[Soundstageluvr]

I have to ordered the horn tips. I like how it bring all three sizes. I'll post my thoughts tomorrow when I listen to them.

 

[Jerry-S]

You can count on it, I will run through my reference playlist side by side, volume matched and make some notes, which I will happily share

I've been trying to decide which of these two sets to buy and there is very little buyer/user feedback on the Mangird tea. So an in depth comparison of the two would i'm sure benefit me and many others. Thanks

 

[finalstan]

I've been trying to decide which of these two sets to buy and there is very little buyer/user feedback on the Mangird tea. So an in depth comparison of the two would i'm sure benefit me and many others. Thanks

I've been listening for hours each day since Friday, alternating between the two sets. I haven't sat down yet to do side by side but I think I've got a pretty good idea by now. Problem is, I am also 'burning in' the DX160, which complicates things a little as I am getting used to its presentation on top (which is great, btw). I can tell you now that Mangirds are superior in almost every way (to me) and I will explain why by giving you a breakdown (they are not million miles apart, though). Please give me another day or two.

 

[Codename john]

If you want something with even more delicious bass and more coherent sound-stage with forward vocals - Hidiz MS4 is my all-time favorite, albeit it's rather large & heavy. But IMHO L3 outperforms both! Only FH7 can be considered an upgrade to L3 (or L9).
I didn't know Thieaudio was a Linsoul company. Bravo Linsoul . For my endgame TOTL - I'll be watching it...

The Ms4 are very underrated

 

[Codename john]

I don’t have either, but it was my understanding that the FH5 and FH7 are two different flavors. While the FH7 is technically superior, some may prefer the sound of the FH5, with it’s higher quantity of bass. Is this accurate? I really haven’t read where fit has been an issue with either, since they have the custom-universal shape. The FH7 does have that huge beryllium DD though.

The Fh7 are better in every way. Fh5 are very good for the price. The bass is the thing with the f5 proper basshead territory. The fh7 has a more accurate and versatile bass, better highs , soundstage, imaging etc etc. The fh7 are my personal favourites opinions may vary.

 

[finalstan]

@IEMusic and @Jerry-S

Realised I wouldn't have time to write up today or tomorrow (and then definitely not for another week) so here it is:

Mangird Teas vs Legacy 3 comparison
TL;DR: Both sets are really great and enjoyable in their own right; not million miles apart in any aspect really, so I had to dig deeper. Mangird Teas are superior to L3 in my opinion in everything except mid-bass slam, which they may lack for some. MTs shine in the mids and with buttery smooth presentation, which is neither too loose, nor too analytical. Comparison also revealed how coloured L3’s sound is across the board. You truly buy into the whole (very fun) sound with them.

For set up, I used iBasso DX160 and I played a few songs from my reference playlist: Loreen – Breaking Robot (pop), George Michael – Fastlove (live from MTV unplugged), Natalie Prass – Sisters (Indie), and a few others. I listen to a lot of electronica as well, all the files were FLAC. It’s a good representation of what I listen to, FYI.

As for IEMs, the L3 I set the switches to 0,1. This is not a popular setting and even though I played around with other settings, I just couldn’t agree with them. This is the only setting that gives them a fighting chance against MTs, in my opinion. Since this is the brightest setting, I think it’s safe to assume I am not a basshead – I love a good bass but I value texture and tightness more than quantity. There is a slight ‘distraction’ (fatigue) and bass bleed to my ears on other switch settings of L3s and 0,1 helps to tame that while pushing mids and treble a little forward, which they need.

Bass. Quantity is greater on L3s but showing signs of bloat. Not the case with MTs. Some may call the latter lean but it can definitely show its punch when it’s called for. It’s clean with no signs of bleed into the mids; flat with slight emphasis on sub-bass – that I find very, very pleasing. With L3s, I feel like I am sitting between two speakers – it’s a party and that carries a certain wow factor. MTs sound more like what I would expect IEMs to sound – clean and controlled but still giving me the quantity I need to enjoy my music. Any less bass, though, and I would agree that they are too lean so taking into account my non-bassheaded-ness, YMMV.

