Moondrop Para 2 Planar Headphone Review

[Oldson]

this is also worth a look

 

[syhooo]

关于这一点以及Syhoo的评论，目前我只见过unheard用类似Amir的设备进行测量。有趣的是，Para 2在3kHz以下的频率响应与Cosmo完全相同，3kHz以上则略有偏差，但Para 2略微提升了低频以抵消漏音导致的滚降，而Cosmo则完全是滚降并伴有漏音……Para 2和Cosmo使用了相同的耳罩，这表明驱动单元和箱体差异可能是造成这种差异的原因。

读到一位制作图表风格与Amirs如此相似的人的主观评测，真是令人沮丧。在Cosmo的评测中，他称赞Cosmo物超所值（！），而对Para 2却质疑“升级在哪里”，但Para 2明明就是Cosmo的一半价位。

The frequency response of planar magnetic headphones is heavily influenced by the pads. Sai has always been a strong advocate for pad rolling, which is why he has measured the FR of almost every headphone with various pad configurations. Subjective listening experiences vary even more from person to person. In my opinion, the main reason Sai didn't give the Para2 a high rating is likely the marginal improvement it offers over the Para1.

 

[Zekbone]

The frequency response of planar magnetic headphones is heavily influenced by the pads. Sai has always been a strong advocate for pad rolling, which is why he has measured the FR of almost every headphone with various pad configurations. Subjective listening experiences vary even more from person to person. In my opinion, the main reason Sai didn't give the Para2 a high rating is likely the marginal improvement it offers over the Para1.

How could that possibly justify his conclusion about the Cosmo, then? Its not good value.

 

[ObjectiveSubjectivist]

It's his personal opinion. For him it is that, for someone it could be very good value.
Both statements are valid.

Seriously people should pay much less attention to what's other people said/think.

 

[migo77]

It's his personal opinion. For him it is that, for someone it could be very good value.
Both statements are valid.

Seriously people should pay much less attention to what's other people said/think.

Exactly! I have tested both of them and decided to keep one. Only your own ears can decide that...

 

[Zekbone]

It's his personal opinion. For him it is that, for someone it could be very good value.
Both statements are valid.

Seriously people should pay much less attention to what's other people said/think.

So when are you going to stop responding to my criticism, since you should pay less attention to what I say or think?

 

[ObjectiveSubjectivist]

So when are you going to stop responding to my criticism, since you should pay less attention to what I say or think?

You seemed to be confused.
Wanted to make it easier for you.

 

[solderdude]

 

[SnakeLord]

The frequency response of planar magnetic headphones is heavily influenced by the pads. Sai has always been a strong advocate for pad rolling, which is why he has measured the FR of almost every headphone with various pad configurations.

Do we get a new Pads-Rolling hype after the op-amps? Already see it comming: "This alpaca leather sounds much more detailled and has wider, bigger soundstage".

Generally speaking, even slightest repositioning and preasure change of any over-ear headphones already changes the tonal charesteristics for the listener and its almost impossible to have those always sitting in the same position to match the perfect measurment response.

So before this is getting out of control and people start to roll pads in addition to their op-amps, seeking for that true unique "deep and moist bass" - just EQ your stuff to your likes together. Its that simple.

 

[yo!]

Sure, pads has big impact.
And most ignore that individual big or compact, flat or bent ears, wide or short, straight or wrinkled pinnas, many or no hairs, will shape the sound of your headphones and IEMs too.
It's not possible to make accurate and absolute measurements from 3 kHz on. Only tendencies.

EQ. Figure it out.

 

[SnakeLord]

事实上，更换耳垫会对频率响应产生客观且可测量的变化。虽然耳垫的放置位置和压力确实存在细微差异，但不同耳垫带来的差异远大于放置位置的误差。任何稍有测量经验的人——或者真正研究过对比数据的人——都会明白，这些变化是天壤之别。

So is it "day n night" difference?

If the pads are changing the resonating geometry, its fit, volume or dampening material then it will affect the tonal charesteristics more or less for sure. But you dont know how it will without measuring, might be good or bad.

Solderdude has already measured that even slightest impact like holding something resonating 10-15cm away from those huge open back headphones is already enough to change the response and affect the sound.

Its the same thing with the speakers, the tone charesteristics will change depending on how and where you place them, your sitting position and the room itself with all the stuff in it. In case of speakers nobody is comming to the idea and tell to change the speaker body in order to change the frequency responce. But it will for sure if you do so.

 

[syhooo]

So is it "day n night" difference?

If the pads are changing the resonating geometry, its fit, volume or dampening material then it will affect the tonal charesteristics more or less for sure. But you dont know how it will without measuring, might be good or bad.

Solderdude has already measured that even slightest impact like holding something resonating 10-15cm away from those huge open back headphones is already enough to change the response and affect the sound.

Its the same thing with the speakers, the tone charesteristics will change depending on how and where you place them, your sitting position and the room itself with all the stuff in it. In case of speakers nobody is comming to the idea and tell to change the speaker body in order to change the frequency responce. But it will for sure if you do so.

Yes, it is absolutely a 'day and night' difference. Take the Moondrop Cosmo as an example: the gap between the stock pads and the EP100A pads is massive.

I never suggested ignoring measurements. On the contrary, the reason I advocate for pad rolling is precisely because it is supported by scientific data. Sai (unheardlab.com) has done extensive work on this, and the graph I provided is from his database.

Pad rolling is a simple hardware-level change. Unlike EQ, which requires you to constantly manage different profiles—leaving you to double-check every time you swap headphones if you have the correct EQ active for that specific pair—pad rolling is "set and forget."

