[Bling527]

the originals are not so bad, already comfortable and not fatiguing. But about the sound they make a difference? tame the highs?

The valour pad makes my skin itch after a while, and it was not very deep so my ear would touch the metal driver making it uncomfortable after a while. The suede pads doesn't get itchy and is deeper. Yes the highs are def more tamed.

 

[daivatam]

The valour pad makes my skin itch after a while, and it was not very deep so my ear would touch the metal driver making it uncomfortable after a while. The suede pads doesn't get itchy and is deeper. Yes the highs are def more tamed.

Yes also for me the depth of original pads it is to small touching sometimes with the tip of the ear the inside part. Perhaps even the thin cloth net inside them will tame/diffuse a little the highs. Worth trying them.

 

[tamleo]

Like could we see the 109 are not completely open ...they had all the back space padded with some thin hard felt like material. They had a lot of holes covered with that very permeable membrane, starting from the membrane aluminium enclosure that had a row of perforated holes to the rim and one hole on top in back to the plastic oval frame that keep the metallic driver in place...3 large hole top 3 bottom...one row larger than the other. Probably here it is a lot of tuning possibilities...to see how they sound without hole closed, completely open etc. Now I have them fitted with 2.5 mm hard felt cut in oval shape as the interior of 109. They tame the highs to a good ballance. Maybe I need to change the felt to 1.8 mm thick to keep the treble a tad more engaging or cut as earlier a hole in the middle. I will try different thickness and materials....maybe also soft felt. I will try also the sponge pads from akg but they are not available locally. As construction I do not like the pads they are a tad to easy to damage and I hate that system of elastic flaps to put them on....you could break them easily...at 800 they should had an quick pad removal system. Also I find the elastic headband a little on the cheap side of material and construction at this price, but it serve good his function even it is cheap and make some hasss noise, also when the elastic will start losse proprieties it is easy to change it..

Beautiful headphone inside out

 

[peterinvan]

I have the Elegia and like them alot, thanks for your comparison. I was looking for another pair of cans to complement them and the Meze looks great. Having an open back with more soundstage would be nice, if it doesn't sacrifice vocals too much.

109s have very realistic and pleasant vocals. Convergence from Malia and Boris Boris Blank shows off the whole range with 180 degree soundstage and pinpoint imaging:

https://tidal.com/browse/album/25029965

 

[malenak]

after trying all the pads, now I am using the VOs with the Verite pads, the Meze seems more detailed to me, even on the basses, the Meze mids seem more neutral to me, the highs of the Meze are many! you keep the VOs for hours, with the Meze it becomes more difficult, even if I love the detail. IMHO!!!

Meze is more detailed than VO? I always wanted to try some ZMF, but they are hard to get in my country. I bought 109 Pro when they came.

 

[Zap67]

Meze is more detailed than VO? I always wanted to try some ZMF, but they are hard to get in my country. I bought 109 Pro when they came.

today I listened to the 109s and the VOs with the desktop system, you can hear the difference in class, but the 109s for their price are a great deal, AKG records should arrive tomorrow

 

[tvrboy]

I suppose after 67 pages I'm a bit too late to contribute anything meaningful to this thread but after several beers and an evening spent with my brand new 109 pros why not ...

After A/B listening with my reference, the Focal Clear, I found that the Clear has much more natural tonality and is more balanced across frequencies. When listening to jazz, the high hat sound is kind of shoved in my face with the 109, but on the Clear it's just in the mix with all the other instruments. The Clear has an edge on detail retrieval and note attack and decay as well. Listening to a bass solo on the 109s, it sounds great but the notes slightly bleed into each other. On the Clear the notes have a more distinct start and stop. The 109 wins a few points back with its dynamics - it's definitely got "slam", "punchiness" or whatever you call feeling the impact of music. Drum solos are "nice" on the Clear but powerful and engaging on the 109 Pro. The 109 sounds great with rock and despite being technically inferior to the Clear by a large margin, my initial impression is that I prefer the 109 for rock music. I can't put my finger on exactly why, but something about the tuning makes electric guitars more prominent than on the Clear. The 109's treble is definitely a little bit emphasized. I've been listening for a while and it's not bothersome to me personally, but if you are sensitive to treble that's something to be aware of. Overall the 109 has a fun sound signature (slight bass boost, present midrange, great dynamics) that doesn't stray too far from the realm of neutral and from my experience so far, it sounds good with many different genres of music.

Besides my subjective listening experience, I think this headphone is interesting from a business perspective because it's a product that is positioned to enter a mature market segment, but it does not have any real differentiating features from the competition. The 109 Pro is conservative in both design (open-back, non-portable, meant for home use, based on design of 99 Classic) and technology (dynamic driver). Sonically I think they are not much different than other headphones in the $800-1200 range and perhaps a little worse. I am kind of curious what the business case was, entering a mature market with a very similar product to competitors, surely Meze knew that they would only get a small slice of the pie. But perhaps being the new entrant / flavor of the month just once is profitable enough for Meze and other headphone manufacturers.

