[MarkParity]

A couple of initial impressions from me on the MACH 80.

1. The much lower sensitivity and higher impedance numbers give no hiss that I can detect when using the MACH 80 with the iFi XDSD Gryphon from the 3.5mm output. The W80 does hiss without IEMatch switched on with the Gryphon.
2. The MACH 80 is quite a bit hotter in the treble region, its probably that peak around 8Khz. I know plenty of people here on Head-Fi will not like that. Its OK I think for me at the lower volume levels I listen at though.

The MACH 80 requires very similar volume settings to the UE 18+ Pro due to its similar sensitivity number.

I think the MACH 80 will make a good pairing with the slightly more laid back sound from the new Sony NW-WM1xxx Walkman's I've been reading about, which I may also own in the future.

Will I keep the MACH 80 yes I will its different enough from the W80 and SE846 to own all three for me anyway.

More "impressions" for what they are worth from me as I figure things out.

 

[Zachik]

Will I keep the MACH 80 yes I will its different enough from the W80

I will be curious to hear more about this specific comparison... MACH 80 vs. W80.

 

[MarkParity]

I will be curious to hear more about this specific comparison... MACH 80 vs. W80.

I will try my best, but I find it difficult, my audio memory is so short that by the time I've got one out of my ears and the other one in I've forgotten what the other one sounded like. Also volume matching is difficult as they need quite a change to output volume to get the same levels.

The very sparkly treble of the MACH 80 verses the W80 is obvious even to me though. The soundstage of MACH 80 is considerably better, larger, wider, taller whatever, when compared to the W80.

Probably better to wait for you or Twister to do the real comparisons as he is awesome at it. Lets see if he agrees with me.

MACH 80 sounds excellent with the TempoTec Sonata HD dongle DAC too BTW.

 

[MarkParity]

Just comparing the MACH 80 to the Sennheiser IE 900 to the W80. Source is Hugo 2 as it has two outputs and allows a quicker swap-over when testing.

Test track, You spin me round (Like a record) - Dead Or Alive - Stranger Things S4 soundtrack. (I will admit this track does highlight the brighter signature issue the MACH 80 has for me)

The only stand out differences for me is that the W80 wins in the mids. The W80 to me has a great balanced sound signature, the IE 900 has the better bass and the MACH 80 is incredibly bright, who at Westone decided this was the way to go?

I do get adjusted to the MACH 80 over a short period of time but when doing a direct comparison of the three, well the MACH 80 all I can say is, where can I get a spare W80, which was my original plan before the MACH 80 released.

I think the MACH 80 has been designed to stand out from the crowd and IMHO its just trying too hard, like all the TV's in the showroom the one with the vivid picture stands out from the rest but can you live with it at home.

And that concludes my impressions of the MACH 80, I wish it was better news, sorry Westone.

 

[Zachik]

Test track, You spin me round (Like a record) - Dead Or Alive - Stranger Things S4 soundtrack. (I will admit this track does highlight the brighter signature issue the MACH 80 has for me)

I will look for this track, to test with the MACH 60 and 70 (I do not have the 80).
My plan is to finish my MACH 60 vs. 70 writeup later today...

 

[InvisibleInk]

Just comparing the MACH 80 to the Sennheiser IE 900 to the W80. Source is Hugo 2 as it has two outputs and allows a quicker swap-over when testing.

Test track, You spin me round (Like a record) - Dead Or Alive - Stranger Things S4 soundtrack. (I will admit this track does highlight the brighter signature issue the MACH 80 has for me)

The only stand out differences for me is that the W80 wins in the mids. The W80 to me has a great balanced sound signature, the IE 900 has the better bass and the MACH 80 is incredibly bright, who at Westone decided this was the way to go?

I do get adjusted to the MACH 80 over a short period of time but when doing a direct comparison of the three, well the MACH 80 all I can say is, where can I get a spare W80, which was my original plan before the MACH 80 released.

I think the MACH 80 has been designed to stand out from the crowd and IMHO its just trying too hard, like all the TV's in the showroom the one with the vivid picture stands out from the rest but can you live with it at home.

And that concludes my impressions of the MACH 80, I wish it was better news, sorry Westone.

I see you have Ety dual flanges mounted. Do the Ety foamies, also mount? Thanks in advance

 

[Zachik]

Westone Audio MACH 60 vs. MACH 70

Today, I am going to share with you my personal impressions of the newly announced Westone Audio MACH 60 and MACH 70. I am going to focus mostly on comparing the 2 models, instead of writing up stand-alone impressions on either of them. I plan to post a couple more comparisons in the coming days: MACH 70 vs. ES70 (which is a custom IEM), and MACH 60 (or MACH 70) vs. W80 (the recently discontinued top model 8-driver IEMs).

