[SCYJ]

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

Have u tried Odin? If you liked it, you might like Loki too.

 

[TibiR]

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.

What you said about mids being too shouty.....this is how I felt earlier today.....but now I am trying to reproduce that moment and it does not feel that bad )))

I am also comparing sources: Hiby R6 sounds a bit warmer....and more musical with this set (as it does for others as well) ....on the other hand the shouty mids which I heard earlier were on BTR 7 ....I know.....but sorry I don't have anything better at the moment.

One more thing I want to add is that my perception of sound is also very influenced by the way I feel or what mood I am in. For example when I am too tired nothing sounds interesting))

 

[KinGensai]

Have u tried Odin? If you liked it, you might like Loki too.

Not the actual set. I test ran the FR by EQing my V14, not interested enough to find a demo. I'm locked in to my preferred FR at this point, all I'm looking for now is quality upgrades. Besides, if you didn't like it, I doubt I would either.

 

[emdeevee]

IMHO, Loki BCD is unlike the others being mentioned in that it's not subtle. Loki's BCD is the prime star of its presentation and I would not use the word "subtle". UM BCD is subtle with folks wondering if there's even a difference (UM had to make a proto with an on/off switch to demonstrate this).

I've not yet tested a GM, tho I'm testing an MSE. Knowing what I know (meaning I have had some time with MSE) I think I would blind buy GM over Loki, but it all depends on what you're going for. My suspicion is that GM would be the better TOTL all arounder than Loki, which is highly dependent on the quality of the recording you're listening to.

 

[KinGensai]

@emdeevee
Fatfreq did a very good job tuning the MSE and GM if your pinna gain peaks past 3k. The choice between the two (Loki & GM)would be very dependent on gain region preference due to the differing targets. I prefer the MSE because the GM doesn't seem worth it to me when I can achieve everything but the venting with EQ, and venting =/= $1k extra to me, and I like the ridiculous party bass anyway cause I can use my V14 for a more normal sound style.

I'm thinking BC would best be used to recreate the sensation of bass rumble lost when using HPs and especially IEMs, I would have to try an IEM using BC for mids to get what the idea is behind that design choice, but I don't get it at the moment.

 

[TibiR]

IMHO, Loki BCD is unlike the others being mentioned in that it's not subtle. Loki's BCD is the prime star of its presentation and I would not use the word "subtle". UM BCD is subtle with folks wondering if there's even a difference (UM had to make a proto with an on/off switch to demonstrate this).

I've not yet tested a GM, tho I'm testing an MSE. Knowing what I know (meaning I have had some time with MSE) I think I would blind buy GM over Loki, but it all depends on what you're going for. My suspicion is that GM would be the better TOTL all arounder than Loki, which is highly dependent on the quality of the recording you're listening to.

Thanks a lot for the feedback!
I have a few more things to say/ask:
Is the Loki shell made out of carbon or something? I feel them vibrate with echo when I close my mouth....has nothing to do with drives, this happens when I put the headphones in , music switched off or even jack unplugged))) . Is this driver flex ? Shouldn't be .

If I were to trade my Loki for the GM or MSE, my worry is that either of these would be too similar to my other set Monarch mkIII ...when Loki is very different)). Am I right?

 

[emdeevee]

Thanks a lot for the feedback!
I have a few more things to say/ask:
Is the Loki shell made out of carbon or something? I feel them vibrate with echo when I close my mouth....has nothing to do with drives, this happens when I put the headphones in , music switched off or even jack unplugged))) . Is this driver flex ? Shouldn't be .

If I were to trade my Loki for the GM or MSE, my worry is that either of these would be too similar to my other set Monarch mkIII ...when Loki is very different)). Am I right?

I think that echoey sound when nothing is playing is caused by the BCD. If you push on the faceplate with nothing playing, you can here it, also.

 

[SCYJ]

I prefer the MSE because the GM doesn't seem worth it to me when I can achieve everything but the venting with EQ, and venting =/= $1k extra to me.

One reason the extra $$$ for GM is worth it (for me) is because I listen to a wide genre of music, including classical. That vocal switch allows a more neutral presentation (better for classical) and an instant volume boost in the mids, which helps with classical recordings that tend to generally be softer than other genres. Don't have to remove the IEM from my ears nor switch to other neutral IEMs nor fiddling with volume controls when switching from pop to classical...flick of a switch and easy peasy!

Also I get vacuum quite easily so I think the vent might help me hehe.

If I were to trade my Loki for the GM or MSE, my worry is that either of these would be too similar to my other set Monarch mkIII ...when Loki is very different)). Am I right?

My impressions of the MMK3 were not positive at all and is inferior to the MMK2 for me personally. And no I don't think MMK3 is similar to GM/MSE in any way.

 

[KinGensai]

@SCYJ
Totally get it. It is faster with the switch than with software EQ, and the venting system is very nice to have.

That's... an interesting take on Mmk2 vs Mk3. Can you break that one down into particulars? I did not like the tuning on the Mk2 much at all, and while I haven't heard the Mk3, it graphs better. Very curious about this.

 

[SCYJ]

That's... an interesting take on Mmk2 vs Mk3. Can you break that one down into particulars? I did not like the tuning on the Mk2 much at all, and while I haven't heard the Mk3, it graphs better. Very curious about this.

Sure! Lemme preface by explaining my tuning preferences more. I notice overtime that my bass preference is heavily skewed towards a subbass focus with a midbass shelf that dips into lower mids, followed by a neutral midrange (see MMK2, Storm graphs), a lower treble dip (or not boosted) into an airy extension. So, a U or mild-W shape if you will.

