[kevin638880]

thanks for the impressions. mids/ vocals not as forward as odin, but still very detailed/present?

Actually haven't spent a lot of time with auditioning the Odin because the treble played and I knew it was not for me. Took it off relatively quickly.

I can only compare it with the U12t - vocals are more forward, a bit less detailed than U12t (but really how many IEMs are more detailed than this monster?).

I def wouldn't call EXT mids recessed or anything. It is very much present and detailed - just what you would expect in a TOTL iem. In any case, the DD mids/vocals are just so damn alluring - something you have to listen to yourself, it's hard to describe

 

[Tanjiro]

I‘m just rolling some tips on my EXT and finally i found my favourite - Azla Sedna light short - Followed by Spiral Dots

After over 70 hours burn in. The bass settled down and Alza Crystals no longer give me enough bass impact. I switched to Alza Sedna Eatfit light short and the bass performance is much better now. Thanks for your recommendation @ooOOoo .

 

[kevin638880]

What cables are you guys using for your EXT?

Just auditioned Horus X/Centurion/Aeneid/Code 51/Leonidas Octa.....went away with Iliad. Found it the most musical sounding and with the best vocals.

Aeneid was a close second - huge soundstage, excellent technical ability, but preferred the more musical Iliad at the end of the day. The mids did it for me - Aeneid was just missing the wow factor IMO.

 

[AEIOU9]

What cables are you guys using for your EXT?

Just auditioned Horus X/Centurion/Aeneid/Code 51/Leonidas Octa.....went away with Iliad. Found it the most musical sounding and with the best vocals.

Aeneid was a close second - huge soundstage, excellent technical ability, but preferred the more musical Iliad at the end of the day. The mids did it for me - Aeneid was just missing the wow factor IMO.

I like Centurion on the EXT a lot but the winner for me so far has been the new PW Audio First Times cable. Despite being a copper cable it doesn’t color the sound further but it does improve soundstage and increase the level of detail I hear compared to the stock cable.

 

[Rockwell75]

Does anyone have any updates around the supply/shipping of these? I'm dying to hear the EXT lol

 

[jwbrent]

Has anybody had the opportunity to compare the EVO to the EXT? I’m interested, but my budget won’t allow both in my collection unless I sell some body parts.

 

[xenithon]

I’ve got a WTB ad up for an EXT. In case anyone has taken delivery and feel they aren’t quite for them….

 

[Tanjiro]

Time for cable rolling after 80 hrs burn in. I paired my EXT with the following cables:

Satin Athena 8 braids
Toxic BW22
Toxic SW22
Brise Yatono LE

Athena brings the most punchy bass but the mid with a bit less body.

BW22 adds body to mid and enhance the bass. However, it sacrifices a bit of treble.

SW22 gives excellent low & treble, but the mid is a bit less forward.

Lastly, I settle with Yatono LE. It seems to be the most balanced cable among my collection. Deep & punchy bass, add a bit body to mid and treble retains well.

Edit: My DAP is SE180+SEM1. Have yet to try SEM2

 

[gnahra]

Has anybody had the opportunity to compare the EVO to the EXT? I’m interested, but my budget won’t allow both in my collection unless I sell some body parts.

I had them both briefly.
you probably saw on the EE thread that the Evo’s upper mids/treble were a deal breaker for me.
In brief, I would say (of course these are tied to my preferences versus being an objective comparison):
-bass: quantity goes to Evo; quality goes to EXT…the EXT has great sub-bass with a very nice rumbly quality, with no mid bleed
-mids: EXT wins easily; partly because I find the additional texture/detail from the DD on the EXT a wonderful and somewhat new experience for me, but also partly because the upper mids on the Evo made it a non-starter
-treble: again, EXT wins easily; similar to mids, the lower treble on the evo were a deal-breaker, but i more generally thought the treble on the EXT is better implemented, with more extension and air
-technicalities: close, but I might give the edge to the EXT in terms of stage and detail retrieval

to be clear: i am not saying the Evo is crap…it’s an excellent monitor. This is comparing strength versus strength, and a lot of the question of “which is better” will come down to preferences, which is certainly the case for me.

 

[jwbrent]

I had them both briefly.
you probably saw on the EE thread that the Evo’s upper mids/treble were a deal breaker for me.
In brief, I would say (of course these are tied to my preferences versus being an objective comparison):
-bass: quantity goes to Evo; quality goes to EXT…the EXT has great sub-bass with a very nice rumbly quality, with no mid bleed
-mids: EXT wins easily; partly because I find the additional texture/detail from the DD on the EXT a wonderful and somewhat new experience for me, but also partly because the upper mids on the Evo made it a non-starter
-treble: again, EXT wins easily; similar to mids, the lower treble on the evo were a deal-breaker, but i more generally thought the treble on the EXT is better implemented, with more extension and air
-technicalities: close, but I might give the edge to the EXT in terms of stage and detail retrieval

to be clear: i am not saying the Evo is crap…it’s an excellent monitor. This is comparing strength versus strength, and a lot of the question of “which is better” will come down to preferences, which is certainly the case for me.

Thank you for your impressions. This certainly is helpful to me since it is likely whichever I choose will end up being a blind purchase.