Before I begin, here is my “perceived reviewer bias" warning:
I am associated with (and consult to) Etymotic and Westone Audio (both are part of the Lucid Audio parent company). Also, I received the MACH 60 and 70 IEMs free of charge. Having said that, the writing below reflects my honest opinions, and there was no influence or pressure by Westone Audio. My reputation is VERY important to me, and I will not write something that I cannot stand behind full heartedly. If you do not believe that, or trust my opinions to be truthful and honest – please stop reading and do not waste your time. I will not be offended!


Comparing the shells

Size and shape wise, the MACH 60 and MACH 70 shells look identical to me. Both fit my ears very well.
The W80 shells are smaller, but I believe that unless you have tiny ears – the MACH series IEMs should fit easily.

Comparing the cables

The MACH 60 comes stock with the black isolation SuperBaX cable. MACH 70 comes with the higher-end UltraBaX cable, that looks much cooler IMHO with its see-through isolation.

Unfortunately, both cables are terminated with 3.5mm plug. I think Westone Audio should have provided a balanced cable with 4.4mm termination, and an adapter from 4.4mm balanced to 3.5mm SE. In this day and age, high-end IEMs targeting audiophiles should come with balanced cables as default, in my opinion. Alternatively, several companies are selling cables with user replaceable plug and include 2.5mm, 3.5mm and 4.4mm. That would have been an awesome option, too.

Speaking of termination and connectors, the MACH series IEMs all use T2 connectors that were previously introduced by Etymotic’s EVO IEMs. For those not familiar, T2 connectors look a little like a smaller MMCX connector, but mechanically it is superior to MMCX. The cable ecosystem for T2 connectors is not as readily available as MMCX or 2-pin connectors, but it has been improving in the year since the introduction of the Etymotic EVO. Hopefully, now that more and more IEMs start using the T2 connectors – the availability of T2 cables would improve quickly.

Sound - test setup

For all my testing and comparisons, I used my FiiO M11 DAP. Out of my collection of sources – I believe the M11 is very neutral and closest to being analytical. Most my other sources are leaning towards warm and musical. I wanted to make sure that I have no external added color or flavor to the MACH IEMs being tested. I really like the M11 as source also because it includes 3.5mm, 2.5mm and 4.4mm headphone jacks – granted only the 3.5mm has been used since both IEMs came with SE 3.5mm cable only.

All test tracks are lossless FLAC files stored locally (microSD card) on the M11 DAP. No streaming. Also, the M11 was set to high gain, and the volume was manually matched – read more about that in the next section…


Ease of driving (or: power requirement)

When comparing IEMs, it is crucial to make sure the volume is matched. It is a very well known phenomena that if volume is not matched – the louder IEM would be conceived as better and more detailed. I was very careful to make sure that does not happen here.
I did not use a measurement device for volume matching, just my ears, but I believe I have done a good job on that one. When it comes to loudness or power requirements – these 2 IEMs are quite different in their needs:

• MACH 60 – sensitivity is 100dB @ 1kHz and impedance of 35 Ohms.
• MACH 70 – sensitivity is 110dB @ 1kHz and impedance of 42 Ohms.

Despite the slightly higher impedance, due to the MUCH higher sensitivity – the MACH 70 is much easier to drive. The volume adjustment on the M11 was significant for matching loudness.


Sound comparison – intro / general notes

As a reviewer, it could get stressful for me when I know I should compare 2 IEMs (or other pieces of gear) that I expect to sound very similar…

“What if my hearing is not good enough to notice the tiny differences?”

“What if my auditory memory fails me? It takes me a good 10 seconds to swap IEMs.”

You get the idea… well, the good news when it comes to MACH 60 vs. MACH 70 – my concerns evaporated almost immediately! Some differences between those 2 IEMs were big enough that I could not miss them even if I tried:

• MACH 70 clearly has more bass! Read on for more details on that.
• MACH 70 beats the MACH 60 on details and resolution. The difference is not subtle at all. That is not to say the MACH 60 is bad. Not at all. But moving up to the 70 really does feel like moving up in detail and resolution!
• 3D layering and holographic head-stage: this one is a little harder to put into words (but that does not mean I won’t try…). Some of my test tracks, with the right headphones or IEMs, would create an amazing illusion of the sound coming from all over and not from the 2 tiny IEMs stuck in your ears. A good example is the short ‘Imaginary Friends’ by Deadmau5 track. This track would actually make me a little dizzy and disoriented for a few seconds with the "sound goes from side to side” effect. Give it a try! Anyhow, with MACH 70 this effect was very very good, and when switching to the MACH 60 – it felt like it was just not the same… something that cannot be quantified was missing (likely due to less sub-bass, if I had to guess).

