Moondrop Lab

[Jimbob54]

So what's the reason to use these xMEMS driver? Do they have some magical properties?

Best I can tell, to add another selling point/differentiator into the mix .

 

[InfiniteJester]

I just find cool to understand, try and collect different technologies.

I don't expect magical clarity, resolution, transparency, openness and everything else.

 

[CedarX]

So what's the reason to use these xMEMS driver? Do they have some magical properties?

The technology looks cool, but you ask the right question: is there any actual benefit for audio?

@Jimbob54 has identified one: the differentiating aspect. In the audio business, where milking the subjective and perception biases is (still) very important, differentiating alone justifies the xMEMS…

We’ll have to wait for objective measurements & evaluations to see if there is anything else…

 

[Joe Bloggs]

$99, apparently.

But it works with the HiBy music app to select presets and such. This app is so awful that it literally doesn't scan my files. I literally cannot use it.

But, depending on the tuning, even without being able to use the app, I may buy them.

Edit: Terrible measurements.

View attachment 395307
View attachment 395308View attachment 395309

It looks like the OAE1 by Axel Grell. Same dip in the treble.

It may be interesting for people who love sets that are simultaneously harsh and muffled.

The measurements are not finalized and depends on the sample rate used because of there being a digital crossover and two DACs, and because the digital signal is never resampled through all of these...

I will have to ask them to kindly try remeasuring with new firmware... though I can't claim that a new curve will be to everyone's liking either.

I've banged my head on the hardware setup here and my head definitely came out worse off in the encounter, will be interesting to see what Moondrop manages to pull out of the xMEMS driver here whichever iteration it is.

 

[mc.god]

I'm very sensible to ear-gain. If you look to the other two graphs, the low amount of bass and the elevated 2k to 4k region would probably make it sound harsh, at least for me.

I just think that the abundance of mid-bass and lower mids will more than cover up for the 2.5k and 4 k peaks, avoiding harshness effect but making them muddy due to the lack in the higher region.
I included the MP145 in the comparison remembering you liking them, the two peaks are not so much higher than MP145 but the bloat region is far more elevated.
But clearly these are just speculations.

 

[anaveragebear]

Could be benefits on the production side, assuming good implementation ofc. Low distortion, good extension, better impulse response...we shall see.

 

[InfiniteJester]

I just think that the abundance of mid-bass and lower mids will more than cover up for the 2.5k and 4 k peaks, avoiding harshness effect but making them muddy due to the lack in the higher region.
I included the MP145 in the comparison remembering you liking them, the two peaks are not so much higher than MP145 but the bloat region is far more elevated.
But clearly these are just speculations.

In the first graph, the ear-gain doesn't look as prominent, but in the other two it clearly rises above the bass.

Maybe the other guys have a different calibration and comparisons made with their squigs would also show that they are in line with the MP145.

It is not my intention to argue. You are probably right. I was just supporting my assumption by the comparisons to OAE1, which it is said to be both harsh and veiled.

Thanks for the dialogue and for remembering my tastes to compare the sets!

 

[Matias]

The Moondrop M4P MTM Passive Monitor speakers have really nice spin and distortion data. Interesting! 400 usd

MOONDROP M4P MTM Passive Monitor Speaker

shenzhenaudio.com: professional headphone, earphone, amplifier, dac, decoder, hifi player, cable supermarket. you will find good price here.

shenzhenaudio.com

SPECIFICATIONS
Description: 2-Way 4inch MonitorSpeaker
Impedance: 4ohms
Weight: 6.2kg(13.66 lb)
Crossover Frequency: 1800Hz
Sensitivity: 85dB(2.83Vrms/1M)
Rated PowerInput: 75W
MaxPowerInput: 150W
FrequencyResponse: 60Hz-30000Hz(-3dB,IEC61094-4Type WS3)
Woofer: 2x4inch(87mm)Carbon Cone Woofer
Tweeter: 1xlinch(25mm)ALU Mag Dome Tweeter
Dimensions(HxDxW): 380mm*185mm*155mm(14.96 inch*7.28 inch*6.10 inch)
Color: Matte black, Matte white

 

[InfiniteJester]

The Moondrop M4P MTM Passive Monitor speakers have really nice spin and distortion data. Interesting! 400 usd

MOONDROP M4P MTM Passive Monitor Speaker

shenzhenaudio.com: professional headphone, earphone, amplifier, dac, decoder, hifi player, cable supermarket. you will find good price here.

shenzhenaudio.com

View attachment 395930

SPECIFICATIONS
Description: 2-Way 4inch MonitorSpeaker
Impedance: 4ohms
Weight: 6.2kg(13.66 lb)
Crossover Frequency: 1800Hz
Sensitivity: 85dB(2.83Vrms/1M)
Rated PowerInput: 75W
MaxPowerInput: 150W
FrequencyResponse: 60Hz-30000Hz(-3dB,IEC61094-4Type WS3)
Woofer: 2x4inch(87mm)Carbon Cone Woofer
Tweeter: 1xlinch(25mm)ALU Mag Dome Tweeter
Dimensions(HxDxW): 380mm*185mm*155mm(14.96 inch*7.28 inch*6.10 inch)
Color: Matte black, Matte white

They look good, but that bass distortion is quite high. Compare them with the cheaper (600€ a pair) Elac Debut Reference DBR-62, which also measure quite good in terms of tuning and seem to have better bass.

