The Tansio Mirai TSMR-3 Pro is available in many different colours and designs, and even as a custom-moulded in-ear.
Almost every single component that is included comes in a separate plastic bag (I'm counting seven in total). While it adds to a valuable impression, it's also a gross waste of resources and absolutely not necessary.
Large, unbranded carrying case plus small, unbranded carrying bag (the latter is especially useful for storing the accessories). A case half the size but with a place to hold the tool to operate the dip switches would have been better, though.
Many included silicone tips as well as a cleaning tool and tool to operate the dip switches.
Three BA drivers per side, allegedly three acoustic ways, dual-bore design.
Three switches on each shell to alter the tonality. They're quite common and standard dip switches that look rather similar to those also found on the TFZ Secret Garden 3, with the exception that the TSMR-3 Pro has got three instead of the Secret Garden's two, and that they're labelled.
The switches need to be operated using a tool that comes included, and lose when it comes to quality compared to my InEar ProPhile 8's switches. What I would have liked the most would be large dip switches at the outside of the shell (faceplate) that could be operated without using a tool.
This included tool is actually a 3.5 mm dust plug with integrated reset pin needle. Nonetheless, it does the job very well.
Very good build quality of the shells - almost impeccable finish and quality.
I really like that the concha parts of the shells are transparent wherefore the drivers, crossovers, acoustic tubes and filters are visible.
The nozzles are somewhat roughened and appear somewhat wider at the tip than at the base so that the ear tips hold and seal better without slipping. A traditional collar/lip would have been more effective, though.
Flush fitting 2-pin connectors.
Awfully curled non-mouldable ear guides on the cable (well, only awfully curled when the in-ears are outside of one's ears, as they work well and are supportive as well as comfortable when inserted). No ear guides or memory wire ear guides would have been better. Otherwise nicely flexible, twisted quad-conductor cable with good chin-slider and angled 3.5 mm plug with good strain relief.
Sound:
Low impedance sources.
Largest included black silicone tips.
Default 020 switch settings tuning.
Default 020 switch settings tuning.
Tonality:
V- to slightly w-shaped sound, depending on the switch settings.
Unlike on my ProPhile 8, the individual switches do not attenuate specific areas of the frequency response, but are all responsible for basically the same. Aligned at 1 kHz, they change the bass and treble output (more bass equals less treble quantity and vice versa when seen from 1 kHz). So the output above 2 kHz remains practically the same, however everything between 20 Hz and up to 2 kHz is affected by the switch settings.
Aligned at 1 kHz, this is what we get (just a selection since combining some of the switch combinations are nearly identical):
000: No bass at all since this disables the woofer altogether.
020: Default tuning. In my opinion best balance between warmth and brightness. Neutral central and upper midrange, just a moderate dose of lower midrange warmth, ca. 7 to 7.5 dB more bass quantity than what would be flat neutral (Etymotic ER-4S and ER4SR), elevated upper treble.
003: Least amount of bass (ca. 4.5 dB more than Etymotic ER-4S and ER4SR), least amount of lower midrange warmth (just a little), neutral central midrange but slightly elevated upper midrange (by ca. 2.5 dB), brightest upper treble (ca. 1.5 dB more than the default tuning).
100: Ca. 9 to 9.5 dB more bass than the Etymotic ER-4S and ER4SR, lower midrange somewhat warmer than the default tuning combination, neutral central and upper midrange, ca. 1.5 dB less upper treble quantity than the default setting.
123: Very close to 100 - the difference is only around up to 1 dB in the bass and mostly indistinguishable in the treble.
- - -
The combination I like the most is the default "020". While I like the bit of extra bass output of 100 and 123, they make the lower midrange sound woollier as the root elevation interferes a bit too much with it.
The bass starts to rise around 700 Hz and reaches its climax around 100 Hz. The true sub-bass (frequencies below 40 Hz) is almost equally present (ca. -2 to -2.5 dB at 20 Hz) as the midbass, but ultimately it's more a mid- than sub-bass-driven signature.
