[Andrew_WOT]

Purely accidentally this thread caught my eye the other day.
https://www.reddit.com/r/headphones/comments/10xb6wj/64audio_u12t_review_a_bit_overrated/

 

[o0genesis0o]

The thing about U12t is that it makes upgrading incredibly difficult because it is consistently great at everything, but not exactly cutting edge at any thing. Say, I want that little extra “special sauce” soundstage of MEST III, I lose the overall dynamic and bass details. I want the slightly extra midrange detail of Monarch II, I lost the comfort, stage, and bass. And if I want upgrade at everything, my bank account would cry (Subtonic Storm, Elysian Anni and the upcoming flagship)

Same story with the 1k benchmarks like Andromeda, and I guess same story with people holding the Monarch II as well. So many times items arriving at my desk (or the local hifi store) promising “kilobuck killer”, and then it fails to out resolve and “out imaging” the plain old Andromeda, and of course fail to out resolve the Monarch II.

IMHO, there is a wisdom in the mass (rather than mindless adherence like some like to spread the idea), and good gear stays good, (regardless of what some edgy reviewers say.)

 

[yaluen]

Interestingly enough, in the case of the MMK2 it seems like we have an instance where it's not impossible the cable CAN audibly impact frequency response, resulting in stronger perceived midbass. One has to take into account that the MMK2's impedance is not constant wrt frequency, that the nominal impedance of 36ohms published by Thieaudio seems to be its DC value, and that its impedance curve is downward sloping and drops to as low as 6ohms in the treble. At which point it's entirely conceivable for cable impedance to be non-negligible wrt MMK2 impedance.

Confused? Required reading here: https://www.reddit.com/r/headphones...n_cable_impedance_affect_iems_and_is/dxekmc5/. Data on the MMK2 here: https://reference-audio-analyzer.pro/en/report/hp/theieaudio-monarch-mk2.php. Pay particular attention to the "Impedance" section and the "When connected to amplifiers with constant output impedance" section further down. Note that for our purposes, the effect of cables is electrically equivalent to increasing device output impedance.

HOWEVER

In practice, "audiophile" cables are typically chunky lower gauge affairs with multiple conductors per channel which equals super low impedance, can be less than a hundred milliohms. The specific case I'm thinking of where the cable could come into play for the MMK2 is with Linum's cables, their BaX is 1.5ohms and Music is 2ohms. I know of no other cable that even approaches those impedances.

Refer also to discussion regarding the Campfire Audio Andromeda where it's the inverse scenario, an upward rising impedance curve. Some people like to pair the Andro with devices with 1~2ohm output impedance to tone down the bass. Data on the Andro: https://reference-audio-analyzer.pro/en/report/hp/campfire-andromeda.php.

 

[imacaverage]

Looks like U12T are dropping like a rock on that list.
Wasn't it like in 2nd or 3rd place before?
https://crinacle.com/rankings/iems/

The u12t hit the top of the list very early, at that time there were not so many headphones with very good tone, but now, of course, there are already many models with much better tone, so it is absolutely logical that when re-rated, the u12t rating fell, since ie600 tone better than u12t

 

[Sharppain]

Absolutely. If a cable has issues (broken, partially broken, poor conductivity, etc.) or is not sufficient to transfer the current without losses (mostly irrelevant for iems, relevant for speakers) it will cause problems. In any other case there is absolutely no way that changing cables changes the sound. Different materials have no impact on the sound unless they cause issues with transferring the current (irrelevant for iems unless a cable was made from some rubbish).

The sole and only function of an iem/speaker cable is to transfer current. If that is done without losses, any and all cables have absolutely no difference between them in terms of sound.

And it is not even psychiacoustics. Psychiacoustics involve some changes in the sound in a way that creates a certain illusion. In this case it is either pure self-deception or pure selling of snake oil.

If someone tells you anything else, he/she/it has no idea about physics and cannot provide any real proof for sure (again unless there is a problem with a given cable).

My point is not to argue or change anyone's opinion. I just want to warn those readers who are open to understand something that will save them lots of money.

What about cable impedance?

 

[Sharppain]

You could try something from IFI as a source. Ive had a very nice mid bass response with the MMk2 from the Gryphon with XBass ON. Or you can try the Pegasus SG1 Gold, it gave the MMk2 an amazing deep bass. Seems like you need a quite powerfull and colored source to bring the MMk2 some shine in low frequencies.

For me Fiio 5Qs like an amp is giving all the bass I need

 

[Sharppain]

Looks like U12T are dropping like a rock on that list.
Wasn't it like in 2nd or 3rd place before?
https://crinacle.com/rankings/iems/

Looks like U12T are dropping like a rock on that list.
Wasn't it like in 2nd or 3rd place before?
https://crinacle.com/rankings/iems/

No surprise!

 

[Sharppain]

Interestingly enough, in the case of the MMK2 it seems like we have an instance where it's not impossible the cable CAN audibly impact frequency response, resulting in stronger perceived midbass. One has to take into account that the MMK2's impedance is not constant wrt frequency, that the nominal impedance of 36ohms published by Thieaudio seems to be its DC value, and that its impedance curve is downward sloping and drops to as low as 6ohms in the treble. At which point it's entirely conceivable for cable impedance to be non-negligible wrt MMK2 impedance.

