[atechreviews]

@atechreviews Just curious how much break in does it take for the glaciers bass to sound correct?

Hey there, sorry for the delay in getting back to you; I didn't notice your message earlier. I have to say, the Glacier's bass has always sounded correct and just right to me from day one. I'm not sure if it has changed in any way; if it has, I probably wouldn't have noticed, since it's possible my brain has slowly adapted as I've been enjoying it daily for quite some time now.

 

[atechreviews]

Agree with @Somafunk. However I found the Glacier's insertion depth are deeper than most IEMs as well. As a last resort, check different sized eartips (for the Glaciers I use a size down than what I normally use for other IEMs) since seal have the potential to have a massive impact on sound, particularly in the bass region. If this doesn't work then you may have received a faulty unit.

My experience matches yours in a couple of ways! First, the Glacier's insertion depth is deeper than most IEMs I use, which gives me a good seal and is important for the bass and treble. Also, I usually go for XL ear tips on both sides, but with the Glacier, I often find myself using large or even medium tips!

 

[llysender]

Hey there, sorry for the delay in getting back to you; I didn't notice your message earlier. I have to say, the Glacier's bass has always sounded correct and just right to me from day one. I'm not sure if it has changed in any way; if it has, I probably wouldn't have noticed, since it's possible my brain has slowly adapted as I've been enjoying it daily for quite some time now.

no wories it took awhile but the demo unit glacier finally stabilised. Personally I prefer a linear tilt over harmans upper bass/lower mids death. I personally found glacier pretty nice but how pushed back things like standing double bass and alto recorders along with the uneveness of harps sadly pushed me away from it.

 

[droid23]

Regarding sibilance and it's typical s and sh prominence: let's not forget that this is pretty much an absolutely normal and natural phenomenon in people's voices. Some have it more (statistically more women since their vocal frequency range is naturally higher than in men; 5-8 kHz vs 3-6 kHz) some have it less. On the other side, the listener side, some are more sensitive to higher frequencies and pitch than others.
In other words, if a headphone has an emphasis on the higher mids and high frequencies, in order to increase signal information in that important psychoacoustic region to provide more details, so that our auditory cortex can do a better "job" to separate frequencies, can better identify and reproduce soundstage and even a natural, more "holographic" imaging, it is made with good intentions, but a possible naturally occurring sibilance is automatically reproduced with it. As said before, some people are just too sensitive and find it annoying, some even prefer it (what we call trebleheads). Most of us can deal with it for some time but then find a "treblehead headphone" fatiguing. That's all rather natural and not a sign of bad engineering of a headphone.

Glad that we have so many headphones with so many different sound signatures to choose from.

 

[atechreviews]

Is mest mk3 or glacier more surround sound/holographic? Cause from my memory mest is really holographic.

Does the surface of glacier prone to scratches?

Which iem gives more detail and resolution and which one gives more of a wow factor?

Thanks for all the replies.

I have the MEST MK III CF edition, and I'm not sure if there are differences between that and the regular version. Both the MEST MK III and the Glacier offer a great sense of surround sound and holography, but the presentation is different. I can definitely understand what people mean by the surround sound of the MEST MK III. That holographic sound is very sensitive to changes with different ear tips. It might be slightly more holographic than the Glacier, but I feel like I hear more sounds on the Glacier.

Take the song "Hotel California" as a simple example. When the drums move from left to right, I can accurately hear the bass of the drum kick and the hi-hats in the background further away. This sounds more realistic to me. On the MEST MK III, that hi-hat is more in the background, as it is farther away, and the drum kick doesn't have that bass impact I get from the Glacier. The Glacier has forward vocals, which I like, making the vocals sound more intimate and enjoyable.

I agree the MEST MK III sounds very holographic, but so is the Glacier. The presentation of the Glacier is different, allowing you to perceive more sounds in the sound field around you, with some sounds closer than others depending on the track. There's also more mid-bass on the Glacier, making the presentation of the sound stage more detailed and realistic. More sounds are perceived around you, so to speak.

