[HardstyleLoco96]

I sold my Focal Utopia’s.

Woah , you prefer the Nano over the Utopia?????

 

[HardstyleLoco96]

I could maybe get 700 to 800 CAD for my clears. Think they're worth holding onto at this point. The nanos are super amazing for their price though.

I'm going to my audio store to do some gear testing and comparisons haha. Time for audio fun or maybe I'll go down the rabbit hole again

 

[HardstyleLoco96]

Nano is wider, faster, with better subass. Clears for with stock pads are punchier, warmer with much sweeter mids. The stock pads definitely make the clears sound a bit more closed in but much more natural and a bit brighter over the zmf pads. I keep reading the zmf suede pads are much closer to the stock pads.

I may listen to the Clear and Clear MG again, maybe I'll walk out with one of them and also I'll try eq on them

 

[martel80]

New Interesting reviews of the Nanos:








Seems like the detail retrieval and resolution opinions are unanimous. (RIP Amir)

On the other hand, it seems like the treble presentation of all Hifiman's cans is still dividing people but I think that in this day and age, this shouldn't be a concern to anyone as it is definitely not lacking and subtractive EQ is really just a matter of preference and wouldn't affect other technical abilities of a device.

One thing that I find interesting is that very few talk about the Hifiman dip in between 1khz and 3khz. It seems to be widely accepted as a normality...or at least to be expected.

Still love mine after EQ and I'm still wondering what I should get next to get better details, resolution but also get a better mid-low section naturally.

And here's a couple strip of bacon.....because bacon!

 

[LordImperious]

New Interesting reviews of the Nanos:








Seems like the detail retrieval and resolution opinions are unanimous. (RIP Amir)

On the other hand, it seems like the treble presentation of all Hifiman's cans is still dividing people but I think that in this day and age, this shouldn't be a concern to anyone as it is definitely not lacking and subtractive EQ is really just a matter of preference and wouldn't affect other technical abilities of a device.

One thing that I find interesting is that very few talk about the Hifiman dip in between 1khz and 3khz. It seems to be widely accepted as a normality...or at least to be expected.

Still love mine after EQ and I'm still wondering what I should get next to get better details, resolution but also get a better mid-low section naturally.

And here's a couple strip of bacon.....because bacon!

 

[LordImperious]

Honestly Amir seems to rip everything apart. I am not really into science behind audio but ASR seems really toxic to me.

 

[martel80]

Honestly Amir seems to rip everything apart. I am not really into science behind audio but ASR seems really toxic to me.

Personally, I’m into the science behind it all but I have issues with people that take flawed measurements and mix it with their biased opinions. To me, it comes across like a flat earther.

When you take the time to take a step back from that website and look at it as a whole, you realize that entry level Neumann and small Genelec receive better ratings then D&D’s, B&W’s and ATC’s. For anyone that has any sort of experience in audio engineering and mastering grade equipment, this is none sense at it’s finest.

Another funny one was the Mytek Brooklyn review. That was some epic failure.

As I said, my issue is not the idea of trying to measure something but if you intend on doing it, at least do it to specs.

Showing a THD graph of a set of cans at 110 db spl is just stupid. Unless you’re deaf and have no ability to actually listen to it of course.

As someone said in a different forum, “ ASR measurementalist opinions are just so convenient. You can judge audio hardware without ever having to actually listen to it”.

 

[Toriga]

I may listen to the Clear and Clear MG again, maybe I'll walk out with one of them and also I'll try eq on them

What is your last eq? Did you do some change?

 

[HardstyleLoco96]

What is your last eq? Did you do some change?

I used Oratorys EQs for the Focal Clear and Clear MG. And for the Ananda Nano, this is the EQ I used.

How I rank the headphones after EQ.
1. Ananda Nano
2. Clear MG
3. Clear
Now they all trade blows and ultimately comes down to personal preference.


Clear vs Clear MG.
If you don't use eq. I find the Clear to have a better stock tuning. The Clear MG is a little warmer overall and more laidback. But loses some sparkle up top. But the Clear MG is the more technical headphone. While tuning isn't as good, it does have better slam and dynamics. More detail in the low end. Overall more detail in mids and highs. Larger staging and better imaging. If you do use eq. Hands down, the Clear MG is the way to go.

Ananda Nano vs Clear & Clear MG
Immediatly, the Nano is brighter. It doesn't have as much slam as the Clear & Clear MG but comes close. The Clear & Clear MG have a touch more bass between 50hz to 125hz but I actually found the Ananda Nano to extend better into the lower sub bass as I could feel texturing a little better in the lows. Very low notes I could hear better in the Ananda Nano. The mids of the Clear & Clear MG are overall smoother and fuller. Low and high mids sound a little more natural where as the Ananda Nano have more forward high mids and heaps of clarity. I could hear vocals more clearly, especially when music gets busy. But it lacks some warmth and sounds a touch thin compared to the Focals. But detail. No comparison. The Ananda Nano is ahead. When it comes to treble, again. The Nano is brighter, but I find the OG Clear to have a slightly more metalic sound to it. The Nano didn't bother me with music, even though yes, it was the brightest. The Clear OG with some songs could make me turn down the volume slightly. The Clear MG was the warmest here. But lacked a little sparkle at times. When it comes to detail and air. No contest, the Ananda Nano has heaps of air and detail. Maybe a little unatural and much at times. It's not in a fatiguing way, but so much detail is being pushed it can become distracting. When it comes to staging and imaging. The Nano has the larger stage. By a fair bit. It can make music sound more centered, especially vocals and put them infront of you. While intruments have a distinct location with pin point accuracy. But then sounds can move around freely, the air between vocals and instruments is larger and overall, the Nano has a blacker and more open background. This is with no eq. I can see people preferring one over the other. They all are different and have strengths and weaknesses.

With EQ
Using the Clear MG & Clear. They both have a very similar tuning after eq. But the more technical headphone is the Clear MG. So I compared the Clear MG vs Ananda Nano after eq. Remember, the Nano isn't using Oratorys EQ, so it isn't 100% fair as tuning is a little different. But I feel the Nano is pretty spot on, leaning slightly brighter compared to something Oratory would make. But I love the EQ I am using.

Now with eq. The Nano regains some more slam and rumble. It comes closer to the Clear MG now. The MG has that more punchy and dynamic low end. But the Nano has that better extension and texturing with more detail. I also find the Nano to better separate sub and mid bass, again more detail is shown. Mids gain more warmth on the Nano, they gain some fullness not sounding thin anymore. They sound more natural while keeping all that detail. The MG still has better timbre and sound more fuller but clarity and detail goes to the Nano. The Nano is very clear and separate multiple vocals and instruments a touch better. Treble. The MG with eq is smoother and less fatiguing. It actually sounds very nice and for me, it has a nice balance overall. The Nano, is brighter but not as bright like stock no eq. I personally prefer how the treble on the Nano sounds. Plenty of energy, heaps of detail and air. But the forwardness is turned down a notch which helps make things a little more easier to listen to. I could see myself having the Nano and Clear MG as companions. But if I had to have one. It would be the Nano. Soundstaging and imaging again. The Nano wins. Things gain more depth after eq and I can hear things more clearly, the treble isn't distracting and details really show.