Moondrop Para 2 Planar Headphone Review

[PenguinMusic]

View attachment 552133
a very basic question for you guys.
i fancy the FT7 but cant really stretch to it.
considering Para 2 as much cheaper alternative.
when i look at the graphs, i would guess they would be very similar, am i correct?
i do use an ADI-2 dac so i can eq to a point (though i usually make thing worse)

Hi,
If the FR curve tells the whole story, the Para 2 may indeed be a good alternative to the FT7.
The question for me remains : does the FR Curve tell the whole story ?
Some people say it does. They are wise and that may be true.
My dumb ears tell me a different story...

But I had the Para (first iteration) and all I can say is : they were a hell of a headphone !
Really loved them... So Para 2 should be no disappointment !

Regards.

 

[dark132]

View attachment 552133
a very basic question for you guys.
i fancy the FT7 but cant really stretch to it.
considering Para 2 as much cheaper alternative.
when i look at the graphs, i would guess they would be very similar, am i correct?
i do use an ADI-2 dac so i can eq to a point (though i usually make thing worse)

As a user, I find that the low-frequency response on the para2 is noticeably attenuated without EQ adjustments, and a balanced sound is only achieved when using the officially released second-generation ear pads (the new version is included as a free gift). The original ear pads were very harsh (the excessive emphasis on high frequencies affected the midrange vocals), but with a slight tweak using amirm’s EQ (I softened the peak in the midrange) and the new ear pads, these headphones sound fantastic. They’re well-suited for Classical Music and jazz, and the vocals are quite satisfying.

 

[dark132]

Brainwavz Hybrid XL good pads for Para 2? Does anyone have any experience?

The second official release of the para2 ear pads (the new version comes as a free gift) is quite good, unless you're a bass enthusiast, in which case you might want to go with the TH900 ear pads (which are a bit pricey).

 

[Zekbone]

View attachment 552133
a very basic question for you guys.
i fancy the FT7 but cant really stretch to it.
considering Para 2 as much cheaper alternative.
when i look at the graphs, i would guess they would be very similar, am i correct?
i do use an ADI-2 dac so i can eq to a point (though i usually make thing worse)

Good observation. The frequency responses are also very similar on 5128 if I'm eyeballing Resolve's reviews correctly. The FT7 is also much more sensitive and a much more reasonable impedance so a powerful amp is much less necessary. The Para 2 actually has lower distortion but FT7 is still very good where you need to boost. As someone who only tolerates Moondrop's headband adjustment, the FT7'#s headband is probably way better.

 

[terminus12]

Hi everyone,I'm considering getting the Moondrop Para 2 planar headphones, which have a very low impedance of just 9-ohm. I'm wondering if my current Topping DX1 II will be able to drive them properly. In the official specs for the DX1 II, Topping states that the load impedance should be > 8-ohm. Since 9-ohm is right on the edge, I'm worried about current delivery limits and potential clipping, especially since the DX1 II is powered exclusively via USB (5V). If you think the DX1 II will struggle with this load, which upgrade path would make more sense? Keep the DX1 II (use it as a DAC only) and add a Topping L50 amplifier? Sell the DX1 II and get a Topping DX5 II combo? My main concern is that the DX5 also has the "load impedance > 8-ohm restriction listed in its official specs. Will the L50 or the DX5 II actually perform significantly better and safely provide the current needed for a 9-ohm planar load compared to the DX1 II? Thanks in advance for your input!

 

[welwynnick]

Had you considered using a power amplier?

 

[terminus12]

Yes, the Topping L50, but only if it turns out to be necessary—though I'm not sure about that.

 

[Zekbone]

Hi everyone,I'm considering getting the Moondrop Para 2 planar headphones, which have a very low impedance of just 9-ohm. I'm wondering if my current Topping DX1 II will be able to drive them properly. In the official specs for the DX1 II, Topping states that the load impedance should be > 8-ohm. Since 9-ohm is right on the edge, I'm worried about current delivery limits and potential clipping, especially since the DX1 II is powered exclusively via USB (5V). If you think the DX1 II will struggle with this load, which upgrade path would make more sense? Keep the DX1 II (use it as a DAC only) and add a Topping L50 amplifier? Sell the DX1 II and get a Topping DX5 II combo? My main concern is that the DX5 also has the "load impedance > 8-ohm restriction listed in its official specs. Will the L50 or the DX5 II actually perform significantly better and safely provide the current needed for a 9-ohm planar load compared to the DX1 II? Thanks in advance for your input!