 

[BBuzecky]

I suppose after 67 pages I'm a bit too late to contribute anything meaningful to this thread but after several beers and an evening spent with my brand new 109 pros why not ...

After A/B listening with my reference, the Focal Clear, I found that the Clear has much more natural tonality and is more balanced across frequencies. When listening to jazz, the high hat sound is kind of shoved in my face with the 109, but on the Clear it's just in the mix with all the other instruments. The Clear has an edge on detail retrieval and note attack and decay as well. Listening to a bass solo on the 109s, it sounds great but the notes slightly bleed into each other. On the Clear the notes have a more distinct start and stop. The 109 wins a few points back with its dynamics - it's definitely got "slam", "punchiness" or whatever you call feeling the impact of music. Drum solos are "nice" on the Clear but powerful and engaging on the 109 Pro. Overall the 109 has a fun sound signature (slight bass boost, great dynamics) that doesn't stray too far from the realm of neutral and from my experience so far, it sounds good with many different genres of music.

Besides my subjective listening experience, I think this headphone is interesting from a business perspective because it's a product that is positioned to enter a mature market segment, but it does not have any real differentiating features from the competition. The 109 Pro is conservative in both design (open-back, non-portable, meant for home use, based on design of 99 Classic) and technology (dynamic driver). Sonically I think they are not much different than other headphones in the $800-1200 range and perhaps a little worse. I am kind of curious what the business case was, entering a mature market with a very similar product to competitors, surely Meze knew that they would only get a small slice of the pie. But perhaps being the new entrant / flavor of the month just once is profitable enough for Meze and other headphone manufacturers.

Thank you for the comparison. I've been looking at the Focal Clear and the Meze as both can be had for very similar pricing now...but can only swing one. Hard decision seems like both are great in their own right.

 

[Cuthbert 80]

I suppose after 67 pages I'm a bit too late to contribute anything meaningful to this thread but after several beers and an evening spent with my brand new 109 pros why not ...

After A/B listening with my reference, the Focal Clear, I found that the Clear has much more natural tonality and is more balanced across frequencies. When listening to jazz, the high hat sound is kind of shoved in my face with the 109, but on the Clear it's just in the mix with all the other instruments. The Clear has an edge on detail retrieval and note attack and decay as well. Listening to a bass solo on the 109s, it sounds great but the notes slightly bleed into each other. On the Clear the notes have a more distinct start and stop. The 109 wins a few points back with its dynamics - it's definitely got "slam", "punchiness" or whatever you call feeling the impact of music. Drum solos are "nice" on the Clear but powerful and engaging on the 109 Pro. The 109 sounds great with rock and despite being technically inferior to the Clear by a large margin, my initial impression is that I prefer the 109 for rock music. I can't put my finger on exactly why, but something about the tuning makes electric guitars more prominent than on the Clear. The 109's treble is definitely a little bit emphasized. I've been listening for a while and it's not bothersome to me personally, but if you are sensitive to treble that's something to be aware of. Overall the 109 has a fun sound signature (slight bass boost, present midrange, great dynamics) that doesn't stray too far from the realm of neutral and from my experience so far, it sounds good with many different genres of music.

Besides my subjective listening experience, I think this headphone is interesting from a business perspective because it's a product that is positioned to enter a mature market segment, but it does not have any real differentiating features from the competition. The 109 Pro is conservative in both design (open-back, non-portable, meant for home use, based on design of 99 Classic) and technology (dynamic driver). Sonically I think they are not much different than other headphones in the $800-1200 range and perhaps a little worse. I am kind of curious what the business case was, entering a mature market with a very similar product to competitors, surely Meze knew that they would only get a small slice of the pie. But perhaps being the new entrant / flavor of the month just once is profitable enough for Meze and other headphone manufacturers.

Nice impressions, thanks very much for sharing.

May I ask what you're using to drive your 109 Pros?

Not sure if you believe in this stuff lol but have you given your 109 Pros time to burn-in? Whether anyone believes in it or not....even Meze themselves recommended burn-in of at least 70 hrs, I believe (don't quote me on the exact number of hours lol). This was confirmed by the host of Youtube channel Super* Review as Meze sent in the headphones for review.

 

[hillbilly559]

I suppose after 67 pages I'm a bit too late to contribute anything meaningful to this thread but after several beers and an evening spent with my brand new 109 pros why not ...

