[yaps66]

 

[TibiR]

Are these CIEM MSE ?

 

[yaps66]

Are these CIEM MSE ?

Indeed! Love them!

 

[SCYJ]

I don't think so, it's the same drivers, sounds cleaner because it's slightly tuned down by the pressure relief system. Still doesn't match BA bass for precision. I'm talking planar magnetic bass driver or something else like that.

My memory of GM's bass is hazy, but I'm waiting for my CIEM to come. But from what I remember, its significantly different from MSE. I don't think them being the same drivers mean anything. Neither do I think that the pressure relief system is the only explanation for GM's bass vs MSE's bass difference. I recently demo-ed MSE and I remember it being very different. I know its very different because I almost hate MSE's bass presentation, but love the GM's.

For example, while GM's bass is slightly tamer, is it also much more separated (it comes from left and right of my head). For MSE, the bass has more volume than GM, but it also comes in front of me, in between me and the vocals. The difference in separation and placement of the bass affects the midbass presentation too (and how much bass bleeds into mids), thus making GM's bass overall much cleaner than MSE's, and so a significant upgrade for one looking for a cleaner bass. It's not all just the volume tuned down. I believe they tuned the bass drivers a little differently too, or maybe driver placement is different. I'm not sure. But MSE's bass is just so different from GM's bass for me. And my impressions are with a very deep fit (both models fit me like a custom).

Can't comment on BA bass precision. But we're dealing with DD, so inherently its not gonna be the same.

 

[KinGensai]

My memory of GM's bass is hazy, but I'm waiting for my CIEM to come. But from what I remember, its significantly different from MSE. I don't think them being the same drivers mean anything. Neither do I think that the pressure relief system is the only explanation for GM's bass vs MSE's bass difference. I recently demo-ed MSE and I remember it being very different. I know its very different because I almost hate MSE's bass presentation, but love the GM's.

For example, while GM's bass is slightly tamer, is it also much more separated (it comes from left and right of my head). For MSE, the bass has more volume than GM, but it also comes in front of me, in between me and the vocals. The difference in separation and placement of the bass affects the midbass presentation too (and how much bass bleeds into mids), thus making GM's bass overall much cleaner than MSE's, and so a significant upgrade for one looking for a cleaner bass. It's not all just the volume tuned down. I believe they tuned the bass drivers a little differently too, or maybe driver placement is different. I'm not sure. But MSE's bass is just so different from GM's bass for me. And my impressions are with a very deep fit (both models fit me like a custom).

Can't comment on BA bass precision. But we're dealing with DD, so inherently its not gonna be the same.

If the drivers are the same, the baseline technical performance exhibited by both models will be the same. GM's bass response is tuned significantly lower (>1dB) starting around 150Hz and deviating -4 dB at 20Hz, this then means that the DD's diaphragm possibly articulates less for the GM than the MSE at the same amplitude normalized at 1kHz, leading to possibly less THD & IMD due to the most impactful principle frequency being at such a comparatively lower amplitude.

The NOAH modules in the GM dissipate some of the bass energy as well, which changes the perception of spatiality to being more open as you noted. It also reduces the felt compression of air, leading to lessened sub bass extension. My demo with the GM demonstrated as much to my ear, this comes down to taste. It makes the GM a bit more versatile because acoustic music benefits from the more diffuse bass presentation, but you can achieve this effect in other ways, like ventilating the tips or using thinner core/flange tips.

Other than the necessary small vent for the DD to function, the MSE is not vented at all, so all that bass generated goes straight to the nozzle or gets absorbed by the shell, so the effect is that significant bass boost vs the GM. It results in perceiving the bass more fully, which includes the elevated non-linear distortion and relatively longer impulse response characteristic to DDs in general. Frankly, I'm impressed that the bass is as clear as it is, the MSE is not messing around with quantity of bass, so I think that elongated nozzle has something to do with increasing felt amplitude by compressing the air as it travels to the eardrum. IEMs that don't generate as much bass clip from overexcursion sometimes, and I haven't heard the MSE clip a single time yet.

Neither the GM or MSE can generate as clean a bass response as my Anole V14 EQed to a similar bass amplitude. As I mentioned previously, the GM and MSE bring better sub bass extension and a more natural presentation of bass due to the longer impulse response and higher relative SPL per dB of the DD to compensate.

 

[Sebastien Chiu]

I may have sounded a bit too critical in retrospect, these have required the least EQ to reach my preferred sound so far. As far as DD bass goes, these are the cleanest I've heard despite the party time sub bass, the sub bass extension digs really deep and feels great.

Overall, these are worth the hype. I think my QDC V14 has cleaner playback in the bass, but it loses the magic rumble the MSE brings because it lacks the sub bass extension (V14 goes down to around 10Hz, I feel the MSE pushing air down to 4Hz).

