Cantorvs.Tea Pro
Sound & Specs Comparison
Information
Both IEMs are widely regarded in the audiophile community. See how they differ in terms of sub-bass response, upper mids, clarity, and overall tonality. Spider charts and rating breakdowns included.
Objective Comparison
Facts, details, stuff.
| General Info | Cantor | Tea Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Brand | AFUL | XENNS Mangird |
| Country | Taiwan | – |
| IEM Description | The AFUL Cantor combines technical precision with musicality in a hybrid design. Featuring a dynamic driver for powerful bass and multiple balanced armatures for clean mids and sparkly highs, it delivers a spacious soundstage with excellent separation. Tuning leans slightly toward a balanced-bright signature, making it a solid choice for detail lovers who still want some low-end punch. | – |
| Price Level | 500 – 1.000 | 100 – 500 |
| Housing & Driver | ||
|---|---|---|
| Driver Config | Multi-BA | – |
| Driver Types | Balanced Armature | – |
| Shell Material | – | – |
| Cable | 4Braid 5N OFC Cable | – |
| Technical | ||
|---|---|---|
| Freq Range | – | – |
| Impedance (Ω) | 20 | – |
| Sensitivity (dB) | 106 | – |
| Crossover | RLC Network Electronic Crossover | – |
| Platform Info | ||
|---|---|---|
| Comments | 1 | 0 |
| Visit Count | 128 | 65 |
| External Reviews | 1 | 0 |
Meta Ratings
// Nothing to compare yet.
Sound Characteristics
Cantor delivers n deeper and more extended sub-bass, reaching lower frequencies with greater authority than Tea Pro (8.5 vs 6). It enhances basslines with m more energy and grip, giving them a livelier feel compared to Tea Pro (9 vs 7). The bass in It feels d more physical and textured, with improved rumble and body compared to Tea Pro (8.5 vs 7). Male vocals and lower instruments sound d richer and better defined on It, unlike Tea Pro which can seem hollow (8.5 vs 6.5). Upper mids are a more resolving and expressive on It, revealing emotion and articulation better than Tea Pro (8 vs 6). Instruments like violins and brass are portrayed with a more brilliance on It, while Tea Pro sounds slightly dull (8 vs 7). The highest frequencies on Tea Pro feel a more natural and less rolled-off compared to Cantor (8 vs 7.5). Cantor paints a a broader sonic landscape, offering better instrument positioning across the stage (8 vs 7). It retrieves micro-details m more effectively, revealing nuances that are less apparent in Tea Pro (8.8 vs 7). It separates instruments a more distinctly, helping complex passages remain coherent where Tea Pro blends them (8.3 vs 7). It keeps competing frequencies under control a more effectively, reducing sonic congestion compared to Tea Pro (8 vs 6.5). The note presentation is b fuller and more tactile on It, giving instruments a stronger physical presence than Tea Pro (7.5 vs 7). It hits with d more authority during transients, creating a more explosive effect than Tea Pro (8.5 vs 7). It controls harsh sibilant peaks a more effectively, making vocals smoother than on Tea Pro (8.5 vs 6). It presents instrument timbre with a more natural coloration, giving a realistic tone that Tea Pro lacks (7.5 vs 7). Across the frequency range, It stays a more consistent in tonal balance, resulting in a smoother listen than Tea Pro (8.8 vs 6.5). It portrays textures in vocals and strings with a more realism, enhancing emotional depth over Tea Pro (8 vs 6).
| Cantor | Tea Pro | |
|---|---|---|
| Sub Bass | 8.5 | 6.0 |
| Bass | 9.0 | 7.0 |
| Bass Feel | 8.5 | 7.0 |
| Lower Mids | 8.5 | 6.5 |
| Upper Mids | 8.0 | 6.0 |
| Lower Treble | 8.0 | 7.0 |
| Upper Treble | 7.5 | 8.0 |
| Sound Stage Width | 8.0 | 7.0 |
| Detail | 8.8 | 7.0 |
| Layering | 8.3 | 7.0 |
| Masking | 8.0 | 6.5 |
| Note Weight | 7.5 | 7.0 |
| Slam | 8.5 | 7.0 |
| Sibilance | 8.5 | 6.0 |
| Timbre Color | 7.5 | 7.0 |
| Tonality | 8.8 | 6.5 |
| Texture | 8.0 | 6.0 |
Tonal Signature
// Nothing to compare yet.