[FritzS]

Between Transparent (T) and Standard - S there is no noticeable difference in bass.

Tested with Mystical Scent - He Xung-Tian

My other Headphones for comparison:
AKG K812, Austrian Audio Hi X-65

DAC: Jan Meier Corda Daccord ff
HA: DIY WNA MKII with Burson V6 Vivid fully discrete audio opamps
M1 MacMini, Audirvana Studio, ripper dBpoweramp Music Converter

 

[Halimj7]

Between Transparent (T) and Standard - S there is no noticeable difference in bass.

Tested with Mystical Scent - He Xung-Tian

My other Headphones for comparison:
AKG K812, Austrian Audio Hi X-65

DAC: Jan Meier Corda Daccord ff
HA: DIY WNA MKII with Burson V6 Vivid fully discrete audio opamps
M1 MacMini, Audirvana Studio, ripper dBpoweramp Music Converter

Do you find the Transparent to be too bright? Thanks

 

[qazxsw80]

My other Headphones for comparison:
AKG K812, Austrian Audio Hi X-65

Can you compare the K812 and the Mysphere? I do know that they sound quite differently, but I'm still interested in your opinion.

 

[FritzS]

I am currently in the middle of the test, it will still take a few days.
But yes, the two are very different!

When you listen to the K812 all the time, at the beginning you think you're listening through cotton wool with the Mysphere. But you have to give yourself time.
After listening to Mysphere for a while, the weaknesses of the K812 become apparent and you notice the effects of its 7kHz peak.

Recordings of artists I know from live concerts are simply like a poem with Mysphere 3.2 and the Transparent Pads.

With Asian music (drums, Tibetan monk chants) I couldn't notice any bass weakness. In my opinion, the bass is more precise with the Mysphere than with the K812.

More in a few days

K812 --> please look at comparison and K812 distortion curve

 

[John Buchanan]

I think the Mysphere 3.2 is a better headphone than the AKG K812, but not glaringly so. The macro- and micro-dynamics of the Mysphere are supreme - ultra fast without the typical brightness of fast phones. Detail without treble excess to spotlight it. It simply handles contrasts of loudness better than any other headphone I have heard without having to be driven with a monolith of an amplifier - quality is required rather than quantity. I still prefer the "B" ear pads.

 

[FritzS]

Today I got an new CD - Peter Ratzenbeck, Argonaut - Acoustic Guitars, as if he were playing in front of me.
I know Peter Ratzenbeck personally from his live concerts.
Mysphere is a headphone that you have to spend a lot of time with! Don't just put them on, judge immediately and put them away!
That's the only way to recognise his qualities!

Now I'm listening to a piece with harp. Very rich in detail, warm basic tone, no trace of sharpness!
Guitar strings sometimes sound metallic (if the artist wants it that way) but no trace of sharpness either!
Just sounded very close to the reality of an (unplugged) live concert.

Peter Ratzenbeck, Argonaut

 

[dynavit]

Hi Fritz,
that's one of the most important sentences concerning the Mysphere: "Mysphere is a headphone that you have to spend a lot of time with! Don't just put them on, judge immediately and put them away!" It's a pitty, but thats what happens at Meetings often. If I come from Abyss, Audeze etc. the Mysphere sounds horrible weak in bass. But if you come from livemusic, you will say: That's it!

 

[FritzS]

I write some about in an German HiFi Forum too:
https://www.open-end-music.com/foru...re-3-2-hoererfahrungen-mit-verschiedenen-pads

 

[FritzS]

Conclusion:
I have now listened to many of my reference pieces from pop, rock, classical, ethnic, jazz, blues, Far Eastern music, demanding singers, etc. with the Mysphere 3.2 equipped with the T (transparent) pad. The driver modules close to the ears.

Bass - in all pieces it came sufficiently punchy, dry and precise, more so than with the K812. Double bass (bass violin) is reproduced very realistically.
Mids - no weaknesses, especially with vocals. Violins, acoustic guitars and singers very realistic.
Treble - not obtrusive, silkier, rather restrained, no annoying sibilants.
Stage - sufficiently wide and deep (depth is difficult to judge with KH, when sitting live in front of an orchestra the impression of depth is also rather modest).

Realistic means for me in comparison to live performances!

The temple sometimes pressed on the eyeglass temple in an inappropriate constellation, you have to find the right angle. This also applies to the pressure on the temples. According to the manufacturer, there is a remedy for those affected.