The lower midrange as well as root are on the warmer side, but not yet to an unpleasant degree, which is also thanks to the central and upper midrange following the diffuse-field neutral target wherefore voices are presented at a correct level and sound authentic.
There's a moderate, rather wide elevation around 5 kHz, and another, somewhat stronger but also wide instead of narrow one between about 8.5 kHz and 10 kHz. The extension in the super treble past 10 kHz is quite limited as the level rolls off quite quickly after the last elevation.
The treble doesn't have a 100% natural timbre due to 5 kHz lift, but it's thankfully neither sharp nor intrusive. And the following upper treble lift if fortunately not sharp or unpleasant either (thanks to being wide instead of narrow and below 5 dB of quantity even at the highest point), but just bright; therefore the TSMR-3 Pro's treble is definitely better than the TFZ Secret Garden 3's that has a strong, nasty and sharp upper treble spike. "Clear and bright but not sharp" is what I'd call the TSMR-3 Pro's upper highs.
So yeah, it's reasonably priced for a triple-BA in-ears, nonetheless its tuning is decent and while it lacks the last bits of naturalness, there's no annoyance, exaggeration or sharpness about it. Positively surprised.
Unlike on my ProPhile 8, the individual switches do not attenuate specific areas of the frequency response, but are all responsible for basically the same. Aligned at 1 kHz, they change the bass and treble output (more bass equals less treble quantity and vice versa when seen from 1 kHz). So the output above 2 kHz remains practically the same, however everything between 20 Hz and up to 2 kHz is affected by the switch settings.
Aligned at 1 kHz, this is what we get (just a selection since combining some of the switch combinations are nearly identical):
000: No bass at all since this disables the woofer altogether.
020: Default tuning. In my opinion best balance between warmth and brightness. Neutral central and upper midrange, just a moderate dose of lower midrange warmth, ca. 7 to 7.5 dB more bass quantity than what would be flat neutral (Etymotic ER-4S and ER4SR), elevated upper treble.
003: Least amount of bass (ca. 4.5 dB more than Etymotic ER-4S and ER4SR), least amount of lower midrange warmth (just a little), neutral central midrange but slightly elevated upper midrange (by ca. 2.5 dB), brightest upper treble (ca. 1.5 dB more than the default tuning).
100: Ca. 9 to 9.5 dB more bass than the Etymotic ER-4S and ER4SR, lower midrange somewhat warmer than the default tuning combination, neutral central and upper midrange, ca. 1.5 dB less upper treble quantity than the default setting.
123: Very close to 100 - the difference is only around up to 1 dB in the bass and mostly indistinguishable in the treble.
- - -
The combination I like the most is the default "020". While I like the bit of extra bass output of 100 and 123, they make the lower midrange sound woollier as the root elevation interferes a bit too much with it.
The bass starts to rise around 700 Hz and reaches its climax around 100 Hz. The true sub-bass (frequencies below 40 Hz) is almost equally present (ca. -2 to -2.5 dB at 20 Hz) as the midbass, but ultimately it's more a mid- than sub-bass-driven signature.
The lower midrange as well as root are on the warmer side, but not yet to an unpleasant degree, which is also thanks to the central and upper midrange following the diffuse-field neutral target wherefore voices are presented at a correct level and sound authentic.
There's a moderate, rather wide elevation around 5 kHz, and another, somewhat stronger but also wide instead of narrow one between about 8.5 kHz and 10 kHz. The extension in the super treble past 10 kHz is quite limited as the level rolls off quite quickly after the last elevation.
The treble doesn't have a 100% natural timbre due to 5 kHz lift, but it's thankfully neither sharp nor intrusive. And the following upper treble lift if fortunately not sharp or unpleasant either (thanks to being wide instead of narrow and below 5 dB of quantity even at the highest point), but just bright; therefore the TSMR-3 Pro's treble is definitely better than the TFZ Secret Garden 3's that has a strong, nasty and sharp upper treble spike. "Clear and bright but not sharp" is what I'd call the TSMR-3 Pro's upper highs.