Mids. Vocals: again, L3 show coloration here and the vocals are a little bit more recessed compared to more forward presentation of MTs (the difference isn’t big, though). Both please, with no sign of sibilance. On a couple of occasions with Mangrids I said ‘wow’ to the vocal presentation, they really do it so well. I tackle layering in technicalities below.

Treble: This is the area with least differences to my ears. MTs have more air and sparkle and extend further, no doubt; overall both are good, if unremarkable (I may be spoiled by my extensive experience with CL2s and P1s planars).

Technicalities. I will use this as a catch all for everything else that stands out to me. I mentioned colouration of L3s sound – it really is there. L3 is the warmer set. Mangirds notes are tighter on both attack and decay but L3 is no slouch. Overall presentation is smooth and slightly laid back (M) vs bold and more forward (L3). Stage is the same, sound coherence also (and great). Layering is also great on both, but with busier tracks MTs are showing greater resolution (more drivers get the job done), L3 gets a bit messy by comparison (this is across the board, but particularly noticeable when vocals are ‘stacked’ on some songs). Neither could be described as analytical, both are very musical and tuned to please. And that’s it.

 

[IEMusic]

@IEMusic and @Jerry-S

Realised I wouldn't have time to write up today or tomorrow (and then definitely not for another week) so here it is:

Mangird Teas vs Legacy 3 comparison
TL;DR: Both sets are really great and enjoyable in their own right; not million miles apart in any aspect really, so I had to dig deeper. Mangird Teas are superior to L3 in my opinion in everything except mid-bass slam, which they may lack for some. MTs shine in the mids and with buttery smooth presentation, which is neither too loose, nor too analytical. Comparison also revealed how coloured L3’s sound is across the board. You truly buy into the whole (very fun) sound with them.

For set up, I used iBasso DX160 and I played a few songs from my reference playlist: Loreen – Breaking Robot (pop), George Michael – Fastlove (live from MTV unplugged), Natalie Prass – Sisters (Indie), and a few others. I listen to a lot of electronica as well, all the files were FLAC. It’s a good representation of what I listen to, FYI.

As for IEMs, the L3 I set the switches to 0,1. This is not a popular setting and even though I played around with other settings, I just couldn’t agree with them. This is the only setting that gives them a fighting chance against MTs, in my opinion. Since this is the brightest setting, I think it’s safe to assume I am not a basshead – I love a good bass but I value texture and tightness more than quantity. There is a slight ‘distraction’ (fatigue) and bass bleed to my ears on other switch settings of L3s and 0,1 helps to tame that while pushing mids and treble a little forward, which they need.

Bass. Quantity is greater on L3s but showing signs of bloat. Not the case with MTs. Some may call the latter lean but it can definitely show its punch when it’s called for. It’s clean with no signs of bleed into the mids; flat with slight emphasis on sub-bass – that I find very, very pleasing. With L3s, I feel like I am sitting between two speakers – it’s a party and that carries a certain wow factor. MTs sound more like what I would expect IEMs to sound – clean and controlled but still giving me the quantity I need to enjoy my music. Any less bass, though, and I would agree that they are too lean so taking into account my non-bassheaded-ness, YMMV.

Mids. Vocals: again, L3 show coloration here and the vocals are a little bit more recessed compared to more forward presentation of MTs (the difference isn’t big, though). Both please, with no sign of sibilance. On a couple of occasions with Mangrids I said ‘wow’ to the vocal presentation, they really do it so well. I tackle layering in technicalities below.

Treble: This is the area with least differences to my ears. MTs have more air and sparkle and extend further, no doubt; overall both are good, if unremarkable (I may be spoiled by my extensive experience with CL2s and P1s planars).

