All this is with comparison between the two in mind: I can say (and I bet I'm not alone in this one) that the MT definately cannot bring out more detail than the N6Pro. That isn't the end of the story though. N6Pro has VERY weak bass. Oh it's there, and you can EQ it up, but when there is a bass heavy song playing I notice distortion in the sub-bass. There IS no mid bass to speak of, and the upper bass is recessed. While the bass on the MT is quite lovely (if you EQ it down a bit, because it is just too strong for me out of the box). It has really good sub-bass, and good mid bass, and good upper bass (these seem to have the biggest boost in sub-bass to my ears).
As for the mids and treble, the N6pro have some of the smoothest mids and best detail retrieval of TWS I have yet to hear. At first listen I thought they sounded very grainy, but found out that these are indeed pretty picky about the quality of music you feed them. They are a mid forward tuned set of TWS. I find I have to EQ down the 1k and 2k region a bit on these. The MT have a really warm and full sounding mid, but they are very recessed a lot (I find I have to EQ up the 1k and 2k regions). The treble is where these are not my favorite. You can EQ up the treble but it doesn't make them better at details, because when you do this, the treble becomes pretty thin sounding (though remember I am speaking comparatively here). Cymbals are the worst offender for this. These are not so much a V but more like a V with a broken right arm...
Overall, I would say I like the N6Pro better for rock and classical (anything I might want better detail). I like the MT better overall because they seem better matched to play just about anything, if you can live without the really good detail retrieval (they are more of a fun sound). This is not to say the detail retrieval is horrible on these, but compared to the N6Pro they are.