the three looks better than my two on that graph…at least for me
except for that scoop that Jason alluded to…looks good
3 Likes
the only one even worth spending money on is the mk1, 2 is v shaped and 3 is warm . look at the midrange recession on both 2 and 3.
mk1 is basically a smoother, a more universal and more mass appealing b3 that aims for that accurate midrange with arguably better treble smoothness.
1 Like
OG still king for vocals and mid-range, but MK3 better tech and bass and treble
MK3 better than MK2 in everything, direct upgrade to it, if you’re choosing between the 2 grab the MK3 no brainer, but personally I like OG the best still tonality wise
6 Likes
Heard OG oracle for the first time recently I have to say OG is still relevant. If people can find good deal on used units they should pick one up.
3 Likes
Thanks for that I love the OG tuning sounds like the MK3 would be a downgrade for my preferences.
Cheers .
2 Likes
After watching your review on the 61T, I had to get out the Doscinco to remind myself how happy I am with that IEM. It has some of the most satisfying bass I have experienced in an IEM.
I have been mostly listening to Explorer and Cinno over the weekend. Low pinna army 
6 Likes
your raving over the Explorer got me to jump on them at the amazon sale price… after a couple songs i got why you like them immediately. this set scratches an itch if you like both Cinno and Doscinco and want to split the difference between what both do well.
2 Likes
If your set sounds like that, I can see why you didn’t like it. It makes sense. Thanks for getting back to me. 
Great 
2 Likes
For people that like treble turned down a bit, the Aful Explorer is pretty amazing. Very smooth sound, with solid accessories, and a small comfy shell.
3 Likes
Word, the cable is very nice for the price as well as the plating, crank these babies up
1 Like
full blast brother and just enjoy the music
2 Likes
The MK3 seems best to me, but it will be a bit warm with a slight recession in the mids, but…that’s not always a bad thing. Lately, I’ve been choosing IEMs with slightly pulled back mids and raised bass. Maybe I’m turning into a basshead 
. In fact, the graph is close to D41.
5 Likes
I am also a big fan of these newer tuning with the elevated bass, and the mids pulled back a bit. I think it sounds more natural not having the upper mids boosted up and too forward in the mix.
Dont see mention of what ThieAudio is using for its BA drivers, but hopefully the Sonion EST drivers should add some nicely articulated top end over The D41 and PA02.
Here would we where diminishing returns hits hard over triple $$$ for the MK3 !!
2 Likes
thie audios absolute horrendous qc strikes again, just look
here the 3 and 1 compared, nothing like the graphs above jay uploaded, also remember that coupler differences isn’t the point here its just solely the poor qc and massive variances from the same products of the same company graphed by the same coupler.
here the mk3 got more lower treble than the mk2 with massive amounts of bass boost, compare with the manufacturer graph
here the mk1 got even more recessed mids than the oracle 3, compare with jays graph
here monarch 2 got considerably lower bass(and treble) than the oracle 3
but here the monarch 2 got more bass( and treble) than the oracle 3
you can’t make this up 
buying thieaudio is like buying those kinder lucky eggs with chocolate around it, you don’t know what you are getting and you are literally paying 500$ + (a low to mid range pc build without monitor and accessories money) for that qc.
meanwhile sony with actual qc, the minor differences are actual couple difference at this point.
and here 6 more different samples are compared with minimal differences.
4 Likes
I agree. Sennheiser also have excellent channel matching.
By the way the D41 has the same graphics and I’m sure it’s technically better than the Oracle MK3, maybe a bit behind in resolution, but everything else will be way over, over 
…
how do you know d41 got same graph to oracle 3? no one with the same coupler measured them. also perceived resolution is just achieving 20hz to 20khz that matches your hrtf well, thats it. my oracle 2 goes from shit res to the same as my speakers with midrange correction, or the buds fe or any single dd i have if eqed properly goes from bottom tier mud and boom to 90% of my speakers and that 10% is the treble issue.
d41 is hybrid with dedicated treble drivers, if you eq it properly you will get top tier resolution.
1 Like
ORACLE MK3 REVIEW
The Oracle MK3 is Thieaudio’s most refined version of the Oracles to date. I would consider these as a balanced all-rounder that’s slightly airy and detailed but still smooth. They’re a direct improvement over the MK2s while being better in many areas versus the legend that is the OG Oracle.
BASS:
The bass texture on the MK3s especially is a noticeable upgrade when you compare it to both the MK2s and the original Oracles. The OG Oracles bass was a bit weak, not that powerful, it had less low-end than Harman 2019 so that’s when you know it’s NOT a bass set. On the other hand the MK2s had more bass than the MK1s, it was a lot more fun in the low-end with pretty decent impact, but compared to the MK3s the MK2s bass feels less-resolving in the smaller nuances and texture, and not nearly as tight and tactile, it feels boomier and not as well-controlled. So, if we’re only talking low-end, the MK3s wins hands down out of all of them, it’s just better with the additional DD and isobaric design.
MIDS:
Mid-range wise in-terms of overall balance, layering, and separation, the MK3 is a small bump over the others. No frequency gets in the way of the other, and you hear the details clearly, again a very well-balanced set. Compared to the MK2s the the MK3s vocals are more powerful, they’re more forward and fuller and not thin or wispy sounding like the MK2s - because the issues with the MK2s was that the vocals was too bright and airy, and didn’t have enough note-weight which made them sound floaty, weak, and unnatural. The MK3s fixes the timbre and note-weight issue on the MK2s while maintaining enough air and detail, so imo in-terms of both the low-end, and mid-range the MK3s would be a direct upgrade to the MK2s in those areas.