 

[gLer]

I had them both briefly.
you probably saw on the EE thread that the Evo’s upper mids/treble were a deal breaker for me.
In brief, I would say (of course these are tied to my preferences versus being an objective comparison):
-bass: quantity goes to Evo; quality goes to EXT…the EXT has great sub-bass with a very nice rumbly quality, with no mid bleed
-mids: EXT wins easily; partly because I find the additional texture/detail from the DD on the EXT a wonderful and somewhat new experience for me, but also partly because the upper mids on the Evo made it a non-starter
-treble: again, EXT wins easily; similar to mids, the lower treble on the evo were a deal-breaker, but i more generally thought the treble on the EXT is better implemented, with more extension and air
-technicalities: close, but I might give the edge to the EXT in terms of stage and detail retrieval

to be clear: i am not saying the Evo is crap…it’s an excellent monitor. This is comparing strength versus strength, and a lot of the question of “which is better” will come down to preferences, which is certainly the case for me.

Great impressions, thanks. I can't fathom any IEM coming close to what EVO does with bass, so I really have to hear this EXT you speak of. And wider stage than EVO is another thing I have to hear!

 

[Skullar]

Great impressions, thanks. I can't fathom any IEM coming close to what EVO does with bass, so I really have to hear this EXT you speak of. And wider stage than EVO is another thing I have to hear!

i just have a feeling that lower quantity on EXT will contribute to both pulling ahead in staging and perceived quality. Besides if it pulls ahead in treble with estats. That will be a score to EXT too. Need to wait and see.

 

[gLer]

i just have a feeling that lower quantity on EXT will contribute to both pulling ahead in staging and perceived quality. Besides if it pulls ahead in treble with estats. That will be a score to EXT too. Need to wait and see.

Treble I can picture, since many like their treble more extended than EVOs, and stats have a shimmering quality to them that BAs can't match. But I don't get the idea that less bass means better bass. I guess if you're not that into bass (or at least it isn't one or two on your checklist like it is for me) then it makes sense, but like @gnahra said, it then comes down to preference.

What gives EVO the edge over everything I've heard to date is the BC driver, which adds a physicality and weight to the bass while keeping it safely away from the mids, adds a reverb effect to vocals, and a realism to the treble.

All that said I'm very curious to hear any IEM that's described as going toe to toe with EVO, especially in bass.

 

[Skullar]

Treble I can picture, since many like their treble more extended than EVOs, and stats have a shimmering quality to them that BAs can't match. But I don't get the idea that less bass means better bass. I guess if you're not that into bass (or at least it isn't one or two on your checklist like it is for me) then it makes sense, but like @gnahra said, it then comes down to preference.

What gives EVO the edge over everything I've heard to date is the BC driver, which adds a physicality and weight to the bass while keeping it safely away from the mids, adds a reverb effect to vocals, and a realism to the treble.

I dont think its a simple less is better. What i said was it will contribute to more spacious sound.
Have not heard EXT myself so not drawing any conclusions, but rather speaking in general.
EVOs bass is quite thick sounding due to noticeable midbass presence. Midbass will always affect soundstage in my book.
Though what i hear so far, EXT is not shy on midbass either so will see.

Need more impressions. As @gnahra said, he only owned EVO briefly (probably needs to confirm if happy to say it was enough to draw a conclusion?) . And as you know EVO takes a while to get accustomed to lile LX was.

There is one thing EVOs is really impressive at due to BC - imaging. So curious how they both compare here.

One thing i am a bit cautious about is upper mids. I honestly like EVO upper mids and dont want any less. But is will be more of a general tuning thing, as less bass might even out with less upper mids.

 

[gLer]

I dont think its a simple less is better. What i said was it will contribute to more spacious sound.
Have not heard EXT myself so not drawing any conclusions, but rather speaking in general.
EVOs bass is quite thick sounding due to noticeable midbass presence. Midbass will always affect soundstage in my book.
Though what i hear so far, EXT is not shy on midbass either so will see.

Need more impressions. As @gnahra said, he only owned EVO briefly (probably needs to confirm if happy to say it was enough to draw a conclusion?) . And as you know EVO takes a while to get accustomed to lile LX was.

There is one thing EVOs is really impressive at due to BC - imaging. So curious how they both compare here.

One thing i am a bit cautious about is upper mids. I honestly like EVO upper mids and dont want any less. But is will be more of a general tuning thing, as less bass might even out with less upper mids.

Agreed with all of the above. EVO is the first monitor where, not sure if it's due to Weapon X, space is actually expanded despite the thicker bass. That said, I don't find EVO's bass particularly thick in the midbass, especially once you pair with Acoustune tips and a revealing source. A more detailed cable helps here too, but like I mentioned in my my review, I find the bass slopes downwards with EVO, with more pronounced sub bass than midbass. Not sure how EXT is tuned, but I've read that it has a healthy midbass rise (more midbass than sub-bass anyway). Maybe someone here can confirm? Also after my initial run-in with EVO's upper mids, I'm finding it's an essential component of the tuning, and am yet to hear any shoutiness. No doubt EXT will be more relaxed here. Another aspect EXT will almost certainly have EVO 'beat' is fit. No getting away from the fact that EVO is a chonker. I have to fit it very carefully, then not move much while listening. Whereas EXT looks much smaller and more nimble.

Very keen to try EXT, and Elysian X, though there's little to no chance of hearing the X without buying one blind, which won't happen at this price point.