It's a bright, beautiful Monday here in Singapore, Singapore, and what better time than now to post another instalment of...
The Deezel Dash: In-Ear Edition - Unique Melody and Sony's Latest
Unique Melody 3DD-Ti
First on the list is Unique Melody's revision of their classic 3DD - now consisting of titanium elements to complement the IEM's three dynamic drivers.
The 3DD-Ti has an energetic, dynamic, w-shaped presentation. Its stage is decently expanded, but certainly within the confines of the head. The stage is constantly full, but notes sound clean nonetheless as a result of a withdrawn lower-midrange. Imaging and separation are fine, but note size and intimacy certainly take precedence. It’s an up-close-and-personal,
rock out! presentation that’ll serve genres like EDM pretty well. its tonal balance leads toward neutral-warm, with peaks along the lower- and upper-treble adding sparkle and clarity.
Bass impact is rather strong, but isn’t too physical and/or guttural. So, punches are sufficiently felt, but don’t fill the stage. Decay is a touch slow, but the recessed lower-midrange maintains definition for the most part. Sub- and mid-bass are relatively balanced, with rumble to complement each passing punch. But, it’s a darker low-end with minimal melody and clarity. Impact and fun is certainly prioritised over texture, layering and detail retrieval.
The midrange is where I take issue with the 3DD-Ti. It has a strange timbre that sounds like an overtly elevated 1-4kHz range and a 5kHz dip. Vocals sound very chesty, with little headroom or air. Delivery sounds throaty with little articulation or resonance from the mouth; almost as if the mic was placed on the singer's neck, then EQ'ed to sound clear. Clarity and layering is fine because of the 3DD’s treble peaks, but resolution is severely bottlenecked by the strange tuning. There’s a lack of coherence, structure and roundedness to vocals and instruments alike, and it’s certainly the 3DD’s weakest aspect.
The treble contains peaks along 7 and 10kHz. Cymbals and snare drums sound energetic and punchy. Tone is pretty squarely neutral, but it’s a treble that remains mostly smooth, whilst being airy and open as well. Extension is okay, with stage stability and background blackness wavering with busier tracks. But, it still delivers on dynamic contrast. Rock songs sound properly impactful and fun, even if they’re left sounding a touch full. Like the midrange, it’s a treble that requires more coherence and linearity, but it remains relatively problem-free.
At its price, the 3DD-Ti isn’t something I’d wholeheartedly recommend, considering the options available throughout the market. But those looking for an EDM-ready IEM with great energy and decent comfort and fit shouldn’t rule out the 3DD-Ti as a possible option to try.
Sony IER-M7
Now, that’s what I’m talking about! Sony’s IER-M7 is an impressively coherent and open-sounding monitor, but more outstanding is how well it preserves tonal balance and vocal density. It’s very reminiscent of 64Audio’s A6t, but with a calmer bass response. Overall, it’s a clear and airy tonal palate, but the star of the show is its dense, well-structured and clean midrange. The bass serves as a great foundation, while the treble provides a deep, open stage and a decently black background.
The M7’s bass plays a more foundational role to the midrange - not particularly noteworthy in impact or physicality, but outstanding in how well it coheres against the rest of the frequency response. It’s paced really well; quick enough for the stage to remain clean, but lingers sufficiently to fill the presentation in a dynamic sense. Extension is impressive for the price, with adequate sub-bass rumble surrounding the perimeter of the stage; only visceral and present when called for. The mid-bass is rather calm and never intrudes into the presentation, which - once again - serves vocal delivery. It’s not the most resolving or textured low-end I’ve heard, but it perfectly complements the M7’s sonic palate. A touch more mid-bass would've given the in-ear a more natural tone and better body, but I’m very happy with where Sony ended up nonetheless.
The midrange is the M7’s star in my opinion. A laid-back lower-midrange gives notes proper definition, and strongly contrasts them against the black background. Following that is a 1-2kHz rise that gives vocals great body and density. Instruments are structured very naturally, with a sufficiently realistic tone. Vocal delivery is dynamic and impactful, paired with the M7’s impressive headroom and depth. The upper-midrange is linearly connected to this rise, but the presence range is relatively neutral. As a result, higher-pitched instruments like female vocals are ever-so-slightly withdrawn, but this results in a more even and rounded image. Pianos in particular deliver both impact (in the force of the keystroke)
and melody; a telltale sign of a well-balanced, realistic midrange.