After A/B listening with my reference, the Focal Clear, I found that the Clear has much more natural tonality and is more balanced across frequencies. When listening to jazz, the high hat sound is kind of shoved in my face with the 109, but on the Clear it's just in the mix with all the other instruments. The Clear has an edge on detail retrieval and note attack and decay as well. Listening to a bass solo on the 109s, it sounds great but the notes slightly bleed into each other. On the Clear the notes have a more distinct start and stop. The 109 wins a few points back with its dynamics - it's definitely got "slam", "punchiness" or whatever you call feeling the impact of music. Drum solos are "nice" on the Clear but powerful and engaging on the 109 Pro. The 109 sounds great with rock and despite being technically inferior to the Clear by a large margin, my initial impression is that I prefer the 109 for rock music. I can't put my finger on exactly why, but something about the tuning makes electric guitars more prominent than on the Clear. The 109's treble is definitely a little bit emphasized. I've been listening for a while and it's not bothersome to me personally, but if you are sensitive to treble that's something to be aware of. Overall the 109 has a fun sound signature (slight bass boost, present midrange, great dynamics) that doesn't stray too far from the realm of neutral and from my experience so far, it sounds good with many different genres of music.

Besides my subjective listening experience, I think this headphone is interesting from a business perspective because it's a product that is positioned to enter a mature market segment, but it does not have any real differentiating features from the competition. The 109 Pro is conservative in both design (open-back, non-portable, meant for home use, based on design of 99 Classic) and technology (dynamic driver). Sonically I think they are not much different than other headphones in the $800-1200 range and perhaps a little worse. I am kind of curious what the business case was, entering a mature market with a very similar product to competitors, surely Meze knew that they would only get a small slice of the pie. But perhaps being the new entrant / flavor of the month just once is profitable enough for Meze and other headphone manufacturers.

I'm considering either Clear OG used or the 109s. I like your description of both but am wondering about the comfort differences? I have a larger head and any clamping is bothersome. Also do your ears touch on either model? Which do you feel are most comfortable overall?

 

[peterinvan]

I'm considering either Clear OG used or the 109s. I like your description of both but am wondering about the comfort differences? I have a larger head and any clamping is bothersome. Also do your ears touch on either model? Which do you feel are most comfortable overall?

I was able to audition the Clear Mg vs. the 109 when I was upgrading recently. The Meze won me over on looks and comfort. The enveloping sound and deep, tight bass closed the deal for me.

I have a large head but normal ears. I can feel the inside of the pads on the 109, but it is not a distraction. The soft velour is nice. Clamping is just right for me, but I believe you can adjust the steel springs on the 109s.

In my experience the 109 drivers did not reach optimum flexibility until about 200 hours. Now I enjoy the full balanced spectrum, with no disturbing sibilance or shrill notes.
Albeit my ears are 70+ years old.

I just sold my Grado 325, because I enjoyed the Meze open sound, and bass notes more. Happy listening

 

[PopZeus]

AKG K240 foam inserts do indeed take some of the treble energy down without blunting any detail. I still am currently using EQ with the 109 in smaller increments with the foam disks. Tonality is overall more natural.

 

[Mhog55]

I was able to audition the Clear Mg vs. the 109 when I was upgrading recently. The Meze won me over on looks and comfort. The enveloping sound and deep, tight bass closed the deal for me.

I have a large head but normal ears. I can feel the inside of the pads on the 109, but it is not a distraction. The soft velour is nice. Clamping is just right for me, but I believe you can adjust the steel springs on the 109s.

In my experience the 109 drivers did not reach optimum flexibility until about 200 hours. Now I enjoy the full balanced spectrum, with no disturbing sibilance or shrill notes.
Albeit my ears are 70+ years old.

I just sold my Grado 325, because I enjoyed the Meze open sound, and bass notes more. Happy listening

Forgive me if I already asked, but what did you prefer about the 109 over the Clear MG? I'm assuming that the 109 is noticeably brighter and extended in the upper mids and lower treble? I'm getting a bit burnt out on trying different open backs - ya know, buying, selling, returning. The only two I would still like to try is the Beyerdynamic T1 3rd and 109. I liked the MG quite a bit, so if I can rule them out without having to play the game, I'd grab another MG.

 

[tvrboy]

I'm considering either Clear OG used or the 109s. I like your description of both but am wondering about the comfort differences? I have a larger head and any clamping is bothersome. Also do your ears touch on either model? Which do you feel are most comfortable overall?

I have a small head but 109 Pro is more comfortable for sure. The Clear, while comfortable in general, has a traditional headband and non-swiveling ear cups. The 109 Pro has a floating headband and the earcups can swivel. For comfort, it's no contest in favor of the Meze. Anything with a traditional headband like the Clear is going to put some weight on the crown of your head, just because the headphone is pulling down on it. Floating headbands are a much better solution.

In case you are wondering, I measured the interior dimensions of the ear pads as best I could. Clear is 2 and 10/16ths by 2 inches, 109 Pro is 2 and 11/16ths by 1 and 14/16ths inches. Virtually no difference between them.

The original Clear is IMO the best used bargain in headphones, but it sounds like the Meze would be more likely to fit you comfortably.

 

[HOT6BOY]

The Clear, while comfortable in general, has a traditional headband and non-swiveling ear cups.

my focal clear mg has swivels .. up and down and sideways...i think og also