Bass: Sub Bass extends low, good quantity and quality, retains some texture, it can be a bit boomy when called upon.
I find the mid bass to be very adaptable. It’s overall smooth, well managed and has good texture and definition, but it can also step up with decent impact and rumble.
Carries into lower mids.
- Mids: Lower mids are slightly recessed and warm, upper mids recover and pull the mids forward. They are detailed with good clarity, and have an overall smoothness to the timbre.
- Vocals: Present forward and both male and female vocals have a natural and accurate presence.
- Highs: Are crisp and clear with very good detail retrieval, they roll off at the upper end which limits micro detail retrieval and upper air to some degree, which fits well with the over all smooth sound of the MEXT.
Highs are not lacking they rise effortlessly above the bass and mids and present very well.
- Soundstage: width is between the ears, maybe just slightly outside the head. Height is good, sub bass goes low, rolled of treble reduces upper air a bit. Depth is good, vocals and mids are forward, depth to the rear could be a bit better. Imaging and layering are good left to right, high and low, and front to rear, I can accurately place individual instruments on the stage. Spaciousness is good, although on some tracks my perception is it can sound, not congested, but a bit “busy”.
The MEXT faithfully follows the sound signature of the source.
Summary: There is no “perfect” IEM but the MEXT fit my listening preference very well.
I had some difficulty putting these thoughts together. I would be sitting back trying to concentrate and critically listen to evaluate a certain part of a song, and next thing I knew the song was over and I had missed my opportunity. The MEXT had engaged and drawn me into listening for simple enjoyment. Not a bad problem to have.
This is not to say everyone will find them engaging and enjoyable, but more a testament to how well they fit my preference.
Overall these are a smooth and slightly warm IEM. The bass is very well done, the mids clear and detailed, and although the treble rolls off a bit early, it really is not lacking and holds its own. Treble fans would likely disagree.
I find these to be a pretty balanced sound signature with excellent coherence between the drivers, the sound flows nicely.
This is my fourth experience with Bone Conduction drivers (UM Mest mkII, EE EVO, and a Shokz head band) and, on the IEMs I still can’t focus on the sound and say “yup, that right there… THAT’s the BC driver I’m hearing”. If it sounds good, I can only accept that the BC is blended in and making a positive contribution.
I’m not going to leave any comparisons here. But since I mentioned the Mest MKII I know I will get asked…..
I only had the Mest II in my possession for a few weeks, so I can’t AB compare the two.
Going back and reviewing the thoughts I posted on the Mest II, I can say there are similarities between the two, and some differences. (Please Note: these comments are based on reviewing my previous post, and on memory.. and by 4 o’clock I can’t remember what I had for lunch, so don’t place too much faith on the comments below)
Bass is similar, but MEXT maybe has some added sub bass extension.
Mids and vocals present more forward on the MEXT.
Highs also present more forward on the MEXT, perhaps not as bright and airy without the EST driver support of the Mest II, just more prominent.
One thing I do recall for certain is, that as good as the Mest MKII was, it really didn’t wow me personally.
The MEXT on the other hand really draws me into the music.
Which means for me, the MEXT is a good fit.