[buckster666]

Can you please also share your opinion how the two compare! All details and thoughts are appreciated, thanks!

2nd that, my next iem purchase is a toss up between the Monarch MK3 or tge Prestige LTD

 

[Yanec]

2nd that, my next iem purchase is a toss up between the Monarch MK3 or tge Prestige LTD

As I was looking at the same comparison here are the fr graphs of the two plotted together from the only squig that has both at the moment:

 

[lukeyrada]

...

 

[lukeyrada]

...

 

[lukeyrada]

...

 

[JoshG1217]

Separation, imaging , timbre and resolution are all subjective also and they cannot be measured. It is all perception/opinion. Some people will agree or share your preferences regarding the Andromeda and some really rate it highly. Campfire Audio in general seem to divide opinion alot. I agree that the US manufacturers provide less value when compared to Chi Fi brands but part of that is because they build in the US so higher production costs/overheads.

Just because they can't be measured, doesn't mean they are totally subjective. Resolution can be determined fairly easily, hearing loss notwithstanding, as can imaging separation, and timbre. That doesn't mean preference may not be involved at all, but it is fairly easy to determine if an iem sounds natural, unnatural, digital, etc. Back to the andromeda, when it is muddy (lacks clarity) that is pretty easy to determine a/b. Other stuff isn't. I, for example, place zero stock in fancy expensive cables, and tests done with them consistently show that users can't actually tell the difference in a blind test. I don't think the same would be true when comparing monarch and andromeda. The difference is pretty obvious. Preference and bias definitely play a role, but a role opposed to objective analysis.

 

[lukeyrada]

...

 

[Yanec]

Maybe. I've seen a fair few praise the Andromedas for everything you've critiqued about them. Of the Campfire Audio line those and the Solaris get the most praise, from what I have seen. It is pretty interesting that folks can have the exact opposite opinion. I've not tried them so I have no opinion on them. Have heard others call the Dorado 2020s "muddy", etc too. I would disagree, I think they sound pretty clear.
Perhaps partially contributing to the confusion is what different people mean when they say clear or not clear.

Some mean detailed mids. Some elevated upper mids and treble. Some treble extension. Some just notice that the usual corrective dips at 4-5k and 10-11k are missing...

I have seen a lot of various assumptions what is clear depending on the one reviewing. I personally prefer discussing exact frequencies. Based on experience people can understand what would that mean in terms of psychiacoustic perceptions and illusions. I can directly correlate most adjectives to certain fluctuations at certain frequencies.

 

[lukeyrada]

...

 

[Yanec]

In audio it is very difficult to compare or speak with objectivity. The language used to describe things is often imprecise or just vague. At times, probably half of the time, I find some of the language in reviews to be gibberish that essentially means nothing and anything. To be fair, it can be difficult to describe sound/audio well.

I personally don't put much rank in graphs either. Graphs are black and white and don't factor in any variables, a major one being the unique implementation from every IEM. You can have 2 different IEMs graph identically but they certainly won't sound identical and one may deal with certain frequencies better or at least differently. There are plenty of IEMs that would read as incompatible with your ideal frequency response/preference but upon actually hearing them you would still like them. For me, graphs are pretty much useless. I don't even look at them because they won't tell me what I want to know.

I agree that iems with similar graphs can sound distinctly different. Especially given different quality of drivers.

But I also completely disagree that graphs are useless. They are very useful although definitely not enough alone by themselves.

 

[lukeyrada]

...

 

[Sharppain]

I hear you. I agree that it is unnatural for anything to be worn for extended periods, irrespective of fit.

I still have the OG firmware. Why risk to screw what I like for a smidge!?

 

[Sharppain]

I fully agree with the last part.

Regarding fit and size, all ears are individual. Some will align with your experience/preference and others with mine. For folks who can properly fit either IEM I would say to probably save your money and get the Monarch Mk3, which is about £250 cheaper here. For anyone even slightly concerned about the size and is blind buying then go with the Prestige LTD. I say this as someone who purchased the Monarch MK2 hoping it would fit me. It was too big so I had to sell it on. Going off somewhat unreliable audio memory I preferred the MkII, especially with vocals. I had more listening time with the MkII though so not a like for like comparison in that respect.

Yes, it is just normal and standard for vocals and timber. So normal that and such a benchmark that some reviers decided to take out from their recs since they will still have nothing to rec and they traded normal for subjective emotion.

 

[Yanec]

An age old audio debate... The human ear vs measurements via machines. To each his own. Many will swear by measurements as to how and why something sounds good or bad. I'm in the camp where all that matters is how something sounds and measurements are irrelevant to that determination. Could not care less about measurements but that's just me. On such forums I suspect this is a minority position.

I agree on the importance of actual listening.

But it is silly to state that "graphs are useless". This is a wrong radical generalization despite the importance of actual listening. Listening and graphs are not mutually exclusive, they are inherently complementary, this should really be obvious.

 

[lukeyrada]

...