 

[staticV3]

They look good, but that bass distortion is quite high. Compare them with the cheaper (600€ a pair) Elac Debut Reference DBR-62, which also measure quite good in terms of tuning and seem to have better bass.

View attachment 395933
View attachment 395932

Distortion data is meaningless if we don't know at what SPL it was measured.

 

[InfiniteJester]

Distortion data is meaningless if we don't know at what SPL it was measured.

Good point, I assumed that it was 85dB. But this is not guaranteed.

 

[thewas]

Even if SPL would be stated it doesn't mean much as its usually not measured in anechoic chambers and in this case measurements from different sources are not directly comparable.

 

[tjf]

One thing is certain (to me at least) -- asking a 4", or even two 4" drivers -- to reproduce sub 200 Hz content at levels above 80db -- will have distortion/dynamic range issues below 200 Hz...

A sub plus proper High Pass filter / bass mgmt between 100 and 200 Hz are really needed here, especially if used in mid or far field listening scenarios...

 

[mc.god]

Do you think the differences between Kadenz and Kato are worth a new model? But ok, market laws require you to renew the offer every now and again...

Gate are there just to remember why one should spend 9X more...

 

[Dazerdoreal]

Gate are there just to remember why one should spend 9X more...

Up to 10k, the Kadenz and especially the Kato will not sound worse but at least different than the Gate, mainly because of the style of the bass up to 300hz. Just like the Kadenz will sound noticeably different from the Kato. The differences you see on this graph are not as negligible as you might think. While it is possible to get used to all of these sound signatures, we are nerds here. I agree that this is not a question of better/worse though. Some might even prefer the sub-bass focus of the Gate.

In the upper treble, I expect the Gate to do worse than the Gate/Kato in an at least noticeable way. I own the Gate and I can say that the upper treble quality sounds lower than on any other IEM I have heard, in a way which (likely) cannot be corrected with eartips. The "lack of smoothness" in the upper treble is more drastic than usually. This is an area cheap IEMs still tend to do worse, and you can also see it on the graph: The pattern above 10k does not follow a smooth curve like on the other IEMs, but it is more like a spike followed by another spike. This is not a big deal for most people, but as I said, we are nerds here.

Not saying that you need to buy the Kadenz because of this. I agree that the vast majority of the population does not need more than a budget priced Chi-Fi IEM. But people who post hundreds or thousands of posts in this forum will likely care about these small differences. Other aspects include build/comfort/looks/etc.

 

[markanini]

Do you think the differences between Kadenz and Kato are worth a new model? But ok, market laws require you to renew the offer every now and again... View attachment 401929

Gate are there just to remember why one should spend 9X more...

Worth the price difference or not,
Given that all have different nozzles length and different included tips I there's a potential to sound more different in-situ than the graphs suggest < 3kHz.

 

[mc.god]

Up to 10k, the Kadenz and especially the Kato will not sound worse but at least different than the Gate, mainly because of the style of the bass up to 300hz. Just like the Kadenz will sound noticeably different from the Kato. The differences you see on this graph are not as negligible as you might think. While it is possible to get used to all of these sound signatures, we are nerds here. I agree that this is not a question of better/worse though. Some might even prefer the sub-bass focus of the Gate.

My question was indeed only between Kato and Kadenz, and I was genuinely curious about your opinions on how much their differences would justify the creation of a new "model" in the line, especially since Kadenz doesn't seem to address much the lack of smoothness in the higher region that you also point out.

In the upper treble, I expect the Gate to do worse than the Gate/Kato in an at least noticeable way. I own the Gate and I can say that the upper treble quality sounds lower than on any other IEM I have heard, in a way which (likely) cannot be corrected with eartips. The "lack of smoothness" in the upper treble is more drastic than usually. This is an area cheap IEMs still tend to do worse, and you can also see it on the graph: The pattern above 10k does not follow a smooth curve like on the other IEMs, but it is more like a spike followed by another spike. This is not a big deal for most people, but as I said, we are nerds here.

Not saying that you need to buy the Kadenz because of this. I agree that the vast majority of the population does not need more than a budget priced Chi-Fi IEM. But people who post hundreds or thousands of posts in this forum will likely care about these small differences. Other aspects include build/comfort/looks/etc.

I agree that Gate will sound slightly different from the other 2, but again, precisely in the higher region Kadenz doesn't seem to me so much better as one would expect from a 9X priced iem these days and as one could be expecting as a real improvement from the "older generation" Kato.

 

[mc.god]

Worth the price difference or not,
Given that all have different nozzles length and different included tips I there's a potential to sound more different in-situ than the graphs suggest < 3kHz.

That's for sure, Kadenz also have three different nozzle for tuning and a new DSP type-c cable in bundle, so there are other reasons for them, but as I said above, I would expect some more fixing to the FR lacks of Kato.