smokecrack
Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2012
- Posts
- 60
- Likes
- 42
M9 has a slightly warmer sound signature. The U12t is sort of neutral/sterile sounding.This comparison has my interest! owning the m9 and wondering how it holds up to the u12t and whether it would be considered an upgrade.
From your description it sounds like the 'soundstage' is wider with m9 in comparison to u12t (at least in width) and a cooler sound signature (relative mid bass?). Any other comments from your comparison in tonality or technicalities?
One day I will test the u12t for myself, knowing the impossibilities of reconciling the reviews and comparison's online. but an interesting discussion nonetheless!
I have also heard the m9s being described as lacking in dynamics and wondered whether this is a technicality of a driver or tonality, with the m9 having relatively less peaks/troughs in comparison to other iem's. I have read modern music being criticized for being compressed and without much dynamic range, one reason being to flatten out a singers volume when recording. A general question to those in the business: can dynamic range of a transuducer be tested? e.g. if played into a microphone, couldn't the relative peaks/troughs be measured and compared?
Yes, M9 definitely had a wider soundstage and in general is just more enjoyable to listen to.
The packaging and build of the M9 is also a step up. Not that the U12t has poor build quality, but the M9 is clearly better. M9 is also more comfortable and comes with a better cable. Regardless of the price of each model, the M9 was a clear upgrade for me.
The only thing I kind of dislike about the M9 is it's supposed to be a pro stage monitor and yet replacement tips are pretty hard to find (at least in my size). And basic maintenance isn't a challenge, but you need to be careful because the filter is glued in and non-replaceable.