1. Which IEM gives more detail and resolution? The Glacier, hands down, and by a large margin. It has more sub-bass and mid-bass, a more forward mid-range, non-harsh treble with detail and air, and more clarity and resolution as well.
2. Which IEM gives you a wow factor? Both IEMs are great, I was impressed by the surround sound of the MEST MK III, but I felt wowed by the Glacier. It could be a preference thing. I like accurate sound that has good, accurate bass. Imagine listening to a pair of accurate studio monitors in a treated room with a subwoofer. The Glacier just sounds right and shows you your music. It is detailed, accurate, wide, and immensely enjoyable.

As you can see from the picture below, I don't have any scratches on my Glacier, but I also take care of my IEMs, so this could be a reason.

 

[atechreviews]

no wories it took awhile but the demo unit glacier finally stabilised. Personally I prefer a linear tilt over harmans upper bass/lower mids death. I personally found glacier pretty nice but how pushed back things like standing double bass and alto recorders along with the uneveness of harps sadly pushed me away from it.

Awesome that you gave it a listen! Everyone's got their own tastes. It's one of the things that makes this hobby fun!

 

[o0genesis0o]

I have the MEST MK III CF edition, and I'm not sure if there are differences between that and the regular version. Both the MEST MK III and the Glacier offer a great sense of surround sound and holography, but the presentation is different. I can definitely understand what people mean by the surround sound of the MEST MK III. That holographic sound is very sensitive to changes with different ear tips. It might be slightly more holographic than the Glacier, but I feel like I hear more sounds on the Glacier.

Take the song "Hotel California" as a simple example. When the drums move from left to right, I can accurately hear the bass of the drum kick and the hi-hats in the background further away. This sounds more realistic to me. On the MEST MK III, that hi-hat is more in the background, as it is farther away, and the drum kick doesn't have that bass impact I get from the Glacier. The Glacier has forward vocals, which I like, making the vocals sound more intimate and enjoyable.

I agree the MEST MK III sounds very holographic, but so is the Glacier. The presentation of the Glacier is different, allowing you to perceive more sounds in the sound field around you, with some sounds closer than others depending on the track. There's also more mid-bass on the Glacier, making the presentation of the sound stage more detailed and realistic. More sounds are perceived around you, so to speak.

1. Which IEM gives more detail and resolution? The Glacier, hands down, and by a large margin. It has more sub-bass and mid-bass, a more forward mid-range, non-harsh treble with detail and air, and more clarity and resolution as well.
2. Which IEM gives you a wow factor? Both IEMs are great, I was impressed by the surround sound of the MEST MK III, but I felt wowed by the Glacier. It could be a preference thing. I like accurate sound that has good, accurate bass. Imagine listening to a pair of accurate studio monitors in a treated room with a subwoofer. The Glacier just sounds right and shows you your music. It is detailed, accurate, wide, and immensely enjoyable.

As you can see from the picture below, I don't have any scratches on my Glacier, but I also take care of my IEMs, so this could be a reason.

One can be over the moon if they can have either of these

 

[cagix]

Yes i know tips efect on ara. It is different iem. On box tips is very 2 d like thin you listen only highs. On fiio fd 5 tips is much stronger fullbody song deeper, biger. But glacier must be realy strong. Tough time is timsok ts 316 is incredible strong iem better laser like sound projection than ara it is like digital filter on iem.

 

[atechreviews]

One can be over the moon if they can have either of these

I'd be over the moon if I had the Elysian Annihilator like someone in this forum—cough @o0genesis0o cough lol!

 

[cagix]

Owner of my timsok have it this annihilator. Maybe it is as good like hifiman he 1000 se or sennheiser hd 800 but who know. My brother setup is stupidly good his gsx mini with gustard a 26. He return he 1000 se back to shop because from memory hd 800 have more highs he 1000 se is touch smoother. And it was true.

 

[Thomastb]

I have the MEST MK III CF edition, and I'm not sure if there are differences between that and the regular version. Both the MEST MK III and the Glacier offer a great sense of surround sound and holography, but the presentation is different. I can definitely understand what people mean by the surround sound of the MEST MK III. That holographic sound is very sensitive to changes with different ear tips. It might be slightly more holographic than the Glacier, but I feel like I hear more sounds on the Glacier.

