[jrazmar]

Most probably I'm preferring the graphene over the cygnus now because of the slightly recessed mids or could it be that the soundstage is better on the graphene which helps with the overall tuning and separation. I could understand that there may be inconsistency with the builds or different versions of this graphene earbuds being a DIY but maybe I'm just lucky to have a more coherent and ear-friendly unit. Thanks @seanc6441 for your inputs. Do you know if the graphene requires burn-in to sound at its fullest? Listening to it now, I'm still amazed how holographic the sound is and how I can turn the volume more than on the cygnus and EMX500 without sounding "shouty" while maintaining balance across the spectrum. If it could have the mids quality of the cygnus, then this could be the perfect earphone for me. I will report here if that impression changes over time.

 

[chinmie]

@jrazmar sorry i haven't hear the Cygnus yet so i can't comment.
The graphene doesn't really need burn in.it might smoothen out a little, but it's pretty much the same.

 

[mochill]

Everything needs burn in

 

[jrazmar]

@jrazmar sorry i haven't hear the Cygnus yet so i can't comment.
The graphene doesn't really need burn in.it might smoothen out a little, but it's pretty much the same.

Not a problem, chinmie. Listening now via my P1 with BBE on and just randomly selected a song (Spanish Harlem by Rebecca Pidgeon) and wow. Normally if I'm not familiar with the song, I immediately press the Next button. Not in this case and ended up finishing the whole song with a big grin on my face.

 

[jrazmar]

One thing that I discovered though, maybe it's also synergy. My graphene sounds better overall (more impactful, more separated, more holographic) on my Google Pixel via Spotify extreme quality than on my P1 with and without BBE with 320kbps mp3s. Not sure why but I ended up listening to my phone.

 

[waynes world]

Most probably I'm preferring the graphene over the cygnus now because of the slightly recessed mids or could it be that the soundstage is better on the graphene which helps with the overall tuning and separation. I could understand that there may be inconsistency with the builds or different versions of this graphene earbuds being a DIY but maybe I'm just lucky to have a more coherent and ear-friendly unit. Thanks @seanc6441 for your inputs. Do you know if the graphene requires burn-in to sound at its fullest? Listening to it now, I'm still amazed how holographic the sound is and how I can turn the volume more than on the cygnus and EMX500 without sounding "shouty" while maintaining balance across the spectrum. If it could have the mids quality of the cygnus, then this could be the perfect earphone for me. I will report here if that impression changes over time.

We are kindred graphene spirits my friend!

 

[HungryPanda]

graphene drivers are pretty good, at least all the ones I've heard

 

[MarkCavendish]

that's why im really love how graphene sounding, except they cable ,really easy to oxidation

 

[chinmie]

The mx760 graphene is good, but my favourite graphene buds is the **** PT15

 

[jrazmar]

Honestly, it's the first time ever for me to really enjoy very extended treble in music without a hint of harshness or unsolicited spikes. At the same time, all the right notes are not in any way missing or lacking. In fact, it's very tasty and makes me want to listen to music types (modern pop music for example) that I don't normally finish listening more due to early fatigue and discomfort. This graphene thing has its magic working. Whether it's real or fake, NiceHCK did a fantastic job with the tuning. I'm in the office now but I can't put the phone down anytime soon. The best part is it's only $29. Wondering how the higher-priced EBX sounds like but I think it's not graphene.

 

[WC Annihilus]

I'm ready

 

[AmericanEDC]

All I see from the original post is a series of photos and identifying labels. Can someone please tell me how to see the reviews or explanations regarding each of the headphones. I've been launching pages and it's a running discussion that I have no reference for. Any suggestions? Thank you! I have a couple pair on the way that people have recommended. The VE Monk Plus is one of them.

 

[seanc6441]

All I see from the original post is a series of photos and identifying labels. Can someone please tell me how to see the reviews or explanations regarding each of the headphones. I've been launching pages and it's a running discussion that I have no reference for. Any suggestions? Thank you! I have a couple pair on the way that people have recommended. The VE Monk Plus is one of them.

I suggest sticking to the latter pages for more relevant suggestions, VE monk plus is somewhat obsolete in today's budget earbuds, you can get better SQ for a similar price.

Have a look at this https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...2RK-1_XnAo/pubhtml?gid=1362510242&single=true

Each tier represents an approximate price group, tier 5 costing around $3-20 and tier 1 $200-500, and you can use the search function to find out more about each of the buds ranked here.

Alternatively you can give us a rough idea of price, sound signature, fit (if you want a smaller or bigger shell for comfort) and maybe what genres of music you listen to.

Then we can recommend you some options!

 

[teesui]

All I see from the original post is a series of photos and identifying labels. Can someone please tell me how to see the reviews or explanations regarding each of the headphones. I've been launching pages and it's a running discussion that I have no reference for. Any suggestions? Thank you! I have a couple pair on the way that people have recommended. The VE Monk Plus is one of them.

You can use the "Search this Thread" feature find reviews/impressions of a particular earbud.

 

[mbwilson111]

The VE Monk Plus is one of them.

VE monk plus is somewhat obsolete in today's budget earbuds,

I love my Monks. Never hurts to start with a classic...especially for the price. Whenever I put in my Monks, I end up listening for hours..totally enjoying my music.