If Fatfreq ever releases a successor flagship level IEM that improves on the bass response further, I'd pretty much auto buy.

Isn't that just the GM? Subbass still digs deep but much cleaner.

I don't think so, it's the same drivers, sounds cleaner because it's slightly tuned down by the pressure relief system. Still doesn't match BA bass for precision. I'm talking planar magnetic bass driver or something else like that.

Thanks for the suggestion, guys! Yes, GM is same drivers and different tuning. It's not just the pressure relief system that's the only differentiating factor to the MSE.

Indeed! Love them!

Those look awesome! hope you're having a great time with them. How's the isolation for you?

My memory of GM's bass is hazy, but I'm waiting for my CIEM to come. But from what I remember, it's significantly different from MSE. I don't think them being the same drivers mean anything. Neither do I think that the pressure relief system is the only explanation for GM's bass vs MSE's bass difference. I recently demo-ed MSE and I remember it being very different. I know it's very different because I almost hate MSE's bass presentation, but love the GM's.

For example, while GM's bass is slightly tamer, is it also much more separated (it comes from left and right of my head). For MSE, the bass has more volume than GM, but it also comes in front of me, in between me and the vocals. The difference in separation and placement of the bass affects the midbass presentation too (and how much bass bleeds into mids), thus making GM's bass overall much cleaner than MSE's, and so a significant upgrade for one looking for a cleaner bass. It's not all just the volume tuned down. I believe they tuned the bass drivers a little differently too, or maybe driver placement is different. I'm not sure. But MSE's bass is just so different from GM's bass for me. And my impressions are with a very deep fit (both models fit me like a custom).

Can't comment on BA bass precision. But we're dealing with DD, so inherently its not gonna be the same.

Yep!

In my experience, BA bass or DD bass doesn't limit how precise something can be. It's more important that we focus on the tuning and implementation of the drivers matter more than the type.

Technology is getting to the point of where it doesn't matter anymore as much as it use to. Drivers are as much as a creative choice as they are a technical choice today.

(Re-itertating, this is my personal point of view).

 

[yaps66]

Those look awesome! hope you're having a great time with them. How's the isolation for you?

Isolation is great! This is my first customs so no comparison basis for me. However, if foams provide good isolation, these provide even better isolation than foams for me.

 

[TibiR]

At this moment the beat IEMs I have are Monarch MK3 and Kinera Loki.
Both are great, in thier own ways , but I might be tempted to trade the Loki for a GM.....from the comments above , I feel like GM would be more more to my liking vs MSE.
By any chance can anyone make a brief comparison Loki vs GM (or MSE) or M MKIII vs GM.

Thank you

 

[SCYJ]

At this moment the beat IEMs I have are Monarch MK3 and Kinera Loki.
Both are great, in thier own ways , but I might be tempted to trade the Loki for a GM.....from the comments above , I feel like GM would be more more to my liking vs MSE.
By any chance can anyone make a brief comparison Loki vs GM (or MSE) or M MKIII vs GM.

Thank you

Loki: Very good bass quality, one of the best I've heard. Great quantity too. Good treble extension. But my problem with Loki is the extremely forward uppermids, putting the singer shouting right in my face and making sound quite unbalanced. Loki's midrange is just totally not my cup of tea.

GM: The perfect fine line with between "all the bass into the world" and "too much bass". Imagine having all the deep rumble you want, without ever crossing that fine line and veiling over vocals. Great quality too, especially that DD feel. Loki edges it only for quality of punch (Loki's midbass texture is smth like Z1R and Storm) but GM is a bass monster. GM also has neutral midrange with ethereally presented female vocals, and its treble is one of the most airy IEM's I've heard (only behind the Annihilator).

MMK3: Can't say much cuz I couldn't get a good fit. But tuning sounded very weird compared to MMK2, and something in the treble probably contributed to that. I much prefer MMK2 over MMK3.

 

[TibiR]

Loki: Very good bass quality, one of the best I've heard. Great quantity too. Good treble extension. But my problem with Loki is the extremely forward uppermids, putting the singer shouting right in my face and making sound quite unbalanced. Loki's midrange is just totally not my cup of tea.

GM: The perfect fine line with between "all the bass into the world" and "too much bass". Imagine having all the deep rumble you want, without ever crossing that fine line and veiling over vocals. Great quality too, especially that DD feel. Loki edges it only for quality of punch (Loki's midbass texture is smth like Z1R and Storm) but GM is a bass monster. GM also has neutral midrange with ethereally presented female vocals, and its treble is one of the most airy IEM's I've heard (only behind the Annihilator).

MMK3: Can't say much cuz I couldn't get a good fit. But tuning sounded very weird compared to MMK2, and something in the treble probably contributed to that. I much prefer MMK2 over MMK3.

