Moondrop Para 2 Planar Headphone Review

[Chagall]

Voted poor.
Parametric equalization does not come in the pack.

And I find it unacceptable for a product to be rated 'excellent' when it is fundamentally deficient and requires external, complex adjustments (like PEQ) to perform well. It's akin to calling a speaker 'excellent' and then immediately saying: '...but you must sit 30cm away, as the built-in amps are too weak.' The dependence on user correction makes the rating misleading.

See the exactly opposite scenario was already done:
"All was not well. You may be wondering with measurements as good as posted, why the 8341 did not get the top honor panther and had to settle for the next grade down. I was quite surprised that as I turned up the volume, listening at just 1 meter or so from the speaker, it just would not get that loud. At first I heard a glitching/ticking sound which then moved into red LED coming up with much more distortion. The amplification is simply too low for the amount of bass this speaker produces."

seen here: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/genelec-8341a-sam™-studio-monitor-review.11652/

That Genelec was not good enough...

So ? Sit closer, perhaps 60 cm, and grant top honor panther.

I argue that a product should not be considered "excellent" if it cannot deliver excellent performance without relying on user-provided fixes, regardless of whether that fix is digital or physical.

And that brings us to the deeper issue: the EXCELLENCE label was meant. so I thought, to represent technical excellence. But if it’s applied to products that only shine after user intervention, it risks becoming a commercial label instead—a marketing tool rather than a rigorous standard.

EQ is a free tool that every headphone can benefit from! In this case, it’s not about a lack of technical excellence (just look at the distortion graph) - it simply helps because people’s preferences differ.

There’s much more to a headphone’s performance than following a single target curve on one measurement rig. That curve is a preference target, meaning a headphone that aligns with it is more likely to sound good to most people - but there’s absolutely no need for it to match perfectly.

The deeper issue is rating a headphone without ever listening to it.

 

[Curupira]

Nice industrial design, now if they release PARA3 with less need for EQ I might try it out

The "meta" tuning for these planars is to go for flat bass and sparkly pinna. Hifiman started this and others followed suit. They all draw from the STAX signature sound, that has lean bass due to physical constraints but compensate by their "speed", i.e, lean bass and forward pinna makes the headphone sound more technical and analytical.

I personally don't think this is a problem, though. Adding an analog bass shelf with acoustics alone requires a complete redesign and is the opposite direction of MD's construction evolution and enhancements. It's much better to have a distortionless blank canvas to EQ afterwards than HAVING TO pay much more for an elaborate default solution. Dan Clark, for instance, goes for the latter (I do appreciate and value DCA proposition though, specially regarding acoustic research).

Voted poor.
Parametric equalization does not come in the pack.

Sure, but the default FR is not at all poor... Even without considerin value and materials, it's a DF light centered tonality, it will sound hifi in the majority of scenarios.

 

[JOCoin]

Hi,

I got the Para 1 and then went to the Venus.
Probably one of the best headphones I've heard.

BUT I do not listen to the Venus anymore and I will not buy anythiing from Moondrop anymore.
Why ?
Simply put the headphone is much too fragile.
It dropped ONCE on the floor from about 1.2m height.
Result was a broken grill that pierced the foil that vibrates to provide sound. So one side not working anymore...

I've been in touch with Moondrop, was able to provide proof of purchase as a brand new item.
I asked if they could provide a new "earcuff" for the Venus (even without the earpad that I still have).
Reply (after several days) was : "Send the whole headphone back to China. We wxill repair it and charge for the repair and tell you the amount to pay once it's repaired".

So : fragile device + super bad customer service = no more Moondrop for me.
I'll stick to the headphone I still have... some of them also fell without any damage.
Maybe it is bad luck for the device. But I think the customer support is representative of some brands... Despite wanting to look cool, Moondrop is not :-(

It's pretty normal to be charged for repairs of damages that were not caused by a manufacturing defect. If I dropped and damaged my hd800S I wouldn't blame Sennheiser for not repairing them for free.

 

[syhooo]

Here is a measurement of two different Moondrop PARA 1 samples from woodenears.com (the site is now offline), measured on a B&K 4128.