Sound comparison break-down

Bass

This region is very personal taste dependent. I am a mild case of a basshead. For me, the extra bass and sub-bass of the MACH 70 made it my favorite of the 2 immediately!

Having said that, the actual music you listen to is a factor here. Tracks that are not very bassy – sounded great with the MACH 60 to me. I did not feel that anything was missing at all, and I truly enjoyed non-bassy tracks with the MACH 60. The tracks that were just too anemic for my taste had mostly sub-bass rumble that I kept looking for (and found with the MACH 70). Couple examples are Royals by Lorde and ‘Unleash the Albannach’ by Albannach. Another track that was just not good fit for the MACH 60 was the ‘Imaginary Friends’ by Deadmau5 that I mentioned above, and I think the lack of sufficient sub-bass was the reason for the holographic “experience” being lacking with the MACH 60 compared to the MACH 70.

On the other hand, listening to Norah Jones, Adele, a-ha (MTV unplugged) and other non-bassy (or non-sub-bassy) tracks left me satisfied with the MACH 60, and mid-bass was present when called for. The drums in ‘I wish I had an angel’ by Nightwish are plenty satisfying with the MACH 60. Nobody can call it bass lite, but the MACH 70 introduces sub-bass and mid-bass boost that would satisfy some (me included!).

Mids

To my ears, the biggest difference in the mid range is the detail retrieval and resolution. I know the whole “veiled” and “veil was removed” terms have been used to death in audio reviews, and I really hate using them, so I will try to use other terms or analogies…

Using the MACH 60 first, listening to a-ha ‘Take on me’ (MTV unplugged), Adele’s ‘Hello’ and Dire Straits ‘Sultans of Swing’ (all part of my normal test tracks) – I was happy with MACH 60 and those tracks. I really was. The mids sounded great – clear and very pleasant. Then, I switched over to the MACH 70, and listened to the same tracks again. The jump in resolution and details was not subtle! The analogy I would use here is reading text on a 1080p computer monitor, and then switching to a 4K display. Everything looks more in-focus, clearer, and cleaner. Then, moving back to the old monitor – the text that was good before, now feels pixelated and slightly blurry. That is the difference between the MACH 60 and 70. Nothing wrong with the 60, until you try the 70 and realize it CAN be better!

Treble

Similar observation to the mids, but to a lesser extent. The MACH 70 treble sounds more detailed to my ears, but the detail or resolution gap is smaller in the treble region compared to the mids region. I would add here that the treble sounds a little different to my ears – hard to put my finger on it, and I am not sure if it is influenced by the elevated bass of the MACH 70 or by some differences in the treble tuning.

With my test tracks, out of the FiiO M11 – neither IEM sounded too bright or sibilant to me. I would venture a guess that for longer listening sessions – the MACH 60 is probably less fatiguing than the MACH 70, but that is not to say the MACH 70 causes fatigue. The MACH 70 just feels more energetic and exciting, while the MACH 60 is more laid back.

In term of treble extension, I would have to first add the caveat that my ears are no longer in their teens or twenties, so I would not trust them to hear ultra-treble, and therefore IF there is a difference there – I would probably not hear it… with that caveat out of the way, I could not really detect any difference in treble roll-off.


Summary

Westone Audio MACH series, at least the MACH 60 and 70 that I got to audition, are a welcome refresh. Those 2 models are much more different from each other than I would have guessed before I started my audition. I truly am enjoying both, and will try to help potentials buyers make a decision between MACH 60 and 70 (knowing that MACH 80 might change these a little, but I have no 1st hand experience yet):

• If you’re an un-apologetic bass-head, get the MACH 70. Period. No question.
• If you prefer a more energetic and exciting sound – get the MACH 70.
• If you tend to have marathon listening sessions, say 8 hours while working – MACH 60 is likely better suited for you.
• If the most important attribute is a flat frequency response – MACH 60.
• If details and resolution matters above all else – get MACH 70. This is where the MACH 80 might change the decision...

