THE ME.1 BY UNIQUE MELODY (Page 2)

Source:Headfonics       2018-02-05       Share:

Matchability


Efficiency


The ME.1 is rated at 23.1 ohms and 109dB which is reasonably efficient, especially for a planar type design but rarely do I find planar specs to tell the full story and in the case of the ME.1 both source and power can play a role in the final performance.


Voltage wise I have no issues with most sources and amps, but I do find the ME.1 can scale much better with amping than regular BA or hybrid designs. I found the gap between quiet and too loud to be much bigger than regular IEM’s, in some cases 10-20 steps more.


Yes, you can plug this into a decent smartphone and get a reasonable sound. For instance, my own LG G6 with its quad-DAC setup sounds ok actually and has no issues with volume but it all comes across as a little polite for me.


True enough, the LG G6 has a little less low-end emphasis compared to the older V20 and it suddenly doesn’t become lean sounding but it could do with a setup with better output power to really drive the low end properly.


Noise


The ME.1 is an excellent performer for noise with pretty much all DAP’s tested delivering a clean black background with next to no noise or background hiss. DAPs with known higher noise floors such as the i5 and X5iii were pretty quiet.
 

Portable or transportable amps such as the Hugo 2 and the ALO RX were also very well controlled. Even the ALO Audio V5 tube amp had excellent low noise levels, perceptible hiss only started creeping in once volume levels went up to a very high level.


6364.jpg
  

Scaling


Summary

 

I say the ME.1 is not as power hungry as the Vega or Flares Pro. Also, they can get louder faster than either of these two. However, source matching, be it an amp of DAP, did bring some tonal variations with the ME.1. Generally, I found the better quality of amping output the cleaner and more controlled the ME.1 sounded.


Out of the DAPs tested the Cayin i5 was the most aggressive and impactful but not the most resolving. It did nicely dovetail the fun signature of the ME.1 so EDM and RnB sounded very engaging with this pairing.


Current mode amping such as the Bakoon HPA-01M would be my pick of amps in terms of speed and impact though I found the ME.1 didn’t need that level of power, well not as much as full-scale planar headphones.


The Hugo 2 was my pairing pick for detail, staging, and separation with the ME.1 though as with the Bakoon the power requirements from the Hugo 2 was not that substantial.


Select Pairings


FiiO X5iii


Low gain – volume 30 – 70, no noise


The X5iii delivered a thicker sound than the higher end DAPs such as the X7ii and Opus#2. Certainly a fuller low-end but it did not feel as agile with the ME.1 as the X7ii and delivered a slightly harder sounding upper mid to lower treble response that played a little on the ME.1’s lower treble energy. It is not overly harsh just not as pure and refined sounding as I would like it to be.


FiiO X7ii


Low gain – volume 30 – 75, no noise


This pairing was very clean with a ‘bigger sound’ than the X5iii using the AM3.  It also had a more refined top end and excellent low-end definition. Unlike the X5iii this pairing has a far smoother lower treble performance but still with plenty of energy and articulation. Sub-bass definition and power are excellent and distortion free creating great depth and power.


I think the X7 Mark 2 also does a little bit more with the treble presence of the ME.1 over the DX200 but that a double-edged sword as it’s not quite as smooth and natural as the DX200 but the additional energy can sound more exciting with the ME.1


63647114165879.jpg


Opus#2


Low gain – volume 55 – 95, no noise


This is an open and engaging presentation delivering a very smooth and detailed sound from the ME.1. It doesn’t quite have the low-end heft and power of the X7ii AM3a combination preferring a more linear low-end performance but sub-bass detail and definition is very good. It is not lacking in that dept.


This pairing really excels in staging with tremendous width and air on the ME.1. Instrumental separation is excellent. Vocals are organic and very natural sounding with Opus#2 and the ME.1. One of the smoothest pairings I have heard to date.


iBasso DX200


Low gain – volume 70 – 105 no noise


Quite similar in general presentation to the X7ii with the AM3a though in general, I find the DX200 to have a slightly fuller sound with the ME.1 and more mid-bass body weight when paired with the ME. 1


Sub-bass was not quite as powerful as the X7 Mark 2/AM3a combo using the AMP 1 card but with AMP 2 and 3 cards, it had a bit more substance. Overall a slightly softer and smoother response from the ME.1 using the Amp 1 card unbalanced.


