Moondrop S8 vs Andromeda Comparison

Apr 10, 2021 at 9:13 AM Post #16 of 32
S8. different metal case BA filters for the mid vent fit perfect but are not recommended. I did try a couple small values and mids transition to highs became too nonlinear. Fortunately, I really like them as is. :relaxed: If you need a bit warmer mids etc, do it with tips, cable or deep insertion. Complys are awesome here if you like accurate.
 
Last edited:
May 9, 2021 at 7:09 PM Post #17 of 32
Hey folks,

I'd like to chime in the audio community. I'd like to think of myself having a bit of audio experience, having owned over a dozen iems, including the ones in the title, earbuds, headphones (ANC, open-back, closed-back), and desktop speakers.

I found the time to give a little comparison of the Moondrop S8 (S8) and the pre-2020 Campfire Andromeda (CFA).

The CFA is a bit more expensive than the S8. However, if you are a follower of Crinacle, you can see his review on the S8, as well as it's ranking - the S8 ranks higher than the CFA.

I am not going to go much on Crinacle's assessment, but want to give my own, which is opposite to what you might expect. Long story short, the CFA is a much more solid IEM than the S8.

The number one reason is that CFA is not grainy. One can argue that the S8 has more detail, but along with that detail comes grain. If you don't know what grain is, it's basically how clean an IEM sounds. Each note in the S8 produces "spikes" during the note decay. It's hard to describe, but a visual analogy is a TV left in the static screen. It's a sort of hiss, and with a moderately trained ear, one can hear this.

Each note in the CFA decay wraps up much more naturally than the S8, though one can argue that the CFA decay is a bit slower as well. The result of this is that it produces a very organic midrange. With that said, and I cannot explain this, but the CFA has a little bit of a nasally tone in the male-vocals area, whereas the S8 does not. Still, the CFA sounds natural, despite this drawback.

Another aspect that the CFA has over the S8 is soundstage height. I truly think that this is the acoustic chamber doing the work, instead of tubes directly feeding the sound. One merit the S8's soundstage has is that it images well, and not as forward as the CFA. It has a natural stage feel, like truly you are sitting in front of a stage. CFA is more holographic, wide, and due to less grain, you can "feel" each instrument in isolation more so that S8, which tends to blend instruments together due to the grain, even if those instruments are imaged well.

Additionally, S8 has glaring weaknesses, like an overly shouty upper midrange. Many people have pointed this out in the Harman tuned iems, and I completely agree. It's very noticeable, and that's all I can say. Does it completely destroy the sound? No. I tried to eq down this area as well, but there are remnants of it even though the eq.

In the end, what I can say is that the CFA is still a strong IEM. It will likely be my endgame before I find more money and buy more high-end IEMs.

And as much as wouldn't like to say this, don't get the S8. Upon first listen, the S8 is a very good iem - you get detail, imaging, soundstage. But in the end, its drivers don't produce as clean notes as iems like the CFA, and all in all you will be bothered by the grain and bright upper-midrange.

Nice post, I would largely agree with your findings!

I think the biggest point of contention is how these differing traits might be considered desirable. For example, some people want grain because it’s the equivalent of note texture and it lends a sense of realism. Others would enjoy the forward upper-midrange on the S8; in fact, I’d argue that the Andro 2019’s vocals are completely sucked-out due to a lack of adequate pinna compensation.

If you look at Crin’s ranking list, the Andro 2019 actually has an S- for technicalities, whereas the S8 has an A+. So the Andro’s slight edge in technicalities (largely imaging) is reflected. The reason why the S8 pulls ahead on Crin’s list is only thanks to raw tuning. And again, that’s subjective, but I would say that the Andro 2019 would be the more polarizing of the two in terms of tonality due to its powerful treble peak, lack of pinna compensation, and quite bloated sub-1kHz.
 
Last edited:
May 10, 2021 at 9:49 PM Post #18 of 32
S8. different metal case BA filters for the mid vent fit perfect but are not recommended. I did try a couple small values and mids transition to highs became too nonlinear. Fortunately, I really like them as is. :relaxed: If you need a bit warmer mids etc, do it with tips, cable or deep insertion. Complys are awesome here if you like accurate.

Indeed. Slap a gold-plated wire and comply tips on these babies.

TOTL iem for vocals and classical music.
 
Aug 10, 2022 at 8:21 PM Post #19 of 32
I’ve had the andromeda og, and I sold them because I just didn’t like the sound…does the s8 sound similar to the original andromeda? I’ve seen the posts here but maybe a direct comparison? Thanks!
 
Aug 11, 2022 at 4:52 PM Post #23 of 32
I don’t know what it was, I think it was that everything was so up front and in your face with the andros If that makes sense? I have the oriveti oh500 now, but I’ve always been curious about the s8.
Yeah you can say that, Andro has lots of midbass and treble spikes. I'd say Moondrop S8 is pretty forward, too. However, I recall that S8 sounds like "first row" feeling, as if the singer is in front of you. Maybe you are afraid of bright IEM? In which case I wouldn't get S8. I have a feeling you won't like it :).
 
Aug 11, 2022 at 4:57 PM Post #24 of 32
Yeah you can say that, Andro has lots of midbass and treble spikes. I'd say Moondrop S8 is pretty forward, too. However, I recall that S8 sounds like "first row" feeling, as if the singer is in front of you. Maybe you are afraid of bright IEM? In which case I wouldn't get S8. I have a feeling you won't like it :).
Ah I see. Yea I’m pretty sensitive to bright iems. Thanks for the advice I was thinking about the s8. Now not so much.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top