Thank you so much. I appreciate the feedback!

One more thing: how did you find GM detail retrieval vs Loki?

 

[SCYJ]

Thank you so much. I appreciate the feedback!

One more thing: how did you find GM detail retrieval vs Loki?

Sorry, on that I don't really remember..

 

[KinGensai]

Loki: Very good bass quality, one of the best I've heard. Great quantity too. Good treble extension. But my problem with Loki is the extremely forward uppermids, putting the singer shouting right in my face and making sound quite unbalanced. Loki's midrange is just totally not my cup of tea.

GM: The perfect fine line with between "all the bass into the world" and "too much bass". Imagine having all the deep rumble you want, without ever crossing that fine line and veiling over vocals. Great quality too, especially that DD feel. Loki edges it only for quality of punch (Loki's midbass texture is smth like Z1R and Storm) but GM is a bass monster. GM also has neutral midrange with ethereally presented female vocals, and its treble is one of the most airy IEM's I've heard (only behind the Annihilator).

MMK3: Can't say much cuz I couldn't get a good fit. But tuning sounded very weird compared to MMK2, and something in the treble probably contributed to that. I much prefer MMK2 over MMK3.

This is an interesting comparison to me, isn't it interesting how much the bass tuning seems to change how the mids are perceived in response. The graph would indicate similar mids and close to too much sheen at 8k for the GM, but the change in the bass region hits so much harder.

One thing that doesn't translate well to graphs is bone conduction drivers. I haven't heard an IEM using one of those, what difference does that make between the two to you? I might get one if it's worth it.

 

[SCYJ]

This is an interesting comparison to me, isn't it interesting how much the bass tuning seems to change how the mids are perceived in response. The graph would indicate similar mids and close to too much sheen at 8k for the GM, but the change in the bass region hits so much harder.

One thing that doesn't translate well to graphs is bone conduction drivers. I haven't heard an IEM using one of those, what difference does that make between the two to you? I might get one if it's worth it.

Ah I forgot Loki had BC. That might have explained it. Very visceral bass indeed.

For me, it's not so much that the mids are similar but GM has more bass, and no I don't think the mids are similar. I'm quite sensitive to the balance between lower and upper mids. GM is quite balanced, and follows MMK2 well (my current IEM and has good natural mids timbre).

Loki, on the other hand, has a bigger contrast between lower mids and upper mids. When I demo-ed Loki with a female song which I'm intimately familiar with, I initially had it playing at a volume that I usually hear the instruments at. But when the female singer came in, it was suddenly so shouty I had to emergency drop volume. So to me the contrast between certain instruments and female singer is much more noticeable (and unnatural for me).

Your graph comparison standardised it at 1khz (which is fine) but even then the difference in mids balance is still there. So not great for my taste. Another example is EE Odin (which based on graph has a similar idea to the Loki), which sounded way too unnatural for me too that I didn't enjoy it. Diva mids is excellent but borderline too forward for me. But sets with mids I love include the MMK2, GM, Storm, etc. So that might give u an idea of my preference in mids...neutral and unboosted.

 

[KinGensai]

Ah I forgot Loki had BC. That might have explained it. Very visceral bass indeed.

For me, it's not so much that the mids are similar but GM has more bass, and no I don't think the mids are similar. I'm quite sensitive to the balance between lower and upper mids. GM is quite balanced, and follows MMK2 well (my current IEM and has good natural mids timbre).

Loki, on the other hand, has a bigger contrast between lower mids and upper mids. When I demo-ed Loki with a female song which I'm intimately familiar with, I initially had it playing at a volume that I usually hear the instruments at. But when the female singer came in, it was suddenly so shouty I had to emergency drop volume. So to me the contrast between certain instruments and female singer is much more noticeable (and unnatural for me).

Your graph comparison standardised it at 1khz (which is fine) but even then the difference in mids balance is still there. So not great for my taste. Another example is EE Odin (which based on graph has a similar idea to the Loki), which sounded way too unnatural for me too that I didn't enjoy it. Diva mids is excellent but borderline too forward for me. But sets with mids I love include the MMK2, GM, Storm, etc. So that might give u an idea of my preference in mids...neutral and unboosted.

Interesting. Looks like we are pretty close in HRTF at the gain region, GM and MSE match up really close to my target response too.

I'll have to look into getting a good BC set to get custom. It would be really nice if Fatfreq could develop one (hint hint @Sebastien Chiu)! lol

 

[TibiR]

My understanding is that the BC is activated around 200-300 Hz ....this is true for the Loki also for MEST 2 .....some people comparing these sets at least form the BC implementation.
On the other hand it is pretty subtle, I remember seeing a small hump on a graph in a video (around 200 or 300), but the guy said that had no impact.

A munch better implementation of the BC seems to be in Canpur 622b