Confused? Required reading here: https://www.reddit.com/r/headphones...n_cable_impedance_affect_iems_and_is/dxekmc5/. Data on the MMK2 here: https://reference-audio-analyzer.pro/en/report/hp/theieaudio-monarch-mk2.php. Pay particular attention to the "Impedance" section and the "When connected to amplifiers with constant output impedance" section further down. Note that for our purposes, the effect of cables is electrically equivalent to increasing device output impedance.

HOWEVER

In practice, "audiophile" cables are typically chunky lower gauge affairs with multiple conductors per channel which equals super low impedance, can be less than a hundred milliohms. The specific case I'm thinking of where the cable could come into play for the MMK2 is with Linum's cables, their BaX is 1.5ohms and Music is 2ohms. I know of no other cable that even approaches those impedances.

Refer also to discussion regarding the Campfire Audio Andromeda where it's the inverse scenario, an upward rising impedance curve. Some people like to pair the Andro with devices with 1~2ohm output impedance to tone down the bass. Data on the Andro: https://reference-audio-analyzer.pro/en/report/hp/campfire-andromeda.php.

I had a similar point on impedance replying a few posts ago. Are there real test with different impedance cables on MMKII?

 

[RIGATIO]

I agree with Crinacle's list and i enjoy the u12t immensely at the same time.
I already wrote on the Monarch II thread half year ago that the MMk2 are better tuned (when ive had my first u12t experience). But the u12t have great bass and layering, they sound analog and warmish to me thats why i like to listen to them.
I also dont find the u12t tuning to be weird, its actually quite normal just with a 3k scoop and they sound very correct to me, way more correct than the Mest Mk2 for example which were really odd.
The u12t arent that far from the Monarch 2 in tuning but they have at least same technicalities but better mid bass and more resolving layering. I actually find the u12t slightly less fatiguing even tho the MMk2 have slightly smoother treble response. Actually when i compare the u12t to the MMk2, the u12t sound slightly dark and warm which i like.
But yeah, to me, the MMk2 is a masterclass in almost everything.

 

[Yanec]

How do the Monarch Mk2 mids and vocals compare to Clairvoyance (and perhaps Oracle Mk1)? I know many love the MMk2 especially for the mids and looking purely at how the graphs of the three compare it seems that the Clairvoyance (and Oracle Mk1) should be no worse at least. Any impressions and thoughts highly appreciated, thanks!

 

[Sharppain]

I agree with Crinacle's list and i enjoy the u12t immensely at the same time.
I already wrote on the Monarch II thread half year ago that the MMk2 are better tuned (when ive had my first u12t experience). But the u12t have great bass and layering, they sound analog and warmish to me thats why i like to listen to them.
I also dont find the u12t tuning to be weird, its actually quite normal just with a 3k scoop and they sound very correct to me, way more correct than the Mest Mk2 for example which were really odd.
The u12t arent that far from the Monarch 2 in tuning but they have at least same technicalities but better mid bass and more resolving layering. I actually find the u12t slightly less fatiguing even tho the MMk2 have slightly smoother treble response. Actually when i compare the u12t to the MMk2, the u12t sound slightly dark and warm which i like.
But yeah, to me, the MMk2 is a masterclass in almost everything.

Probably, this is the most I agree with you. U12t does not stand the time (new lanches and previous competitors).
Enjoy:

 

[RIGATIO]

Probably, this is the most I agree with you. U12t does not stand the time (new lanches and previous competitors).
Enjoy:

Well i will say that the u12t do stand the time quite excellently. These are one of the oldest top dogs and they still sound fabulous and are one of the best iems on the market right now. If only the MMk2 had u12t's midbass, i would definitely come back to the Monarchs. But the u12t are the only iem which i can replace the MMk2 with.

 

[Sharppain]

Well, we may focus on the mid-bass, if it is a real 'issue' since it is handled quite better by some tips and daps, and depends on the music genre and library. But you may not skip the flaws of U12t - you cannot improve so much the timber and dips in FR of U12t, except you are EQing and you are a god of EQ and get a that expensive DAP.
And again, it is subjective.
For me, the MMk2 is the jack of all trades - it may not do anything the best, but its 'flaw' is not critical, might be handled, and its timber is hardly surpassed.

 

[RIGATIO]

Well, we may focus on the mid-bass, if it is a real 'issue' since it is handled quite better by some tips and daps, and depends on the music genre and library. But you may not skip the flaws of U12t - you cannot improve so much the timber and dips in FR of U12t, except you are EQing and you are a god of EQ and get a that expensive DAP.
And again, it is subjective.
For me, the MMk2 is the jack of all trades - it may not do anything the best, but its 'flaw' is not critical, might be handled, and its timber is hardly surpassed.

You don't need to convince me that the MMk2 are a better iems than the u12t, I wrote that myself

 

[Andrew_WOT]

You don't need to convince me that the MMk2 are a better iems than the u12t, I wrote that myself

Time to make up your mind.