A headphone that you should definitely consider if you want to leave the beaten track and are looking for something out of the ordinary!

I will answer any questions as far as possible.

PS: I had to return the headphones, my thanks to Heinz and Helmut for the loan!

 

[dynavit]

Hello Fritz,
Because you ask me to compare the Mysphere 3.2 to the Stax 009. Here are my impressions, which I just copy from German to English with Google. Hope that works fine.

I can't think of much about the tonality, because I basically play both with EQ. On the one hand, this has the reason that I correct my age-related treble drop by 2-3db with all KH, on the other hand I like a bass increase of 3db with both Kh - Stax 009 and Mysphere with bass pads. With the 009, the corrections from Orratory (?) are added in the upper mids and highs. I defuse the Mysphere by 3-2db in the 2400hz range. Tonally, the two are so very similar.
I listen to both with Paltauf DAC and Paltauf ESD, so there is no difference on the source side.

The Mysphere kicks very cleanly in the upper bass, the 009 has a little more fullness, but is softer. Neither let me miss anything, even with the Rolling Stones (slave on Tatoo You with saxphone solo by Sony Rollins). (Please don't start the eternal bass discussion here again!!!)
In the mids, where the music plays like the clarinet by Louis Sclavis, I see advantages for the Mysphere. They are simply even cleaner, sharper cut and the wider stage looks even livelier. This is reminiscent of the X9000. Apparently the Mysphere goes to work with even less distortion than the 009.
The heights remain the domain of the Staxen with their silkiness. The Mysphere can already be dashing. (That's why there is also a drop at 2400hz and no personal increase in the heights). With the appropriate personal corrections, the Mysphere surprises me with how much warmth it represents the wood of the bass clarinet and the percussion in the right light.
Remarks on Tatoo You: The CD appears to be from the early days of CD production, although the deluxe version sounds better freshly mixed. than the original.
Without EQ I would prefer the 009. That sounds a bit more pleasant, rounder. The electric guitar and choir aren't as prominent compared to Jagger's voice.
With EQ, the Mysphere presents more vocal intelligibility than the 009! (Ok, a lot of text is not!)

Both listeners are not pretty, the Mysphere even less. But that speaks for its quality. Rubish in - Rubish out. Music in - music out.

 

[Kiats]

Taking the 3.2 out for a spin on the Sony TA-ZH1ES.

 

[aphexthetuss]

Hello, I am considering trying a Mysphere, but am unsure of what version to choose. I would mainly be running it off a Lotoo PAW Gold Touch, and I have seen mixed thoughts on which version to try. I hear the 3.1 was good for portable units, but also hear the 3.2 meets the output impedance requirement of the Lotoo where the 3.1 does not. Which one would I consider?

 

[hrklg01]

# aphexthetuss
The most important issue for the MYSPHERE 3 is to get the correct electric damping.
The power consuption is really relatively little.
Lotoo PAW Gold Touch offer on the 4.4mm symmetric output at 110 ohms almost 500 mW - which is about 8 times more than the MYSPHERE 3.2 require to offer 1 Pa sound pressure.
In other words and as the Lotoo PAW Gold Touch is a typical low impedant solid state amp on the output section, you should choose of sure the MYSPHERE 3.2 version.
Best regards, Heinz

 

[aphexthetuss]

# aphexthetuss
The most important issue for the MYSPHERE 3 is to get the correct electric damping.
The power consuption is really relatively little.
Lotoo PAW Gold Touch offer on the 4.4mm symmetric output at 110 ohms almost 500 mW - which is about 8 times more than the MYSPHERE 3.2 require to offer 1 Pa sound pressure.
In other words and as the Lotoo PAW Gold Touch is a typical low impedant solid state amp on the output section, you should choose of sure the MYSPHERE 3.2 version.
Best regards, Heinz

Thank you for the information! It is good to hear that impedance and power matches up well enough. Do you think quality wise it would be good enough or would it require an upgrade? Later on, I would consider getting a desktop amp and using the Lotoo as a DAC, but would it be adequate directly out of the Lotoo for the time being?

 

[hrklg01]

Absolutely!
The power is much enough!
However, not only power is important. It's also how an Amp can handle the large emk of the Mysphere driver.
Your mobile Amp can do it well, but a strong stationary Amp mostly can do it better.
The largest difference you can recognize is in the bass region. The stronger the amplifier is, the more precise Mysphere 3 act. Just the same as with speakers.
(as Mysphere drivers are speakers and not really comparable with headphone drivers).
Br heinz