Technicalities. I will use this as a catch all for everything else that stands out to me. I mentioned colouration of L3s sound – it really is there. L3 is the warmer set. Mangirds notes are tighter on both attack and decay but L3 is no slouch. Overall presentation is smooth and slightly laid back (M) vs bold and more forward (L3). Stage is the same, sound coherence also (and great). Layering is also great on both, but with busier tracks MTs are showing greater resolution (more drivers get the job done), L3 gets a bit messy by comparison (this is across the board, but particularly noticeable when vocals are ‘stacked’ on some songs). Neither could be described as analytical, both are very musical and tuned to please. And that’s it.

Thanks for taking the time to provide us with such a detailed write up! That is basically what I was hoping and expecting from the Tea compared to the L3.

 

[originalsnuffy]

I appreciate the write-up vs.the Tea; but I think our views of what a preferred sound would be are pretty far apart. I only use the L3 in 0,0 or 1,1.

 

[IEMusic]

I appreciate the write-up vs.the Tea; but I think our views of what a preferred sound would be are pretty far apart. I only use the L3 in 0,0 or 1,1.

That’s actually what I really appreciate about his write-up. He made his music/sound preferences clearly known. That‘s really key for interpreting his information for our own purposes.

 

[finalstan]

I appreciate the write-up vs.the Tea; but I think our views of what a preferred sound would be are pretty far apart. I only use the L3 in 0,0 or 1,1.

I think I can address that. In those settings bass is pushed a little more forward and mids and treble back, to my ears (they are not that different between themselves). My comments would still apply, but would include more things like 'muddier bass', more recessed mids etc. I went with my preferred switch setting, which is actually bringing the two sets closer together, but the differences would still be the same, just more apparent. This should also tell you, understanding that it's still subjective coming from one person, what to expect from Mangirds.

I learned in the process what is closer to my ideal tuning and presentation, and that is what Mangirds offer. So something leaner, flatter and more extended but still musical. I can't commit to spending more money for the time being but I am eyeing EJ07s/the new Thieaudio tribrids... Black Friday maybe?

 

[IEMusic]

I think I can address that. In those settings bass is pushed a little more forward and mids and treble back, to my ears (they are not that different between themselves). My comments would still apply, but would include more things like 'muddier bass', more recessed mids etc. I went with my preferred switch setting, which is actually bringing the two sets closer together, but the differences would still be the same, just more apparent. This should also tell you, understanding that it's still subjective coming from one person, what to expect from Mangirds.

I learned in the process what is closer to my ideal tuning and presentation, and that is what Mangirds offer. So something leaner, flatter and more extended but still musical. I can't commit to spending more money for the time being but I am eyeing EJ07s/the new Thieaudio tribrids... Black Friday maybe?

That would be perfect. It gives time for the early purchasers to provide impressions/feedback on all the new tribrids. I imagine 11.11.20/single’s day will provide the best sales.

 

[Jerry-S]

I've been listening for hours each day since Friday, alternating between the two sets. I haven't sat down yet to do side by side but I think I've got a pretty good idea by now. Problem is, I am also 'burning in' the DX160, which complicates things a little as I am getting used to its presentation on top (which is great, btw). I can tell you now that Mangirds are superior in almost every way (to me) and I will explain why by giving you a breakdown (they are not million miles apart, though). Please give me another day or two.

@IEMusic and @Jerry-S

Realised I wouldn't have time to write up today or tomorrow (and then definitely not for another week) so here it is:

Mangird Teas vs Legacy 3 comparison
TL;DR: Both sets are really great and enjoyable in their own right; not million miles apart in any aspect really, so I had to dig deeper. Mangird Teas are superior to L3 in my opinion in everything except mid-bass slam, which they may lack for some. MTs shine in the mids and with buttery smooth presentation, which is neither too loose, nor too analytical. Comparison also revealed how coloured L3’s sound is across the board. You truly buy into the whole (very fun) sound with them.

