This and That:
Compared to the more expensive P1, the P2's delivery content is less opulent and the unboxing experience is also less luxurious.
Nevertheless, the sturdy cardboard with a magnetic lid is better than average for the price class.
In addition to the cable, the in-ears and a quick start guide, the packaging of the Pinnacle P2 contains three pairs of single-flange silicone tips, three pairs of bi-flange silicone tips, one pair of Comply Foam tips, a 6.3 to 3.5 mm jack adapter, a shirt clip and a pleather storage case with Pinnacle logo.
Visually the MEE audio Pinnacle P2 adapts the unmistakable and elegant housing form of the P1, however with glossy black plastic housings instead of brushed zinc.
Compared to the P1 that had a inner-facing vent hole, the P2's is located on the outside
The new, cheaper in-ear is also equipped with MMCX connectors, making the cable exchangeable.
The fact that the cable is exchangeable is a good thing, because the included cable is unfortunately a clear step backwards compared to the silver-plated premium cable of the P1.
The P2's cable is just not nearly as flexible or supple.
The storage case is not as luxurious as that of the P1, but as a compensation it is much more practical and protective, since no dirt or dust can penetrate through the zipper.
Sound:
I've only used low impedance sources with the P2.
Solely the largest included single-flange silicone tips were used for listening.
Tonality:
Does the Pinnacle P2 sound different than the P1? Yes, it does, although both are unmistakably related. Compared to the P1, the P2 has slightly more sub-bass with otherwise identical warmth and fullness. The P2's 1 to 3 kHz dip is slightly less, making the midrange less strange. On the other hand, the range between 3 and 8 kHz is brighter with the P2, while the 8-10 kHz peak of the P1 is omitted.
The P2 is also noticeably more sensitive than the P1 (with identical volume setting on the player, it is significantly louder than the P1).
The P2 is therefore not a hi-fi in-ear either, but intentionally a coloured sounding in-ear. Even though it eliminates some tuning weaknesses of the P1 (more about this later in a direct comparison and also here in this section), it unfortunately has a few new weaknesses, which lead to the fact that its tuning can unfortunately not be described as more natural than with the Pinnacle P1 that isn't that great either.
In the bass and fundamental range, the P2 is a full sounding in-ear with an impactful emphasis of about 11-12 dB in the sub- and midbass compared to an in-ear that is diffuse-field neutral in the lows, such as the Etymotic ER-4S/SR.
At about 750 Hz, the level begins to rise and reaches its peak, which can be maintained down to 20 Hz without any roll-off, at about 60 Hz. Thus the sub-bass is lively and rumbling in corresponding recordings.
The fundamental range of the P2 is on the warmer, fuller side, without overshadowing the mids.
The midrange of the P2, apart from the pleasantly warm impact of the fundamental, is clearly on the coloured side. Even if the central midrange is largely flat, there is a small dip following above it, between 1 and 2 kHz, which avoids that the midrange becomes too forward. However, since this dip is smaller and narrower than the P1's, the P2's midrange is less irritating or strange sounding.
From 3 kHz on, however, the upper midrange and central treble frequencies are on the brighter side, which gives voices, especially brighter ones, a higher pitch and a brighter timbre. Thus the timbre of the midrange is clearly bright rather than warm.
In the following central treble there is a strong boost at 5 kHz, followed by another peak at 8 and 12 kHz respectively. Between 8 and 11 kHz, on the other hand, unlike the P1, there is no peak.
Although this makes cymbals less pointy/bright than with the P1, the Pinnacle P2's bright central treble makes the timbre seem rather unnatural, which is a shame, because the improvements between 1 and 3 as well as 8 and 11 kHz compared to the P1 could have made the P2 a pleasantly natural, even-sounding in-ear. Instead, it seems inharmonic due to the too bright, somewhat unsteady midrange and central treble, as this 5 kHz boost not only shifts the midrange and treble timbre, but also makes the cymbals' attack sound more metallic and somewhat alienated.
The attempt to generate clarity, airiness and freshness through this increase has unfortunately gone in the wrong direction. Threrefore the tuning seems rather artificial with most music.
Resolution:
The Pinnacle P2 adopts some aspects of the P1 in terms of detail retrieval and presents a decent level of details.
In the low frequencies the P2seems to be even more detailed, although a little bit softer, as well as less dull than the P1, but doesn't fully reach its detail resolution in the mid and high frequencies.