Unfortunately the measurements are ambiguous and contradict the manufacturer's specs. Amir meausured the DX1 II to produce 467mW into 33 ohms and 57mW into 300 ohms from the 4.4mm headphone out. That implies ~4VRMS for both measurements. But NTTY's review, despite not measuring power directly due to a lack of impedance dummy, used an output of 8VRMS for one of his tests. 8 volts at 64 ohms is exactly 1 watt, the exact spec given by topping.

Plugging these values into Ohm's law gives us current equal to approximately .12 amps and .22 amps for Amir's 33 ohm measurement and both of Topping's official 3.5mm and 4.4mm at 16ohm specs respectively. Conservatively, if we assume these are the maximum current the amp can produce before clipping, we can again plug these current values into Ohm's law again with an 8 ohm impedance and calculate a max power output of ~115mW and ~380mW respectively. If you don't EQ bass, you may get away with keeping the DX1 II.

 

[welwynnick]

Yes, the Topping L50

That's a headphone amplifier. If you have 9 ohms headphones, I suggest using a power amplifier instead, as that will be designed to drive loads of 4 to 8 ohms.

9 ohms is right on the limit for any headphone amplifier, even one as good as the L50. If you look at Topping's L50 web page you see power specs for 600, 300, 64, 32 and 16 ohms. They don't advertise the performance at any lower impedance, so they obviously think that's beyond it's intended envelope.

In general, I think it's a bad idea to plan to run any equipment right on the edge of it's performance envelope like this.

 

[terminus12]

I have Topping Mini 300 and Ayima a04.

 

[olieb]

Hi everyone,I'm considering getting the Moondrop Para 2 planar headphones, which have a very low impedance of just 9-ohm. I'm wondering if my current Topping DX1 II will be able to drive them properly. In the official specs for the DX1 II, Topping states that the load impedance should be > 8-ohm. Since 9-ohm is right on the edge, I'm worried about current delivery limits and potential clipping, especially since the DX1 II is powered exclusively via USB (5V). If you think the DX1 II will struggle with this load, which upgrade path would make more sense? Keep the DX1 II (use it as a DAC only) and add a Topping L50 amplifier? Sell the DX1 II and get a Topping DX5 II combo? My main concern is that the DX5 also has the "load impedance > 8-ohm restriction listed in its official specs. Will the L50 or the DX5 II actually perform significantly better and safely provide the current needed for a 9-ohm planar load compared to the DX1 II? Thanks in advance for your input!

I cannot provide measurements, but I have Para 2 and DX1 II here and sending 100 Hz full scale signal from REW to DX 1 with high gain and 3.5mm unbalanced connection to Para2, I get clean signal up to ≈-6dB (volume of DX 1). Higher volume will start to distort audibly but I do not know whether that is the amp or the headphone.

With 4.4mm balanced connection it seems to distort a bit earlier (≈-10dB) and the perceived clean loudness is about the same.
In any case this is very unpleasantly loud even in bass (onset of dizziness), so I abstained from using higher frequency which will increase loudness even more.
And to me this seems to be more distortion from the transducers than clipping from the amp. (i.e. lower frequency 50-63Hz distort somewhat earlier)

I would say the combination works well. (That is what I bought the DX1 for as most other headphones work well on the HP output of the Macbook)
YMMV

 

[Zekbone]

That's a headphone amplifier. If you have 9 ohms headphones, I suggest using a power amplifier instead, as that will be designed to drive loads of 4 to 8 ohms.

9 ohms is right on the limit for any headphone amplifier, even one as good as the L50. If you look at Topping's L50 web page you see power specs for 600, 300, 64, 32 and 16 ohms. They don't advertise the performance at any lower impedance, so they obviously think that's beyond it's intended envelope.

In general, I think it's a bad idea to plan to run any equipment right on the edge of it's performance envelope like this.

These headphones are power hungry, but not that power hungry. All that the low impedance means is they will clip sooner. These things can be heard across the room with my Atom Amp 2. If you turn off the EQ, the mid and high frequencies are loud enough to be hurt your ears if you take them off, angle the cups, and hold them at arm's length to use them as pseudo speakers. And L50 is a whole watt more powerful than Atom Amp 2.