Thank you for reading my impressions of comparing the MACH 60 to the MACH 70, and let me know if you have any questions

 

[qsk78]

Interesting. I remember that the W60 (1st generation, at least) was a mild bass-head IEM that time (emphases in mid bass).

 

[MarkParity]

I see you have Ety dual flanges mounted. Do the Ety foamies, also mount? Thanks in advance

Yes the Ety foams will fit and also the yellow and "olive" foams from Shure will fit, they are all interchangeable.

Anyone who hasn't tried the Ety dual flange tips on the Westone should give them a try too, for me the fit and seal is perfect but I am starting to wonder if these tips are adding too much brightness to the MACH 80's sound signature, I will test it shortly.

 

[Zachik]

Interesting. I remember that the W60 (1st generation, at least) was a mild bass-head IEM that time (emphases in mid bass).

MACH 60 mid-bass is not lacking, but not emphasized either.
However, to my ears and taste, MACH 60 sub-bass is lacking, and therefore not a great fit for genres that rely on good sub-bass (EDM, hip-hop, etc.).

 

[Zachik]

but I am starting to wonder if these tips are adding too much brightness to the MACH 80's sound signature

That is the reason that whenever possible - I am testing IEMs with their stock tips ("the way they were intended to sound")...

 

[MarkParity]

Treble

Similar observation to the mids, but to a lesser extent. The MACH 70 treble sounds more detailed to my ears, but the detail or resolution gap is smaller in the treble region compared to the mids region. I would add here that the treble sounds a little different to my ears – hard to put my finger on it, and I am not sure if it is influenced by the elevated bass of the MACH 70 or by some differences in the treble tuning.

With my test tracks, out of the FiiO M11 – neither IEM sounded too bright or sibilant to me. I would venture a guess that for longer listening sessions – the MACH 60 is probably less fatiguing than the MACH 70, but that is not to say the MACH 70 causes fatigue. The MACH 70 just feels more energetic and exciting, while the MACH 60 is more laid back.

In term of treble extension, I would have to first add the caveat that my ears are no longer in their teens or twenties, so I would not trust them to hear ultra-treble, and therefore IF there is a difference there – I would probably not hear it… with that caveat out of the way, I could not really detect any difference in treble roll-off.

Great review, interesting that our opinions of the treble region differ slightly although you haven't heard the MACH 80 yet.

60 - Red
70 - Blue
80 - Green

They all look similar in the 8k peak so unless its the 5.5k peak I'm sensitive to they would most likely all sound on the brighter side to me anyway.

Perhaps the MACH 60 as its flat a 5.5k so logically would be a better choice for me I will have to see if I can demo one.

 

[MarkParity]

That is the reason that whenever possible - I am testing IEMs with their stock tips ("the way they were intended to sound")...

OK I tried the Westone tips, the longer ones with the red core, still a bright sound signature.

I then tried the red cored foam tips, those are difficult to get on, I was worried about breaking the nozzle. still bright.

I then tried the Shure yellow foams, you guessed it still bright.

The foam tips do enhance the Bass though, which sounds nice on the MACH 80 but seem to make, for me anyway, very little difference to the mids and treble.

Westone have obviously tuned these on the brighter side, I don't think anything other than EQ can fix this, but I don't generally EQ, anyone who does will be fine with the MACH 80 I'm sure.

Have a listen to Forget about the World - Gabrielle, or any Gabrielle track, or heck any female vocals you will get what I mean, its sss, sss, sss.

 

[Zachik]

Great review, interesting that our opinions of the treble region differ slightly although you haven't heard the MACH 80 yet.



60 - Red
70 - Blue
80 - Green

They all look similar in the 8k peak so unless its the 5.5k peak I'm sensitive to they would most likely all sound on the brighter side to me anyway.

Perhaps the MACH 60 as its flat a 5.5k so logically would be a better choice for me I will have to see if I can demo one.

I guess @vsg28 or @twister6 (both of whom got the MACH 60, 70 and 80) could chime in here, and let us know whether they hear the brightness of the MACH 80 that you're hearing. They can also shed some light of MACH 80 vs. 60 (or vs. 70) with regards to the 60/70 being less bright than 80 model?

Looking at the @vsg28 generated MACH 60/70/80 overlap FR graphs (which are awesome) - I am wondering which track or instruments should I listen to, in order to hear the difference in the 5.5kHz peaks...

 

[Zachik]

Have a listen to Forget about the World - Gabrielle, or any Gabrielle track, or heck any female vocals you will get what I mean, its sss, sss, sss.

I will look for this track and give it a listen with the MACH 60 and 70...