[Sharppain]

Excellent write up that completely cooled off my upgrade urge. Looks like ThieAudio missed the mark with this one.

 

[Sharppain]

Guess depending on what you are after, elevated bass and zing treble is definitely not my kind of thing, MK2 tuning is near perfect in that regard

Yep, no sibilance, no zing, no bass bleed in the mids, no artificial timber, no W-shaped soundstage,.... just 'too normal'

 

[Sharppain]

I was just replying to your comment where you said Thie missed the mark with the MKIII. They didn't miss. The article/review never implied that either. In fact, their conclusion states:

I don't know how you came to the conclusion that Thie "missed the mark" from that article/review.

It's fine if you think it's not worth the upgrade and shelling out another $1,000 for a "sidegrade and a minor upgrade," isn't what you want to do.

If you want to take their treble "zing" comment and use it as your reasoning to not purchase the MKIII, that's fine too.

But Thie in no way "missed the mark" with the MKIII. They hit the mark again, and for people like me (and most reviewers), we prefer the MKIII to MKII.

So you prefer spicy vs fidelity, in that case.

 

[drspeter]

as far as I read here and there so far, it is definitely not a upgrade from mk2 if someone already has it, and new buyers can decide depending on what they are looking for in terms of preference. I actually got more curiosity about helios as it was compared with monarchs a lot with some better aspects, especially its treble performance

 

[Sharppain]

as far as I read here and there so far, it is definitely not a upgrade from mk2 if someone already has it, and new buyers can decide depending on what they are looking for in terms of preference. I actually got more curiosity about helios as it was compared with monarchs a lot with some better aspects, especially its treble performance

Hi, I have both. And the Helios is a gem - it's a crisper and cleaner presentation, slightly U-shaped and with great soundstage depth. It is a great companion for the MMk2.
Btw, my Holy trinity is Z1R ~ MMk2 ~ Helios, and if I want fun ~ UM Mest v1. Hope that gives more explanation.

 

[Click]

So you prefer spicy vs fidelity, in that case.

I prefer to actually listen to the IEM before bashing it or dismissing it based off of 1 reviewer/article's few negative opinions about the IEM, while ignoring all of the positives things being said or written about it.

You should try doing that some time.

 

[FcConstruct]

This article on headphones.com compares MK2 to MK3 in pretty good detail. My bad if it's already been posted somewhere.

Thanks for posting, author of the review here.

Excellent write up that completely cooled off my upgrade urge. Looks like ThieAudio missed the mark with this one.

No, not at all. As mentioned in the conclusion, I prefer the MkIII and I generally prefered listening to it over the MkII even having both of them in front of me. I gave a few reasons for why someone might want to avoid the MkIII, which is essentially because of its upper treble boost that accentuates every shimmer and sizzle of the hats and cymbals. This doesn't happen in every track - e.g. you aren't going to find this an issue in an acoustic guitar or classical piano performance. My music consists of a lot of alt-rock where the recording and mastering makes it challenging for many many headphones/IEMs to properly render without breaking that treble triangle I mentioned.

Ahaha, how absurd: "Truth be told, Precogvision and I decided to remove the Monarch MkII from the buying guide as we really wanted to narrow down the recommendations. The MkII felt a little too “normal” compared to the Helios and U4s despite its numerous strengths. In retrospect, perhaps that decision was a bit too hasty. The MkII is still an excellent IEM and very safe option. It’s a textbook example of doing everything a great IEM should do."

Thank you, the article's headline could be "I got so bored that I will accept some sibilance and incoherent soundstage for a smidge of detail more"

The imaging of the MkIII is not incoherent in any way. There's very clearly an intimate center image and massive horizontal soundstage for panned instruments. It's different, not incoherent. As well, I don't note much sibilance in the Monarch MkIII. Its upper treble boost mainly affects instruments such as the hats, cymbals, glockenspiel, or other chime-like instruments. Vocal sibilance is generally found around 5 - 8 kHz.

 

[Sharppain]

I prefer to actually listen to the IEM before bashing it or dismissing it based off of 1 reviewer/article's few negative opinions about the IEM, while ignoring all of the positives things being said or written about it.

You should try doing that some time.

I try to do that all the time. I never favored the MMk2, before I had enough hours with it, never regretted that it doesn't have spectrum of faceplates... to choose when ordering it.
We discussed the article and they said that they push away the MMk2 because it's 'too normal'... and other similar, absurd too me arguments, like bass bleeds in the mids but is more textured (as if it couldn't be textured w/o bleed)

 

[drspeter]

Hi, I have both. And the Helios is a gem - it's a crisper and cleaner presentation, slightly U-shaped and with great soundstage depth. It is a great companion for the MMk2.
Btw, my Holy trinity is Z1R ~ MMk2 ~ Helios, and if I want fun ~ UM Mest v1. Hope that's gives more explanation.

