[291079]

51. softears rsv (W) vs campfire audio andromeda 2020:

The rsv is smoother, warmer, more natural, sounds more like a whole, has better bass, better vocals, is more balanced between bass-mids-treble, and has better layering.

The andromeda 2020 is clearer, airier, has better background detail, leaner mids, sharper treble, better strings and acoustic instruments, and is more comfy. However, everything sounds too forward, sometimes it is too bright and the tonality sounds “off” in some areas. I am not a particular fan of this tuning.

 

[291079]

52. focal utopia (W) vs audeze lcd-5:

The utopia has more bass, fuller notes, more sub-bass, closer background detail, sounds more natural and analog, sounds more as a whole, is warmer, more intimate, male vocals sound better, is comfier and needs less power.

The lcd-5 is more transparent, leaner, airier, has tighter bass, more height and wider soundstage, is clearer, has a sharper treble, better imaging, a little faster, better instrument separation, is brighter, has sweeter vocals, and better background detail. However, strings and acoustic can sound more hollow and artificial (probably a planar thing), and bass lacks “umph” in comparison.

These two cans would complement each other well, I think. The utopia being warmer and more natural, and the lcd-5 being brighter and more analytic. To be honest, it’s hard to say I prefer one to the other. At first I sided with the lcd-5 for its transparency and clarity, but over time I think I am happier with the naturalness and the warmth of the utopia.

 

[291079]

53. campfire audio andromeda 2020 vs moondrop blessing 2 dusk (W):

The andromeda 2020 has a little more forward mids, tighter bass, more height, brighter treble, is airier, comfier, takes less power, but is more sibilant.

The dusk has more bass, has a smoother treble, is more intimate, has better background detail, some of the mids sounds clearer, sounds more as a whole, sounds more natural, has a better balance between bass-mids-treble.

 

[291079]

54. a&k acro be100 vs moondrop blessing 2 dusk (W):

So, the acro be100 is A&K’s $500 bluetooth speaker. It has aux, but I used it as near-field speakers with bluetooth. It has more bass and sub-bass, is airier, more transparent, has better male vocals and elec guitar, a slightly nicer treble, but has thinner mids and is more sibilant.

The dusk is clearer, has better mids, tighter bass, better coherence, better layering, clearer and louder background detail, is more engaging and musical, is more intimate, and has more recessed mids.

Actually, I found it a little hard to give a preference to one item here. The dusk does sound better in more areas, but the airiness and the bass of the be100 (vibrating your body instead of just your eardrums is a difference experience altogether, and I’m saying that as someone who is not a basshead) offsets it. In the end, if I could only keep one, I would probably go with the dusk, but it’s a very small preference gap.

 

[291079]

55. campfire audio andromeda 2020 vs sony ier-z1r (W):

The z1r has a sweeter treble (though it can get a little bright), more forward mids, is clearer, more transparent, more spacious, better instrument separation, cleaner and tighter bass, a little faster, great cello, better strings, more sub-bass, better layering, better imaging, more natural wider soundstage, but needs more power.

The andromeda 2020 has smoother mids, better bass-mid-treble balance, closer background detail, needs less power, is comfier, but also more sibilant and can feel bloated at times in comparison.

 

[291079]

56. 7hz timeless vs sony wf-1000xm4 (W):

The timeless has more bass and sub-bass, leaner mids, is clearer, has a little more height and a little wider soundstage, but also sounds a little hollow with a slightly harsher treble.

The 1000xm4 has fuller notes, better bass-mids-treble balance, sounds more as a whole, and is more natural.

I think technically the timeless is slightly better, but the 1000xm4 sounds more pleasant to me, being more natural, more balanced and without that planar hollowness. Also, I have to say that I wasn't a believer in wireless iems before, but i think the sonys just won me over.

 

[TheFrator]

Hey I made a Head-Fi account because I wanted to say how much I appreciate what you're doing.

 

[291079]

Hey I made a Head-Fi account because I wanted to say how much I appreciate what you're doing.