The difference between these two samples is incredibly small, perhaps even smaller than the left/right channel imbalance on some other headphones.

 

[Noske]

EQ is a free tool that every headphone can benefit from! In this case, it’s not about a lack of technical excellence (just look at the distortion graph) - it simply helps because people’s preferences differ.

It is a free tool if you have laptop with recommended i7 processor connected to your system, preferably dedicated.

Some of the features in the DSP Engine can consume a lot of CPU resources. Nothing beats a strong Core i7

With Roon. What else am I missing?

https://help.roonlabs.com/portal/en/kb/articles/muse#Getting_Started

 

[Chagall]

It is a free tool if you have laptop with recommended i7 processor connected to your system, preferably dedicated.

Some of the features in the DSP Engine can consume a lot of CPU resources. Nothing beats a strong Core i7

With Roon. What else am I missing?

https://help.roonlabs.com/portal/en/kb/articles/muse#Getting_Started

Roon is music library manager, server, player and streamer with DSP. But if you just need EQ, there are a lot of options:

EQ Software for Windows, Linux, macOS, iOS/iPadOS and Android

 

[Hammeredklavier]

Nice industrial design, now if they release PARA3 with less need for EQ I might try it out

I'm the same. I can't be bothered with EQ anymore, I just want to plug in and listen.

 

[Svensson]

Roon is music library manager, server, player and streamer with DSP. But if you just need EQ, there are a lot of options:

EQ Software for Windows, Linux, macOS, iOS/iPadOS and Android

I came to say the same. A marvellous range of EQ and PEQ options for almost any scenario.

 

[dav0043]

Headphones needing serious EQ are in the category of a gourmet meal needing salt & pepper. No bueno.

 

[respice finem]

Headphones needing serious EQ are in the category of a gourmet meal needing salt & pepper. No bueno.

Theoretically yes, practicaly, it depends.
I for one am still using the BD T1 mk2 (with PEQ), which was completely "flattened" in Amir's test.
Thanks to PEQ I can hear at similar quality as with my loudspeakers, without buying another headphone.
Why am I doing this? Because a) I have yet to find one that fits my head and ears this well, and b) with 58 years, I have no illusions to hear everything either.
There's more distortion, no doubt, but I can't really hear it. So why bother?

 

[amirm]

There are headphones that are annoying without EQ, or super dull. This one is not that. There are also headphones that have a lot of distortion. Again, this one is not that. While all else being equal, I too want a headphone without EQ, as @respice finem mentions, this headphone brings a different set of factor when it comes to comfort.

In some sense, it is an alternative to Sennheiser HD6XX. It is more expensive but I think has much better spatial effects.

 

[jmdesignz2]

Are there any other headphones that measure similarly but with better bass under $600?

 

[solderdude]

Is the 10k anomaly audible/does it affect the entire sound range?

That isn't a headphone issue but an artifact of the used test fixture.
A similar thing occurs with human ears but can be anywhere between 6kHz and 10kHz (ear dependent) and may have a different 'depth'..

Best to ignore everything above 8kHz.

 

[solderdude]

Are there any other headphones that measure similarly but with better bass under $600?

Bass is actually really good as is, just not following the Harman target.
The 1kHz emphasis gives the Para 2 a 'forward' and 'clear/open' sound.

 

[Honken]

Sorry for the extremely subjective question, but how comfortable were these to wear? They don't look super comfortable from the picture in the opening post, but if they measure well at that price point whilst being comfortable? Then that's a pretty darn good deal!

As for "needing" EQ, every headphone and IEM benefit from EQ, either by a little or by a lot. If you listen to anything but speakers, make sure you figure out how to inject EQ into your listening setup.

 

[Jeromeof]

One word I don't hear too often in the audiophile world is "cohorts" - but statistically there are typically large groups of people that are clustered around difference preferences in lots of industries ( and the recent Harman research / @Sean Olive shows this especially for IEMs ). So saying this headphone is lacking bass is wrong IMO, there are a large cohort of people who like more sub-bass and a large cohort who like this more linear bass response (I am one of them) and sadly I believe having one 'average' curve gives certain people the wrong opinion about what is 'right' or 'wrong' with headphones FR. In my opinion, this has a perfect bass response.