Take the song "Hotel California" as a simple example. When the drums move from left to right, I can accurately hear the bass of the drum kick and the hi-hats in the background further away. This sounds more realistic to me. On the MEST MK III, that hi-hat is more in the background, as it is farther away, and the drum kick doesn't have that bass impact I get from the Glacier. The Glacier has forward vocals, which I like, making the vocals sound more intimate and enjoyable.

I agree the MEST MK III sounds very holographic, but so is the Glacier. The presentation of the Glacier is different, allowing you to perceive more sounds in the sound field around you, with some sounds closer than others depending on the track. There's also more mid-bass on the Glacier, making the presentation of the sound stage more detailed and realistic. More sounds are perceived around you, so to speak.

1. Which IEM gives more detail and resolution? The Glacier, hands down, and by a large margin. It has more sub-bass and mid-bass, a more forward mid-range, non-harsh treble with detail and air, and more clarity and resolution as well.
2. Which IEM gives you a wow factor? Both IEMs are great, I was impressed by the surround sound of the MEST MK III, but I felt wowed by the Glacier. It could be a preference thing. I like accurate sound that has good, accurate bass. Imagine listening to a pair of accurate studio monitors in a treated room with a subwoofer. The Glacier just sounds right and shows you your music. It is detailed, accurate, wide, and immensely enjoyable.

As you can see from the picture below, I don't have any scratches on my Glacier, but I also take care of my IEMs, so this could be a reason.

Thanks for the amazing detailed explanation. Much appreciated. I have also subscribed to your channel. Keep up with the good work, support!

 

[atechreviews]

Thanks for the amazing detailed explanation. Much appreciated. I have also subscribed to your channel. Keep up with the good work, support!

Thank you for your support, I really appreciate it.

 

[Gromu]

Thank you @DUNU-Topsound for the Titanium Grey Dunu Falcon Ultra as part of the giveaway! These are a beautiful pair of IEMs. I received them last week and have been listening to them quite a bit in both tuning nozzles. I prefer the nozzles that match the body (worded this way because of the identically tuned blue version) due to the warmer, more laid-back tuning, but it is nice to have the option to swap on the gold nozzle and add a bit of zing to the upper mids. It also seems to open up the presentation of the sound, at least to my ears. The highlight of these IEMs is definitely the bass, with it hitting hard without taking away too much from the mids and still having plenty up top to satisfy people that like a bit of sparkle.

 

[MaxBass]

Hey there, sorry for the late reply; I didn't see your message earlier. I've been using the DUNU Glacier as my daily driver since I got it, and I'm loving it more and more every day. Whether the 's' and 'sh' sounds are emphasized can depend on personal sensitivity and preferences. But in my opinion, the Glacier doesn't make these sounds harsh. I'm someone who's sensitive to treble, and I listen to a lot of rock and metal, but I've never found the Glacier to be harsh or sibilant. The 's' and 'sh' sounds are there, and they're clear and forward. It's also important to remember that the quality of the recording can affect how harsh or smooth the music sounds. The Glacier is a very detailed IEM that faithfully reproduces what's in your music, and listening at loud volumes just reveals more detail without adding harshness. However, it's always good to get another opinion before making a decision, as this is just my experience with the Glacier.

Just a friendly reminder that some sounds can be harsh in real life!

Thank you for your reply,

I do have and have had some flagship IEMs and I will try to write a review about them and compare.
I'm a bit sensitive to the upper mids and harsh sounds but you have convinced me so so much from your video , reviews and your comments that they are now on their way to me. I'll let you know how much i like them as I , like you, i like clarity , soundstage and bass.

 

[atechreviews]

Thank you for your reply,

I do have and have had some flagship IEMs and I will try to write a review about them and compare.
I'm a bit sensitive to the upper mids and harsh sounds but you have convinced me so so much from your video , reviews and your comments that they are now on their way to me. I'll let you know how much i like them as I , like you, i like clarity , soundstage and bass.

No problem, and welcome to the club! I am treble-sensitive but not sensitive to upper mids. It's great that you have other flagship IEMs for accurate comparisons. When you get them, ensure a deep insertion and achieve a good seal by experimenting with the different ear tips. Personally, I use lower-sized ear tips with the Glacier. We're looking forward to hearing your thoughts; no one has written a review of the Glacier yet, so you could be the first!