Note that for bass, I'm quite midbass sensitive. XE6 and RN6 makes me wanna tear my ears off. People say MMK2 has subbass boost but weak midbass. But I don't find the midbass lacking at all. Rather, I find it well balanced. For me, overly punchy without the corresponding subbass boost to balance it makes it unnatural and gives me anxiety. That's how the MMK3 came across to me. Sure, more midbass. More punchy. But the bass balance for me is thrown off, and the midbass masks the subbass. Moreover, the midbass boost bleeds a little into the overall mids presentation. You can see on graph comparisons the boosted midbass shelf and a slightly reduced lower mids vs the MMK2 (if you normalize by volume and not frequency). For me, balance is everything, and even shifting midbass up 1-2db and lower mids down 1-2db makes all the difference. No longer does it sound as natural as the MMK2.

There is also something odd about the uppermids/lower treble. Female vocals are natural and exquisite on the MMK2. But it comes across artificial and digital on the MMK3, even sounding nasally.

When I demo-ed the MMK3 alongside my MMK2 in CanJam, the guy sitting beside me did the same, and told me he liked the MMK2 much more than the MMK3, and that there's something off about the treble.

I will also say, MMK2's nozzle is borderline shallow for me. But it still just fits. MMK3, on the other hand, is shorter with a different shell shape. This made fit extremely difficult for me, too shallow and couldn't seal. That slightly shallower fit might have contributed to skewing the FR badly vs my HRTF/earcanal resonance.

It might also be my large and deep ear canals that I find the the GM perfect (I used M/L AEX07 tips when I demo-ed it).

 

[aaf evo]

If anyone is after a MSE CIEM give me a shout. I have decided to let mine go as I have a GM CIEM also and prefer it.

FatFreq will reshell it for a new owner.

 

[SCYJ]

If anyone is after a MSE CIEM give me a shout. I have decided to let mine go as I have a GM CIEM also and prefer it.

FatFreq will reshell it for a new owner.

What's ur gym carry gonna be now?

 

[aaf evo]

What's ur gym carry gonna be now?

Craft Ears Omnium

 

[KinGensai]

@SCYJ
That makes a lot of sense. The Mk3 looks like it has a significantly higher gain response peak at 4k(??? That's a bit strange now that I look at it in detail) and maintains a lot of energy straight into the 8k resonance peak on Super22's measurements. I didn't see that in other measurements I checked, maybe super's rig caught this difference better.

Fair enough on the midbass vs subbass response. You must have liked the Variations' tuning by the sound of it. Curious that the GM doesn't bother you as much in the same way.

I've really come to like longer nozzles thanks to the MSE, it didn't seem like it was likely to be comfortable at first. I still think I'll go custom eventually, but the universal version isn't unpleasant at all.

 

[SCYJ]

@SCYJ
That makes a lot of sense. The Mk3 looks like it has a significantly higher gain response peak at 4k(??? That's a bit strange now that I look at it in detail) and maintains a lot of energy straight into the 8k resonance peak on Super22's measurements. I didn't see that in other measurements I checked, maybe super's rig caught this difference better.

Fair enough on the midbass vs subbass response. You must have liked the Variations' tuning by the sound of it. Curious that the GM doesn't bother you as much in the same way.

I've really come to like longer nozzles thanks to the MSE, it didn't seem like it was likely to be comfortable at first. I still think I'll go custom eventually, but the universal version isn't unpleasant at all.

I last heard the Variations 1.5 years ago, so memory is vague. But funnily enough, I didn't particularly liked it either. I would say that I'm midbass sensitive in the sense that i am sensitive not just to too much of it (overly boomy music makes me anxious), but also sensitive to too little of it (too little makes the bass punch lack meat). I think that for me, my acceptable midbass range is much narrower than most people. It has to be within a perfect range, not too little and not too much. And I would say MMK2 is within that range, albeit on the lower end, while Variations has too much dip (it glides well but ends lower than the lower mids, which is a no-no for me). MSE is a little over that range (altho with MSE it's probably a volume issue, just overall too much sub and midbass), while GM is tastefully on the higher end of that range (from memory). I think it's also because the GM's subbass elevation is so high that is masks the midbass and balances it. The Diva's max-bass setting shelf is actually closer to my bass preference, but unfortunately the Diva's bass quality is just not refined. The Elysian X's bass glide is another example of my preference!

I suppose the subbass to midbass ratio is more important to me than sheer midbass quantity. I think if you go to HBB's squiglink and compare GM, Elysian X, and MMK3, you'll see that the bass glide shape of the GM and Elysian X is similar, but the GM's is elevated in a balanced way from midbass all the way to subbass. By contrast, the MMK3 doesn't follow that shape. It's subbass is roughly similar to Elysian X, but midbass gets abit too much, ruining the ratio. The odd one out for me would be the Z1R. I think its bass presentation is spectacular, despite looking more midbass focused. Yet I hear the subbass extend all the way. Graphs probably don't tell everything.

Yeah the universal for MSE/GM fits me like a custom, but when buying my GM i wanted to customize my faceplates with my signature on it, so figured why not just go full CIEM since my signature on the faceplate is gonna tank the resale value anyways. Also, I found GM's 8khz a little sharp (like MSE's), so I think CIEM's slightly deeper fit will hopefully smoothen the treble just enough for me.