Cantorvs.Mk12 Turris
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 | Mk12 Turris |
|---|---|---|
| Brand | AFUL | Hidizs |
| 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. | The MK12 Turris brings a striking design together with a smooth and full-bodied sound. It’s an all-rounder that aims to please a broad range of musical tastes while offering style and substance in equal measure. |
| Price Level | 500 – 1.000 | 100 – 500 |
| Housing & Driver | ||
|---|---|---|
| Driver Config | Multi-BA | Single Dyn. Driver |
| Driver Types | Balanced Armature | Dynamic Driver |
| Shell Material | – | – |
| Cable | 4Braid 5N OFC Cable | – |
| Technical | ||
|---|---|---|
| Freq Range | – | 10-45kHz |
| Impedance (Ω) | 20 | 32 |
| Sensitivity (dB) | 106 | 111 |
| Crossover | RLC Network Electronic Crossover | – |
| Platform Info | ||
|---|---|---|
| Comments | 1 | 1 |
| Visit Count | 128 | 13 |
| External Reviews | 1 | 1 |
Meta Ratings
// Nothing to compare yet.
Sound Characteristics
Cantor enhances basslines with n more energy and grip, giving them a livelier feel compared to Mk12 Turris (9 vs 8). Mk12 Turris renders lower mids a more naturally, giving male vocals and instruments a fuller tone than Cantor (9 vs 8.5). It offers c greater shimmer and nuance in the lower treble, revealing micro-details that Cantor misses (9 vs 8). It captures ambient cues and reverbs s more precisely through its upper treble, enhancing spatial perception over Cantor (9 vs 7.5). It shows a better control of masking effects, maintaining clarity across frequency ranges better than Cantor (8.5 vs 8). It adds a more body and density to musical notes, enriching the overall texture compared to Cantor (8.5 vs 7.5). Cantor hits with e more authority during transients, creating a more explosive effect than Mk12 Turris (8.5 vs 7.5). Listeners may experience c fewer sharp edges in 'S' and 'T' sounds with Mk12 Turris, whereas Cantor can get fatiguing (9.5 vs 8.5). The tone quality of It feels e more organic and true-to-source than the slightly artificial flavor of Cantor (8.5 vs 7.5).
| Cantor | Mk12 Turris | |
|---|---|---|
| Sub Bass | 8.5 | 8.5 |
| Bass | 9.0 | 8.0 |
| Bass Feel | 8.5 | 8.5 |
| Lower Mids | 8.5 | 9.0 |
| Upper Mids | 8.0 | 8.0 |
| Lower Treble | 8.0 | 9.0 |
| Upper Treble | 7.5 | 9.0 |
| Sound Stage Width | 8.0 | 8.0 |
| Detail | 8.8 | 8.5 |
| Layering | 8.3 | 8.5 |
| Masking | 8.0 | 8.5 |
| Note Weight | 7.5 | 8.5 |
| Slam | 8.5 | 7.5 |
| Sibilance | 8.5 | 9.5 |
| Timbre Color | 7.5 | 8.5 |
| Tonality | 8.8 | 8.5 |
| Texture | 8.0 | 8.0 |
Tonal Signature
// Nothing to compare yet.