 

[noisey]

Hi everyone,I'm considering getting the Moondrop Para 2 planar headphones, which have a very low impedance of just 9-ohm. I'm wondering if my current Topping DX1 II will be able to drive them properly. In the official specs for the DX1 II, Topping states that the load impedance should be > 8-ohm. Since 9-ohm is right on the edge, I'm worried about current delivery limits and potential clipping, especially since the DX1 II is powered exclusively via USB (5V). If you think the DX1 II will struggle with this load, which upgrade path would make more sense? Keep the DX1 II (use it as a DAC only) and add a Topping L50 amplifier? Sell the DX1 II and get a Topping DX5 II combo? My main concern is that the DX5 also has the "load impedance > 8-ohm restriction listed in its official specs. Will the L50 or the DX5 II actually perform significantly better and safely provide the current needed for a 9-ohm planar load compared to the DX1 II? Thanks in advance for your input!

I sometimes drive my Para II with my JCally JM20 Max dongle. The specs state that it drives headphones with impedances ranging from 16-600 Ohms. Nonetheless it drives the Para II (with EQ and negative pre-gain) with ease and plenty of headroom.
As others have stated already, the DX1 II should be able to drive them as well.

 

[Oldson]

after much deliberating i finally bagged a pair of these used.
had started to look at other options as i dont think i will be a fan of the headband/fit. but this is only way i will find out.
plan to eq the bass up , just as Amir in review.
hopefully the ADI-2 will have enough puff for it

 

[Zekbone]

reserved

@amirm the EQ you devised is not visible in the screenshot...


Here are some thoughts about the EQ.
Please report your findings, positive or negative!

Notes about the EQ design:

• The average L/R is used to calculate the score.
• The resolution is 12 points per octave interpolated from the raw data (provided by @amirm)
• A Genetic Algorithm is used to optimize the EQ.
• The EQ Score is designed to MAXIMIZE the Score WHILE fitting the Harman target curve (and other constraints) with a fixed complexity.
  This will avoid weird results if one only optimizes for the Score, start your journey here or there.
  There is a presentation by S. Olive here.
  It will probably flatten the Error regression doing so, the tonal balance should be therefore more neutral.
• The EQs are starting point and may require tuning (certainly at LF and maybe at HF).
• The range around and above 10kHz is usually not EQed unless smooth enough to do so.
• I am using PEQ (PK) as from my experience the definition is more consistent across different DSP/platform implementations than shelves.
• With some HP/amp combo, the boosts and preamp gain (loss of Dynamic range) need to be carefully considered to avoid issues with, amongst other things, too low a Max SPL or damaging your device. You have beed warned.
• Not all units of the same product are made equal. The EQ is based on the measurements of a single unit. YMMV with regard to the very unit you are trying this EQ on.
• I sometimes use variations of the Harman curve for some reasons. See rational here and here
• NOTE: the score then calculated is not comparable to the scores derived from the default Harman target curve if not otherwise noted.

Good L/R match.

I have generated one EQ, the APO config file is attached.

Score no EQ: 69.2
Score with EQ: 70.4

The score is limited by the trough at ~9/10 kHz

View attachment 481871

I figure I will share my findings after using the machine generated EQ and and Amir's EQ, both for several months each: I only only changed both of their bass boosts to a shelf filter, made the bass shelf 10db instead of 5.5db, and later added a -3db 10khz high shelf. I preferred Amir's simpler EQ over the machine generated treble boost. I swear the machine made the soundstage taller but not wider, if that makes sense.

 

[noisey]

after much deliberating i finally bagged a pair of these used.
had started to look at other options as i dont think i will be a fan of the headband/fit. but this is only way i will find out.
plan to eq the bass up , just as Amir in review.
hopefully the ADI-2 will have enough puff for it

Congratulations, hope you'll enjoy it.
While it's the heaviest headphone I have used, the Para II is also the most comfortable, especially for long term wear and while wearing glasses. The headband distributes the weight evenly across a large area and the loose fit keeps it from pressing the glasses frame against the side of my head.

I am using the EQ suggested by Maiky76 and like it a lot.

 

[Oldson]

if seal is compromised on the Para 2 does this increase or lower base?

have not received mine yet btw

 

[ObjectiveSubjectivist]

if seal is compromised on the Para 2 does this increase or lower base?

have not received mine yet btw

Increase

Taken from

Moondrop Para II review: where’s the upgrade?

Intro: Despite feeling a bit too bright for my taste, I still enjoyed the original Moondrop Para when I reviewed it. It offered excellent value for money with its technical performance and flexibil…

unheardlab.com

 

[A Surfer]

Bass being increased with a broken seal doesn't seem to follow what is typically reported. I suspect measurement variations explain this. How could a broken seal improve low end perception? I could be wrong though. Curious.

 

[solderdude]

This happens with almost every open planar magnetic headphone. Some more so than others.
In general the bass quality suffers a bit as in most cases (when there is too much seal breach) the bass gets 'flabby'.