If I still complained about the P1 that I didn't find its resolution level appropriate to its price point, I can't blame the P2 for this anymore as it's clearly cheaper. Because even if the P1 has a slightly higher resolution in the mid and high frequencies, the P2 delivers a decent to good performance in its price range, which is a little above that of my Shure SE215m+SPE, but doesn't come close to better performers like the Fidue A65, Brainwavz B100 or DUNU's Titan models, whereas, to be fair, the latter are a little higher in price.
The bass is pleasantly tight for an in-ear with one dynamic driver on each side and has only a marginal softness in decay, without negatively influencing the speed or control, thus avoiding muddiness.
Texture and resolution in the lows and lower midrange are also good.
Speech intelligibility and detail resolution in the midrange are good without reaching the detail level of expensive in-ears.
The treble resolution and instrument separation are good, but not high enough to make the overdone central treble appear pleasant.
Soundstage:
The stage of the P2 is a little wider than average, but does not come close to the open and immersive, three-dimensional stage of the P1.
Spatial depth is present, although there is about 65% more width than depth in my ears.
The precision of the stage, on the other hand, is quite decent to good.
There is no real "air" between instruments, but individual elements and instruments do not bleed into each other. In fast and complex, densely packed recordings, the separation does not degrade, which is a good sign.
---------
Compared to other Single Dynamic Driver In-Ears around $100:
Shure SE215m+SPE:
The MEE has a little more sub-bass quantity, while both otherwise have about the same bass level with similar warmth in the fundamentals, which are more balanced by the P2 through a raised upper midrange, resulting in a bit less subjective fullness although both are objectively about identically full sounding.
The P2's treble is clearly brighter than the Shure's.
The Shure sounds more even and harmonious in the mid and high frequencies.
In the bass, the MEE is a bit more detailed and has a slightly higher resolution in the midrange and treble. The SE215m+SPE, on the other hand, has a somewhat tighter bass response, with comparable control and speed.
The stage of the SE215m+SPE is wider, with less depth. Due to the more pronounced width, the Shure also appears slightly better separated.
ORIVETI BASIC:
The BASIC has less warmth, but more darkness.
The P2 is raised more strongly in the upper and midbass, while the ORIVETI has got the more pronounced sub-bass.
In the mid and high frequencies the MEE is clearly brighter than the ORIVETI.
The BASIC is more even and harmonious sounding.
The Pinnacle P2 is slightly more detailed in the midrange and treble.
The bass of the BASIC is somewhat softer and slower than that of the MEE.
The BASIC has a slightly larger, deeper stage.
MEE audio Pinnacle P1:
The P2 has a slightly improved midrange timbre - the 1 to 3 kHz dip is milder and narrower, so it doesn't seem as "irritating" here. However, it's still not perfect and has other weaknesses such as a too bright, somewhat uneven central treble, which makes it sound more metallic. In the upper treble, the more expensive P1 is raised more strongly.
The sub-bass of the P2 is a little more pronounced.
In my opinion, the P1, despite its weakness in the mid-range tuning, has a slightly better tuning overall, which is due to its more even central treble tuning. None of the two is an even and realistically tuned in-ear though and both have weaknesses when it comes to realism.
An improvement is the bass range of the P2, which got rid of the dullness of the P1 and seems to attack faster. On the other hand it's slightly softer in decay, which isn't really perceived as a negative aspect since the overall punch is still nice and overall tight for a dynamic in-ear.
In the mid and high frequencies, however, the detail resolution of the P2 isn't quite as good as that of the higher priced and more premium Pinnacle P1.
The stage of the P1 is a bit bigger, more spacious, more engaging and three-dimensional than that of the more affordable P2.
Conclusion:
The MEE audio Pinnacle P2 costs only about half the price of the Pinnacle P1. It was therefore foreseeable that there would be a few compromises in terms of delivery content and premium quality. Nevertheless, they could have included better cable.
Even though the P2 has some improvements over the P1 in some areas, when it comes to sound, such as midrange and upper treble tuning, and bass quality, these improvements also come with a few additional downsides, such as a smaller soundstage, a more unnatural central treble and less details in the midrange and highs compared to the P1.
I feel like MEE audio could have done much more with the P2, such as fixing the P1's tuning flaws without adding new ones. As it is, the P2, just like the P1, doesn't leave me satisfied.