Thanks for sharing your experience. I enjoy my Mest mk1 as well and prefer its tuning more than v2. I am using my monarch mk1 as well but haven't heard mk2 to compare but many said mk1's characteristic bass response has been attenuated. It seems the manufacturers sometimes decide to make their new variant from the successful mk1 to have more general tuning that satisfies broader customers, which is not bad at all but sometimes ending up losing the special sauces that were the main reason why many loved such original tuning. I am seriously looking at helios, do you think that it is worth having both Mest and helios?

 

[drspeter]

Thanks for posting, author of the review here.

No, not at all. As mentioned in the conclusion, I prefer the MkIII and I generally prefered listening to it over the MkII even having both of them in front of me. I gave a few reasons for why someone might want to avoid the MkIII, which is essentially because of its upper treble boost that accentuates every shimmer and sizzle of the hats and cymbals. This doesn't happen in every track - e.g. you aren't going to find this an issue in an acoustic guitar or classical piano performance. My music consists of a lot of alt-rock where the recording and mastering makes it challenging for many many headphones/IEMs to properly render without breaking that treble triangle I mentioned.

The imaging of the MkIII is not incoherent in any way. There's very clearly an intimate center image and massive horizontal soundstage for panned instruments. It's different, not incoherent. As well, I don't note much sibilance in the Monarch MkIII. Its upper treble boost mainly affects instruments such as the hats, cymbals, glockenspiel, or other chime-like instruments. Vocal sibilance is generally found around 5 - 8 kHz.

Hi, the review was indeed helpful to understand what would be better suited for my taste. It is rare (if not none) to find the review that compares mk1 vs mk3, do you think that mk3 is a upgrade from mk1 especially in terms of technicalities such as the size of soundstage and detail retrieval? thanks!

 

[FcConstruct]

I am seriously looking at helios, do you think that it is worth having both Mest and helios?

I think so. These IEMs are sufficiently different from one another that it's worth having both if you really enjoy the MEST. And honestly, the Helios is an upgrade to the Monarch MkI as well. If you're curious, I did write a Helios review as well here. This was from about a year ago but my general thoughts on it still haven't changed.

Hi, the review was indeed helpful to understand what would be better suited for my taste. It is rare (if not none) to find the review that compares mk1 vs mk3, do you think that mk3 is a upgrade from mk1 especially in terms of technicalities such as the size of soundstage and detail retrieval? thanks!

Yes, the MkIII easily outperforms the MkI in pretty much every regard unless if you're specifically looking for the MkI's-style neutral+subbass tuning.

 

[Sharppain]

Thanks for sharing your experience. I enjoy my Mest mk1 as well and prefer its tuning more than v2. I am using my monarch mk1 as well but haven't heard mk2 to compare but many said mk1's characteristic bass response has been attenuated. It seems the manufacturers sometimes decide to make their new variant from the successful mk1 to have more general tuning that satisfies broader customers, which is not bad at all but sometimes ending up losing the special sauces that were the main reason why many loved such original tuning. I am seriously looking at helios, do you think that it is worth having both Mest and helios?

Definitely YES. They are fully different experience. And Helios is extreme value with amazing replay - check the Golden Sound review in youtube, it describes it perfectly.
Just, be aware, Helios is a big shell iem, bigger than Z1R, and needs a deep fit (despite the long nozzle).

 

[drspeter]

I think so. These IEMs are sufficiently different from one another that it's worth having both if you really enjoy the MEST. And honestly, the Helios is an upgrade to the Monarch MkI as well. If you're curious, I did write a Helios review as well here. This was from about a year ago but my general thoughts on it still haven't changed.

Yes, the MkIII easily outperforms the MkI in pretty much every regard unless if you're specifically looking for the MkI's-style neutral+subbass tuning.

Thanks! I actually prefers the tuning that subbass is elevated while keeping the midbass nicely under control, which is why I though helios would be my taste by reading its FR graph. But if MK3 is a fair upgrade in the technical performance, I would definitely consider that as one of the great option for next purchase.

 

[drspeter]

Definitely YES. They are fully different experience. And Helios is extreme value with amazing replay - check the Golden Sound review in youtube, it describes it perfectly.
Just, be aware, Helios is a big shell iem, bigger than Z1R, and needs a deep fit (despite the long nozzle).

yeap. Many pointed out Helios' fit as a main cons when they nitpick from that amazing product. It is my main concern as the failure of fitting would cost me quite a lot unless I have a free return option (things like products available from amazon) Thanks for your comment!

 

[Andrew_WOT]

Completely lost on "MKx" thing, are we still talking Monarch or Helios?
BTW, as compliment to Monarch MK2 would Z1R or U12T be a better choice, my understanding that technical performance is on U12T side, but Sony has mind boggling soundstage, thing that is the Achilles heel of all IEMs.