Cayin i5


Low gain – volume 20 – 32, no noise


This is a punchy sounding pairing with a bit more dynamic low-end impact and less neutral sounding than the X7ii and DX200 combinations.


The top end performance is well controlled, clean and clear without any harsh peaks and focuses well on that forward vocal signature of the ME.1. I do not find this pairing as resolving as the ES9028PRO DAPs but it does nicely compliment with the musical signature of the ME.1


636471141658.jpg


Bakoon HPA-01M


Low gain – 30-40% on the analog pot, no noise


This is a noise-free pairing but not as power hungry as some full-scale planar headphones so you do not have to turn the dial up that far in low gain. There is some noticeable channel imbalance on low volume but this is entirely normal for the HPA-01M on efficient planars and generally all IEMs.


This pairing has a tighter low end than the DAPs and also a smoother treble response. The general presentation was clean with well separated instrumental passages and a natural but full-bodied timbre.


The flatter current mode output also kept the low-end from blooming nicely as well as preventing any sharpness in the upper mids and lower treble. Sub-bass depth and presence are both powerful and well defined.


I do prefer the ME.1 with the Bakoon amp stage, it seems to enjoy the additional power over running out of pure sources with excellent dynamics and a touch more speed.


Chord Hugo 2


Volume lighter red max – plenty of power to drive the ME.1, No noise


The Hugo 2/ME.1 delivers a lovely black background with a very tight low end, plenty of detail and excellent separation. However, this presentation does differ from the Bakoon pairing in a number of ways.


The Bakoon teases out a much superior low-end in terms of power and impact whereas the Chord tends to sound a bit more neutral with the ME.1 focusing instead on quicker transients, better imaging, and a bigger soundstage. Treble is also a bit more prominent on the Hugo 2 compared to the Bakoon/ME.1 pairing.


636471141658795246405.jpg


RHA L1


Low Gain Volume – 1.8 – 2 using line in, no noise


This was a clean but punchy and energetic pairing with a bit more body in the ME.1 than the Hugo 2 and the Bakoon. It was perhaps my favorite pairing if I wanted to inject some serious impact in the ME.1 low end.


The dynamics with this match-up were excellent and certainly more aggressive sounding than the DAP only combinations.


Treble was a little harsher sounding than both the Hugo and the Bakoon with the ME.1 though not overly bright, just a little too metallic sounding for my liking which tended to draw my focus in a bit more.


Our Verdict


I am really glad that more and more companies are working on planar technology within the IEM industry because the recent efforts combined with an open design make listening to an absolute pleasure.


The ME.1 should not be considered another “me too” product though. Yes, it evokes an LCD type imagery but it is well-designed, reasonably comfortable and with just enough efficiency to sound good on most devices. The secret though is in the amping to make this planar IEM really sing. Not just pure power, but quality resolving power. Once you sort out your power this is a very open, spacious but powerful sounding IEM, with a fun sounding presentation that matches really well with classic power metal, R’n’B, and EDM.


I have to remark, and perhaps I didn’t emphasize it enough during the review that my ears never felt pounded on or tired from listening to the ME.1 despite its full-bodied nature. Credit to Unique Melody on the acoustic filter implementation for that end result.
  

What could be improved? I would like to hear the custom version obviously just to nail that comfort level and seal. The supplied silicone single bore tips are a bit loose for me and the lack of a lip on the nozzle makes it all a bit ‘slippy slidey’. Stronger stem variants such as Symbio sound superior and hold their grip better.


All this for $769 though is actually very good value in my books. It is certainly a head turner and a very interesting IEM physically but thankfully it also has a very engaging sound that I quite enjoy.


Technical Specifications


Impedance: 23.1 Ω

Diaphragm Diameter: 18.5 mm

Magnet Type: Dual-Layer High Strength Neodymium

Shell: 3D Printed Medical Grade Acrylic with CNC Finish

Connector Type: 2-Pin Protruding Connector

Cable: 6N Single Crystal Copper

Cable Termination: 3.5 mm Headphone Jack


Full review:https://headfonics.com/2017/09/the-me-1-by-unique-melody/

Version Description Legal Protection Legal Notice Copyright 2018 Unique Melody Global.