Thank you! Much appreciated And welcome to head-fi ^^

 

[denis1976]

7hz timeless vs sony wf-1000xm4 (W):

The timeless has more bass and sub-bass, leaner mids, is clearer, has a little more height and a little wider soundstage, but also sounds a little hollow with a slightly harsher treble.

The 1000xm4 has fuller notes, better bass-mids-treble balance, sounds more as a whole, and is more natural.

I think technically the timeless is slightly better, but the 1000xm4 sounds more pleasant to me, being more natural, more balanced and without that planar hollowness. Also, I have to say that I wasn't a believer in wireless iems before, but i think the sonys just won me over.

From which dap did you heard the timeless? I had the Sony in the past and yes is Sony style type of sound that I like, but timeless kicks it out of the water, better stage, better details if it sounds arsh or hallow is maybe source problem, I got to remind you that is a planar driver, yes timeless is a little V shape, that's all

 

[TheFrator]

Do you have a comparison between Focal Clear OG and Clear MG?

Also, I recommend the song Personal by Emotional Oranges to add to you listening tests (and your general catalog of music )

 

[291079]

sorry, i do

Do you have a comparison between Focal Clear OG and Clear MG?

Also, I recommend the song Personal by Emotional Oranges to add to you listening tests (and your general catalog of music )

sorry, i do not, and don't plan on it for now.
but i will definitely check out the song sometime ^^

 

[291079]

From which dap did you heard the timeless? I had the Sony in the past and yes is Sony style type of sound that I like, but timeless kicks it out of the water, better stage, better details if it sounds arsh or hallow is maybe source problem, I got to remind you that is a planar driver, yes timeless is a little V shape, that's all

mostly from my sr25. yes, i agree that the timeless has better stage and better details (in my comparison i did write that it has a wider soundstage, more height and is better technically), but i prefer the balance and naturalness of the wf-1000xm4. not sure the planar 'hollowness' is a source problem since i think the timeles sounds a little hollow and metallic even when used with my tt2. but i can see why lots of people would prefer the timeless for its technicalities. i just value tonality more than technicality, that's all, especially since i listen to mostly instrumental and vocals and not EDM or such. ^^

 

[291079]

57. moondrop blessing 2 dusk (W) vs 7hz timeless:

The dusk has tighter bass, is a little faster, has smoother mids and treble, is more natural, more engaging, more balanced between bass-mids-treble, more intimate, has fuller notes, better instruments, sounds more as a whole.

The timeless has leaner mids, more bass, is airier, has a wider soundstage, more height, better background detail, better layering, better imaging, sparklier treble, but too much bass compared to mids and has that hollow planar sound.

 

[291079]

58. hidition viento-b (universal) vs sony ier-z1r (W):

The viento-b has better mids, is more neutral, more natural, better balanced between bass-mids-treble, is comfier, more intimate, but has a hasher treble at the top end.

The z1r is airier, has a wider soundstage, better bass (and therefore better cello, elec guitar, etc), smoother and better treble, better imaging, better layering, more height, better instrument separation, is more transparent, and a little faster.

Whereas I do love the viento-b for its naturalness and its mids (I do listen to midcentric music a lot after all), the technicalities of the z1r is just that much superior, especially when it gets enough power. Not entirely sure how much better a custom viento would be, but that's for another day I guess.

 

[291079]

59. focal elegia vs focal utopia (W):

The elegia has more forward mids, is more lively, has that closed studio sound (so sounds good with small studio music), but has a harsher treble.

The utopias are better in almost every aspect. It's overall smoother, has better mids, is airier, clearer, more transparent, more natural, has a smoother treble, better bass, more sub-bass, wider soundstage, more height, better imaging and layering, and better background detail especially when many instruments are present.

Of course, the real question is just how much worse is the elegia? (I'm sure no one expected the elegia to win). I would say that it sounds 70-80% of the utopias, depending on genre. That's a pretty good deal, considering that new elegias can be found at a tenth of the utopia's msrp, and that it can easily be driven from daps.