Furthermore, since high-frequency (HF) measurements are notoriously tricky and often less reliable for creating precise EQ filters, a simple pad swap allows us to find a signature that suits our ears better. I don't understand the resistance to pad rolling when it's a physically-backed, measurable way to refine sound.

 

[Chagall]

Yes, it is absolutely a 'day and night' difference. Take the Moondrop Cosmo as an example: the gap between the stock pads and the EP100A pads is massive.

I never suggested ignoring measurements. On the contrary, the reason I advocate for pad rolling is precisely because it is supported by scientific data. Sai (unheardlab.com) has done extensive work on this, and the graph I provided is from his database.

Pad rolling is a simple hardware-level change. Unlike EQ, which requires you to constantly manage different profiles—leaving you to double-check every time you swap headphones if you have the correct EQ active for that specific pair—pad rolling is "set and forget."

Furthermore, since high-frequency (HF) measurements are notoriously tricky and often less reliable for creating precise EQ filters, a simple pad swap allows us to find a signature that suits our ears better. I don't understand the resistance to pad rolling when it's a physically-backed, measurable way to refine sound.
View attachment 500203

Pads absolutely make a difference, no argument there. The question for me is how do you know which pads to buy in the first place?

It's great when measurements exist for that specific headphone with those specific pads, but that’s the exception, not the rule. And as you pointed out yourself, measurements (especially HF) don’t translate perfectly between rigs, heads, or ears anyway, whether we're talking stock pads or aftermarket ones.

That's why I tend to think of pad rolling as paying for a single, fixed EQ preset. Once you buy the pads, you are locked into that tuning, and in most cases there are no measurements at all to tell you what you are actually changing before you spend the money. And to this day I haven't seen a pad that can boost HD600's bass for example.

Meanwhile, proper PEQ is free, highly customizable, trivially easy to use these days, and completely reversible. You can iterate, fine-tune per headphone, and adjust as your preferences change, without buying multiple pads and hoping one happens to land where you want.

So yes, pad rolling is real and measurable, but from a practicality and efficiency standpoint, PEQ still seems like the more precise and flexible tool for most people.

 

[CedarX]

Pad rolling is a simple hardware-level change. Unlike EQ, which requires you to constantly manage different profiles—leaving you to double-check every time you swap headphones if you have the correct EQ active for that specific pair—pad rolling is "set and forget."

I don’t disagree with what you wrote here, but I have a different take…
Knowing what pads are installed—a hardware-level change you can easily see—only exacerbates our natural, unavoidable, biases: I know what pads are installed therefore I “know” what it sounds like.
OTOH, if I need to double-check every time I swap headphones whether EQ is ‘on’ and which profile is active, it tells me that the EQ impact may not be that audible for me, or I may not perceive the changes correctly—kinda of a “blind check” (not test), that happens to me quite often…

 

[Jiraya369]

Pads absolutely make a difference, no argument there. The question for me is how do you know which pads to buy in the first place?

It's great when measurements exist for that specific headphone with those specific pads, but that’s the exception, not the rule. And as you pointed out yourself, measurements (especially HF) don’t translate perfectly between rigs, heads, or ears anyway, whether we're talking stock pads or aftermarket ones.

That's why I tend to think of pad rolling as paying for a single, fixed EQ preset. Once you buy the pads, you are locked into that tuning, and in most cases there are no measurements at all to tell you what you are actually changing before you spend the money. And to this day I haven't seen a pad that can boost HD600's bass for example.

Meanwhile, proper PEQ is free, highly customizable, trivially easy to use these days, and completely reversible. You can iterate, fine-tune per headphone, and adjust as your preferences change, without buying multiple pads and hoping one happens to land where you want.

So yes, pad rolling is real and measurable, but from a practicality and efficiency standpoint, PEQ still seems like the more precise and flexible tool for most people.

unheardlab has an ungodly amount of headphones with a LOT of them being measured with different pads!

 

[Jiraya369]

this is the link to unheardlab's measurements :

Squiglink - IEM frequency response database by Sai

Compare hundreds of frequency response graphs between IEMs and earphones from manufacturers like Moondrop, Sony, 64 Audio, Fiio, and more.

sai.squig.link

his website for his review :

unheardlab.com

independent headphone measurement and reviews

unheardlab.com

i love reading his subjective reviews, most of them lined up nearly exactly with how i auditioned a few headphones and he seemed to agree with my takes, that's crazy

 

[Zekbone]

I don’t disagree with what you wrote here, but I have a different take…
Knowing what pads are installed—a hardware-level change you can easily see—only exacerbates our natural, unavoidable, biases: I know what pads are installed therefore I “know” what it sounds like.
OTOH, if I need to double-check every time I swap headphones whether EQ is ‘on’ and which profile is active, it tells me that the EQ impact may not be that audible for me, or I may not perceive the changes correctly—kinda of a “blind check” (not test), that happens to me quite often…

It's pretty fun to A/B test between EQ's meant for different headphones. Using the EQ for FT1 Pro on my M50x sounds much, much, better than the other way around. And swapping the EQ for the FT1 pro and Para 2 is basically doubling down on their 1-2khz deficiency and excess respectively.

 

[Chagall]

unheardlab has an ungodly amount of headphones with a LOT of them being measured with different pads!

I won't say no to more measurements, but unless the alternative pads last 2x longer and/or improve comfort I don't see the point of pad rolling when EQ exists.

 

[Jiraya369]

I won't say no to more measurements, but unless the alternative pads last 2x longer and/or improve comfort I don't see the point of pad rolling when EQ exists.

comfort should be the NUMBER 1 factor for pad rolling, if anyone does it for magical sound quality gains they're stupid.

 

[Dk33145]

Does anyone know why the recommended EQ settings don't adjust the 10k trough? It IS audible.