The treble comes tuned with light peaks along 7-8 and 12kHz for clarity, while a 6kHz dip prevents sibilance. Instruments are articulate, yet gracefully smooth. While the A6t uses its wet mid-bass to counteract its treble, the M7 has a relatively more withdrawn treble, so it remains pretty even with the centre-midrange; a
touch forward relative to the upper-mids. Though, the A6t sounds a touch fuller with its stock cable. Once again, linearity and coherence is fantastic, and I wouldn’t be surprised if someone told me the M7 was a one-to-two-driver monitor. Extension is adequate as it posits an open stage with decent sphericalness. Pricier TOTLs still have the edge in imaging precision, stability, background blackness and resolution, but the M7 is an excellent performer at its MSRP.
Overall, the M7 caught me by surprise. It’s a tuning I wouldn’t immediately associate with Sony, but I love what it has going for it. It’s forgiving, fun, articulate and - above all - deliciously smooth. The linearity and coherence it portrays is outstanding, and so is its midrange structure. Fans of the Campfire Andromeda looking for a cheaper and more ergonomic alternative will find
much to love in the M7.
Sony IER-M9
Compared to the M7, the M9 has a more v-shaped response with an emphasis on impact, dynamic energy and contrast. Bass and treble quantities are definitely elevated relative to the midrange. As a result, the M9 has a cleaner stage, a blacker background and fuller instruments. It delivers more punch compared to the M7, but with less linearity in its tone and vocal structure. The M9 is more fun and full-bodied than coherent and refined.
The M9’s bass is more mid-bass oriented. There’s a stronger sense of melody, body and warmth, while sub-bass presence remains the same. It’s still a bass that’s a touch darker in tone, but the M9's upper-treble emphasis bolsters its clarity and layering. Despite its fatter response, texture is more apparent here than on the M7. Extension is also a touch stronger for more palpable physicality, so it’s a low-end that’s more catered towards synthetic instruments. It’s still a ways away from Sony’s conventional bass tuning - which was a lot bloomy-er, darker and thicker - but it’s definitely tuned for dynamism and body; more so than the M7.
The M9’s midrange is less linear and coherent compared to the M7. Its emphasised lower- and upper-treble peaks make the lower-midrange attenuation more obvious, so notes are a touch crisper. Though, wetness is maintained because of the elevated mid-bass and tone is a touch warmer. This tuning choice generates more clarity and cleanliness, but at the expense of smoothness and refinement. Transients are more harder-edged, so sensitive listeners might consider this tuning more fatiguing. The upper-midrange remains neutral, so higher-pitched instruments remain neutrally-placed in the stage. I’m tempted to draw comparisons to the 64Audio N8 with the M9’s midrange; crisp, clean, mid-bass-fuelled and structurally adequate, albeit lacking slightly in coherence and refinement.
The M9 maintains a similar treble profile as the M7, but with a slightly more emphasised 12kHz region. This results in a crisper transient, while the M7 is a touch more refined. But, it should be said that the M9 has superior body because of its elevated mid-bass. So, if your definition of fatigue stems from a lack of fullness, the M7 will sound more tiring after long periods. Conversely, if it stems from a peaky-er treble, the M9 will be more tiresome. Nevertheless, I think both are relatively smooth and this is true across a huge variety of tracks. The M9’s superior extension creates a more stable stage and a blacker background, as well as a stronger sense of transparency and resolution. Over the M7, it’s definitely a stronger technical performer.
Both the M9 and M7 hold great value in my opinion. They perform excellently for their respective price points and they're two of the most ergonomic UIEMs I've tried in recent memory. The M7's glossy, fingerprint-magnet paint job gets a no from me, but the M9's rugged, brushed aluminium finish (and carbon fibre faceplate) is
dreamy. The M7 has a smoother treble and a withdrawn low-end for a more neutral signature, while the M9 has an elevated mid-bass and upper-treble to maintain tonal balance whilst adding tons of dynamic contrast. The M7 has a more uniform response, while the M9 has stronger technical performance. Nevertheless, both have a lovable tone and a thought-out structure that I think will put Sony back on the map in 2018.
