitely, they scale with power!

 

[flu_fighter]

LOAK-2 Prototype Impressions​

Going to put down what I hear on the LOAK-2 prototypes, along with a comparison with the original LOAK-T(CL) Cocobolo.

OG LOAK-T(CL) vs. Prototype-1 (Cocobolo)​

The Prototype-1 sound seems to have a different tuning compared to OG LOAK, but not exactly an improvement. It has a slightly more emphasized bass region - both sub and mid. It immediately put a smile on my face. Textures are similarly well reproduced. However, this bass emphasis seemingly compromises the transparency by a tiny bit, but noticeable.
The midrange of the Proto-1 is a bit pushed back compared to the OG. The OG midrange sounds slightly bigger - but that might be because of the more forward nature. Midrange notes are slightly bigger in size on OG, but have slightly more depth and weight on Proto-1. Textures and details are comparable.
Treble is where the OG is better than the Proto-1. The Proto-1 treble is slightly more spicy, tonally a bit cold, and has thinner notes compared to the OG - sounds a bit unnatural. OG treble, although similarly bright, has a more natural tonality, energy, and note weight.
The soundstage of the OG is taller, so sounds a bit bigger. The Proto-1 soundstage has a bit more depth. Imaging is similarly good.

OG LOAK-T(CL) vs. Prototype-3 (Brass)​

Now, this is the true upgrade in my opinion. Compared to the OG, the Prototype-3 sounds better in every aspect. Bigger and more robust bass, bigger midrange, better transparency, more balanced and naturally tuned treble, improved textures and details, more well-defined notes with added weight and body throughout the spectrum, more enhanced soundstage in every direction, markedly better three-dimensional imaging, a very nice holographic presentation altogether.
Frankly, this is my favourite. I simply cannot get enough of it. Considering this still isn't the final tuning, I am very excited to know what is the final tuning going to be. Rest assured - I am going to upgrade my LOAK to a brass model only.

(Musashi san said that the Brass models were supposed to have vocals a step back as it was developed for instrumental Jazz. However, in my experience, it has the most delightful midrange out of all. Better defined, more natural body, similar texture and details - absolutely no compromise, only enhancement.)

OG LOAK-T(CL) vs. Prototype-2 (Open back) ​

Quite obviously, the Prototype-2 has slightly less body in the bass. However, the subbass still digs quite deep, and midbass slams are quite impactful. The slight reduction in bass body makes the soundstage more open and spacious. Separation is markedly enhanced. Midrange notes are slightly less edgy, bigger in size, and more refined. Midrange is noticeably more transparent. Treble also has better-defined notes, similar energy and extension, but better textures and details. Overall the presentation is significantly bigger and better over the OG, with slightly reduced bass body, but distinct presence nonetheless.


It's very hard to pick the better one between Proto-2 and Proto-3. Compared to Proto-3, the Proto-2 has an overall more open, spacious, and clean presentation. The textures, details, and note definitions are largely the same, very very minute differences that I could barely notice. Proto-3 has a fuller and more dynamic bass response. Proto-2 has more separation and better imaging. Proto-3 sounds more fun and engaging.

There are differences in physical weight as well: Proto-2 < Proto-1 < OG < Proto-3. Proto-3 is the heaviest among them, largely because of the added brass parts, because the titanium body seems to be lighter than the SS body of the OG.

The driver used in these prototypes has a Graphene diaphragm.

And lastly, would like to mention this disclaimer from Musashi san once more:


There you go. Feel free to ask me any further question.

Prototype 3 seems to be the next gen BSB.

 

[theory_87]

Prototype 3 seems like something i’m looking forward to.

 

[PhenixS1970]

My Miroak-ii has been shipped and should arrive mid next week. Excited .

 

[Leonarfd]

My Miroak-ii has been shipped and should arrive mid next week. Excited .

Sweet, last week I have used Miroak-II every day it's in my top 5 now besides NP, Aurora, DTE900 and Aure.

 

[Leonarfd]

Have been writing notes and comparing Serial and Miroak-II, can share later if I get time today. One IEM is going out from the collection now.

 

[PhenixS1970]

Nice surprise after returning from the office. Miroak-II has arrived . Put on the XINHS cable and Spiral dots++ and having a first listen with BTR7. Going to like these a lot and let the burn in begin. Build quality and comfort are exemplary. A brand I will certainly keep my eye on and not my last iem from this small, high performing company.