However, versus the MK1s, I do still prefer the vocals better on the OG Oracles because they’re just more natural. The MK3s are more laid back and more airy as you hear more of the nuances, timbre is still very natural, but vocal extension just feels more complete on the OGs with the extra 3K bump, and vocals feel more forward and clean as there is less emphasised from the treble and low-end that is more boosted on the MK3s.
To me the MK1 is the most natural sounding, and a very pure and sweet set is how I would describe it, it’s like the spring rain, very clean and clear. It’s also the smoothest, and scales better than both the MK2 and MK3s because of the lower-bass and treble region which shifts the focus on the midrange and vocals more, and sounds more special to me personally.
TREBLE:
Treble wise, if we’re strictly talking refinement plus detail, the MK3 is the best out of the 3, it strikes the best balance between smooth but still airy and nuanced in the extension. The MK2s in comparison simply has too much air, overly bright, scales really bad as I can’t really listen to them past 65 dbs, plus the timbre again is wispy and thin sounding because there’s just too much treble. The only instance where I can see someone taking the MK2s over the MK3s is either, #1 they have hearing loss in the treble region, or #2, they’re a treblehead.
But aside from those scenarios the MK3s overall has better treble when it comes to the timbre and refinement vs the MK2s, and more air and detail than the originals. So again, it strikes a nice balance between the MK1 and MK2s, and imo it’s a good upgrade to the MK2s, and overall a better all-rounder than the MK1s.
vs MEGA5 EST 7TH:
Now versus the Mega5EST 7th edition these two are fairly similar in the overall tuning, balanced, well-layered, and laid back with an open presentation to the staging. The main difference is that the Oracle MK3s has better bass, it’s more textured, it hits harder, and my unit at least has more low-end in general and not as vanilla. The main nitpick I had with the Mega5-7th was that my unit had a weak low-end, so when you compare that to the dual DDs and isobaric design on the MK3s, the Oracles just feels like a tier above the mega5s in that sense.
And depending on your unit, the treble is also more airy on top, and overall just more engaging than the mega5-7th which was more neutral, uncolored, and monitor like. To me, the Oracle MK3 is pretty much just a better version of the mega5-7th, it’s still balanced and monitor like, midrange on both is fairly similar, but the MK3s just has a better low-end, so, if you were thinking about getting the mega5-7th, I’d just get the Oracle MK3s instead.
vs Hype 4:
Compared to the Hype 4 the MK3 is a more laid back, detailed version of it with less emphasize in the low-end. The attack in the bass notes is slightly sharper than the Hype 4s and overall cleaner and tighter in the low-end, but it’s not as impactful, immersive, or full and big sounding as the hype 4s. The overall sound feels more forward on the Hype 4s, even the vocals, but it’s just not as resolving, airy, and well-separated when compared to the MK3s.
So, from a technical perspective the MK3s are a bump over the Hype 4s, but tuning wise, I still like the Hype 4s more, it just sounds more engaging and unique.
vs Hype 10:
On the other hand, the Hype 10s has the same technical capabilities as the Oracle MK3s, but just fuller and more impactful in the low-end, with the vocals being pushed more forward, they feel more powerful and you hear them better, and also more grounded in the note-weight.
The MK3s in comparison feels lighter and airier, more laidback, smoother actually, whereas the 10 is heavier in the attack, more textured, and feels more dynamic and has that engagement from the Hype 4s but just more resolving.
So tech wise they’re fairly similar, but it just depends if you want a smoother chill listening session, or a more engaging and dynamic one.
vs Monarch MK3:
Compared to the Monarch MK3s, I personally like the Monarchs the best as an all-rounder, the vocals are more detailed, they pop-out more, and the sound is overall a little more dynamic while also being smooth and slightly airy. They’re pretty much the Hype 10s but just with more air while being more dynamic. It’s a better all-rounder that’s a little more detailed and engaging, while the Oracles MK3s are more laid-back… But, the direct upgrade to the Oracle MK3s would actually be the Prestige LTD.
vs Prestige LTD:
The LTD is similarly airy leaning and laid back in the vocals like the Oracle3, but with better detail and layering, as well as a bigger sense of stage and space. However, the Oracle3 actually has better bass tactility and impact because of the new isobaric setup because the LTDs didn’t use that when it came out, so a bit of a weird case.
Overall though, if you’re looking for a more spacious and detailed sound, a more unique signature, then go for the LTD, but if you’re ok with trading off some “tech and sauce” for a better low-end, then go Oracle3, plus it’s also the better value at 2x cheaper.
WORTH IT?
All in all the Oracle MK3 is a solid set, no real weaknesses, great technicalities and refinement, but it can lack engagement and that “special sauce” as it’s more balanced and all-rounded. Personally, I’d still take the OG Oracles for the vocals, but you can’t go wrong with either one.
Here is the Final Ranking:
Tonality: S- (8/10)
Tech: A+/S- (7.5/10)
Overall: A+ (7.5/10)
Thanks for reading!
15 Likes
Is the Oracle Mk3 smooth sounding like the Mega5EST has been described? My guess is it isn’t.
1 Like