 

[Kremmen]

Voted poor.
Parametric equalization does not come in the pack.

And I find it unacceptable for a product to be rated 'excellent' when it is fundamentally deficient and requires external, complex adjustments (like PEQ) to perform well. It's akin to calling a speaker 'excellent' and then immediately saying: '...but you must sit 30cm away, as the built-in amps are too weak.' The dependence on user correction makes the rating misleading.

See the exactly opposite scenario was already done:
"All was not well. You may be wondering with measurements as good as posted, why the 8341 did not get the top honor panther and had to settle for the next grade down. I was quite surprised that as I turned up the volume, listening at just 1 meter or so from the speaker, it just would not get that loud. At first I heard a glitching/ticking sound which then moved into red LED coming up with much more distortion. The amplification is simply too low for the amount of bass this speaker produces."

seen here: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/genelec-8341a-sam™-studio-monitor-review.11652/

That Genelec was not good enough...

So ? Sit closer, perhaps 60 cm, and grant top honor panther.

I argue that a product should not be considered "excellent" if it cannot deliver excellent performance without relying on user-provided fixes, regardless of whether that fix is digital or physical.

And that brings us to the deeper issue: the EXCELLENCE label was meant. so I thought, to represent technical excellence. But if it’s applied to products that only shine after user intervention, it risks becoming a commercial label instead—a marketing tool rather than a rigorous standard.

I recently bought a Samsung Q-OLED 65" TV. It was not exactly to my liking on initial setup so I changed some picture settings. I sometimes change the picture settings depending on what I am watching, or if I am gaming etc. It is still a fabulous TV, but it requires user intervention to get the very best out of it, and such is the quality of the TV, it handles the changes I make to it perfectly. It's amongst the very best TVs in its price range.

I for one would be delighted to own these headphones. I may need to EQ the bass, I may not. The HD600 and HD650, for example, are short on bass when compared with the Harman target and show noticeable distortion (though not necessarily audible) when EQ'd to compensate for that deficit. Do I rate those headphones poorly because they may need some EQ? Of course not. For many they are fine, for others they are veiled and bass-light. They will require user intervention to shine. There are so many options out there to easily EQ headphones for free, and very easily, we've never had it so good!

The fact that this headphone has such remarkably low distortion, is easy to drive, sounds good at default, and is $500 is good enough for me. Knowing that with the EQ that Amir tried out I can transform it into something very special indeed is another win.

Having said all that, I do agree that it would be much better if we didn't have to apply EQ to get the fabulous sound quality that is hidden behind the curtain, as it were. And not every listening platform allows for easy, or any, access to EQ. Such is life!

Thanks for the review Amir!

 

[totti1965]

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

Equalization suggestions according to @Maiky76 in plain text:

Moondrop Para 2 EQ Flat 96000Hz
October102025-210734

Preamp: -6.9444 dB

Filter 1: ON PK Fc 24.6 Hz Gain 6.81 dB Q 0.27
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 206.1 Hz Gain -1.14 dB Q 1.62
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 1208.9 Hz Gain -6.34 dB Q 1.06
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 3065.7 Hz Gain -5.61 dB Q 2.97
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 4750.9 Hz Gain -5.67 dB Q 2.88
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 3118.2 Hz Gain 8.12 dB Q 0.46
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 7645.8 Hz Gain -2.06 dB Q 3.89
Filter 8: ON PK Fc 11897.2 Hz Gain -8.80 dB Q 5.00


Thank you @amirm and @Maiky76 for your work!

 

[RogerSmith]

Thanks for the review. So we have a winner here, apparently no need to buy an Audeze if one wants a "canvas for EQ", it is cheaper and lighter, the only thing missing would be the wood aesthetics.

 

[Rja4000]

Wow !
Now that's seriously low distortion !

Thanks for this review !

Is there anything about the reflections that one may hear ? Is this measurement useful ?