64 Audio U12t Review (IEM)

[markanini]

I don't mean to beat a long dead and decomposing horse, but I just read through the entire thread and wanted to throw in my 2 cents.
I owned maybe 15 different IEMs over the last two years. I sold or gave away what IEMs I didn't care for and I'm holding on to a few that I actually regularly use.
I'm a frugal person and I know my way around audio and measurements. I classify myself as a trained listener and don't spend money I don't need to get the performance I want.
Seeing how the published FR graphs often don't really reflect my personal impressions, and Youtube reviewers are not a good source of recommendations, I bought the passes to the CanJam in NYC earlier this year and made a point of listening to many IEMs as to have a better insight into the market.

I eventually made my way to 64 Audio table and got to listen to the U4S and the U12T. U4S sounded OK but definitely not worth the asking price, but the U12T was indeed special.
My U12T impression was actually the opposite of what the graphs show. The female vocals in a really congested tune that I often use for evaluation were well defined and right in my face, whereas typically on textbook IEMs they are more thin sounding and further back in the mix.
The measured dip at 3kHz would suggest the vocals would be disadvantaged, but that's not what I heard. Whatever psychoacoustic effect was at play was very beneficial to my ear. The music overall sounded full and warm and pleasant without loss of detail. It might not be the most analytical IEM, but it's what I would want as my daily driver. I totally understand the high rankings it gets from reviewers. 64 Audio got the euphony right here.

The asking price for the U12t (even on the used market) is more than I like to spend on an IEM, but a used 64 Audio Nio came up for sale for less and I bought it. The Nio is very similar to the U12T, it replaces the 4 BA's responsible for bass with one DD. The midrange and treble are the same configuration from what I can tell. It's not quite the same experience as I remember from the U12T at CanJam, but it still is subjectively better than my Hype 4 and my Dusk which measure better.

It's theoretically possible that a deviating looking frequency response can be viable and preferable to some listeners based on their specific habits and taste. I try not to be reductive and say that something is bad just because it doesntt conform with an established curve. We are talking about an ear canal coupled transducers at the end of the day, and the science is not that granular as steady state devices such as amps or DACs. A wide range of individual anatomy variability can substantially affect the in-situ frequency response that the graph can represent in a singlular curve. My only remaining qualms with 64Audio is that they demand a premium for their unique tuning, and the less than standard FR increases the risk of being a bad fit for many users if they choose to blind buy. One user a few years ago shared his journey in a thread, blog style, about acquiring a 64 Audio IEM which he went into with unrestrained optimism. But things turned sour for him due to QC issues and a restrictive return policy (he should have negotiated about this prior to purchasing IMO). In your case you had a good experience it seems, and you were able to demo the product beforehand to determine if it was worked the asking price and things turned out well for you. I would say you should enjoy them and ignore shallow criticism.

 

[ryaneagon]

I don't mean to beat a long dead and decomposing horse, but I just read through the entire thread and wanted to throw in my 2 cents.
I owned maybe 15 different IEMs over the last two years. I sold or gave away what IEMs I didn't care for and I'm holding on to a few that I actually regularly use.
I'm a frugal person and I know my way around audio and measurements. I classify myself as a trained listener and don't spend money I don't need to get the performance I want.
Seeing how the published FR graphs often don't really reflect my personal impressions, and Youtube reviewers are not a good source of recommendations, I bought the passes to the CanJam in NYC earlier this year and made a point of listening to many IEMs as to have a better insight into the market.

I eventually made my way to 64 Audio table and got to listen to the U4S and the U12T. U4S sounded OK but definitely not worth the asking price, but the U12T was indeed special.
My U12T impression was actually the opposite of what the graphs show. The female vocals in a really congested tune that I often use for evaluation were well defined and right in my face, whereas typically on textbook IEMs they are more thin sounding and further back in the mix.
The measured dip at 3kHz would suggest the vocals would be disadvantaged, but that's not what I heard. Whatever psychoacoustic effect was at play was very beneficial to my ear. The music overall sounded full and warm and pleasant without loss of detail. It might not be the most analytical IEM, but it's what I would want as my daily driver. I totally understand the high rankings it gets from reviewers. 64 Audio got the euphony right here.

The asking price for the U12t (even on the used market) is more than I like to spend on an IEM, but a used 64 Audio Nio came up for sale for less and I bought it. The Nio is very similar to the U12T, it replaces the 4 BA's responsible for bass with one DD. The midrange and treble are the same configuration from what I can tell. It's not quite the same experience as I remember from the U12T at CanJam, but it still is subjectively better than my Hype 4 and my Dusk which measure better.

Totally agree with your take. I have the A12t, and I’ve spent time comparing it with the Thieaudio Monarch MKIII. The MKIII definitely has more air and brightness, but to me, it just sounds a bit unnatural—almost too “hi-fi” for its own good. The A12t, on the other hand, is one of the most natural-sounding IEMs I’ve ever heard. It’s got that realism, but it still slams when it needs to—deep bass, tight kick, solid sub-bass.

I also have a custom MEST MKII, which is probably my favorite IEM overall. It’s not the most accurate of the bunch, but man, it’s fun. Engaging, exciting, and just super enjoyable to listen to. It’ll play anything you throw at it and make it sound good.

The A12t is a bit pickier—it doesn’t sugarcoat poorly recorded or mastered music—but when the source is good, it shines. I actually love having both, because they complement each other perfectly. Totally different tunings, but both bring something special to the table.

I will say, it usually takes me about 20–30 minutes to recalibrate my ears when switching between them. But once I settle in, I honestly love them both equally—it just depends on my mood and what I’m listening to.

 

[JamoBroGuy]

The A12t, on the other hand, is one of the most natural-sounding IEMs I’ve ever heard. It’s got that realism, but it still slams when it needs to—deep bass, tight kick, solid sub-bass.

The A12t is a bit pickier—it doesn’t sugarcoat poorly recorded or mastered music—but when the source is good, it shines.

Unsurprising, since it’s a studio reference monitor.

For those who don’t know, 64 Audio tunes their universals differently than their customs to please audiophiles. The U12t is not flat, the A12t is. Most pro companies don’t do this (for rather obvious reasons), but 64 does.