For set up, I used iBasso DX160 and I played a few songs from my reference playlist: Loreen – Breaking Robot (pop), George Michael – Fastlove (live from MTV unplugged), Natalie Prass – Sisters (Indie), and a few others. I listen to a lot of electronica as well, all the files were FLAC. It’s a good representation of what I listen to, FYI.

As for IEMs, the L3 I set the switches to 0,1. This is not a popular setting and even though I played around with other settings, I just couldn’t agree with them. This is the only setting that gives them a fighting chance against MTs, in my opinion. Since this is the brightest setting, I think it’s safe to assume I am not a basshead – I love a good bass but I value texture and tightness more than quantity. There is a slight ‘distraction’ (fatigue) and bass bleed to my ears on other switch settings of L3s and 0,1 helps to tame that while pushing mids and treble a little forward, which they need.

Bass. Quantity is greater on L3s but showing signs of bloat. Not the case with MTs. Some may call the latter lean but it can definitely show its punch when it’s called for. It’s clean with no signs of bleed into the mids; flat with slight emphasis on sub-bass – that I find very, very pleasing. With L3s, I feel like I am sitting between two speakers – it’s a party and that carries a certain wow factor. MTs sound more like what I would expect IEMs to sound – clean and controlled but still giving me the quantity I need to enjoy my music. Any less bass, though, and I would agree that they are too lean so taking into account my non-bassheaded-ness, YMMV.

Mids. Vocals: again, L3 show coloration here and the vocals are a little bit more recessed compared to more forward presentation of MTs (the difference isn’t big, though). Both please, with no sign of sibilance. On a couple of occasions with Mangrids I said ‘wow’ to the vocal presentation, they really do it so well. I tackle layering in technicalities below.

Treble: This is the area with least differences to my ears. MTs have more air and sparkle and extend further, no doubt; overall both are good, if unremarkable (I may be spoiled by my extensive experience with CL2s and P1s planars).

Technicalities. I will use this as a catch all for everything else that stands out to me. I mentioned colouration of L3s sound – it really is there. L3 is the warmer set. Mangirds notes are tighter on both attack and decay but L3 is no slouch. Overall presentation is smooth and slightly laid back (M) vs bold and more forward (L3). Stage is the same, sound coherence also (and great). Layering is also great on both, but with busier tracks MTs are showing greater resolution (more drivers get the job done), L3 gets a bit messy by comparison (this is across the board, but particularly noticeable when vocals are ‘stacked’ on some songs). Neither could be described as analytical, both are very musical and tuned to please. And that’s it.

Excellent, thank you.

 

[Banbeucmas]

Got my Legacy 3 review up so I decided to post it here
https://banbeu.com/thieaudio-legacy-3-review/

Honestly, while it is a decent IEM with the tuning that I think a lot of people is going to appriciate. The draw back from its technicalities doesn't make me feel confident in recommending it.

I would love to see ThieAudio getting better and this Legacy 3 does shows some potential from the brand. Maybe next time.

 

[laleeee]

Honestly, while it is a decent IEM with the tuning that I think a lot of people is going to appriciate. The draw back from its technicalities doesn't make me feel confident in recommending it.

I would love to see ThieAudio getting better and this Legacy 3 does shows some potential from the brand. Maybe next time.
[/QUOTE]

Got my Legacy 3 review up so I decided to post it here
https://banbeu.com/thieaudio-legacy-3-review/

Honestly, while it is a decent IEM with the tuning that I think a lot of people is going to appriciate. The draw back from its technicalities doesn't make me feel confident in recommending it.

I would love to see ThieAudio getting better and this Legacy 3 does shows some potential from the brand. Maybe next time.

Can you recommend a better iem in this price range ?

 

[firesign]

Can you recommend a better iem in this price range ?

I like the Reecho & Peacock Spring more than the Legacy 3 (I have both).
And maybe even the iBasso IT01 (and IT00) are better than the Legacy 3. Less bass impact, but better technicalities.