So yeah, it's reasonably priced for a triple-BA in-ears, nonetheless its tuning is decent and while it lacks the last bits of naturalness, there's no annoyance, exaggeration or sharpness about it. Positively surprised.
Resolution:
Really good for the price.
Very high speech intelligibility thanks to the neutral central and upper midrange tuning (thankfully no fake upper midrange clarity brightness boost). Midrange resolution good, too.
Bass typically tight as known from most multi-BA implementations. Attack and body ultimately just moderately on the softer side with fast decay. Becomes a bit soft with bass settings above the default 020 but never smudgy or spongy. Sub-bass definition could be just a little better.
Treble details clean which also applies to the high note separation. Treble character only very slightly on the softer side, which is probably even a good thing considering the generally bright upper treble tuning.
Very high speech intelligibility thanks to the neutral central and upper midrange tuning (thankfully no fake upper midrange clarity brightness boost). Midrange resolution good, too.
Bass typically tight as known from most multi-BA implementations. Attack and body ultimately just moderately on the softer side with fast decay. Becomes a bit soft with bass settings above the default 020 but never smudgy or spongy. Sub-bass definition could be just a little better.
Treble details clean which also applies to the high note separation. Treble character only very slightly on the softer side, which is probably even a good thing considering the generally bright upper treble tuning.
Soundstage:
Very good for the price, and probably only beaten by my Pai Audio MR3 when it comes to multi-BA in-ears in this price range - fairly wide as it exceeds further than the base between my ears, and has got a decent amount of spatial depth as well, even though it is ultimately more oval than circular.
Mostly precise imaging and note separation - the "empty" space between instruments and tonal elements only rarely carries a bit of fogginess, and the stage never collapses.
- - - - - - - - -
Compared to my Pai Audio MR3 (TSMR-3 Pro with default 020 Switch Settings):
The TSMR-3 Pro is clearly ahead when it comes to accessories, cable and finish, that's not even up for debate.
The TSMR-3 Pro is somewhat bassier and warmer. The TSMR-3 Pro's upper root interferes more with its midrange compared to the MR3 whose lower mids and upper root are more correct and less warm, however the Tansio Mirai is more accurate in the upper mids where the MR3 is a little in the background wherefore it places voices a bit further in the mix; it's probably a tie overall.
Both are more or less comparably bright in the treble - the MR3 a little more so. Cymbals sound somewhat more metallic on the MR3 in comparison (therefore the TSMR-3 Pro is a little ahead when it comes to treble naturalness but not perfect either).
Both are not far apart at all when it comes to technical qualities, nonetheless the Pai Audio in-ear is ultimately a bit ahead (somewhat tighter and better defined bass and somewhat better resolving midrange; the Tansio Mirai in-ear is, on the other hand, ahead when it comes to treble realism while the treble separation is very close (probably slightly in favour of the MR3)).
Very subjectively, the Pai Audio MR3 appears a bit more coherent sounding to me.
Both do a really good job when it comes to soundstage. While the MR3 offers just somewhat more spatial depth as well as a smidgen more spatial width and is ultimately a bit ahead when it comes to imaging (instrument separation and instrument placement precision), the TSMR-3 Pro does a very good job for a multi-BA in-ear at this price point, as do both in-ears in general when it comes to sound (the MR3 ultimately just a little more so).
Mostly precise imaging and note separation - the "empty" space between instruments and tonal elements only rarely carries a bit of fogginess, and the stage never collapses.
- - - - - - - - -
Compared to my Pai Audio MR3 (TSMR-3 Pro with default 020 Switch Settings):
The TSMR-3 Pro is clearly ahead when it comes to accessories, cable and finish, that's not even up for debate.
The TSMR-3 Pro is somewhat bassier and warmer. The TSMR-3 Pro's upper root interferes more with its midrange compared to the MR3 whose lower mids and upper root are more correct and less warm, however the Tansio Mirai is more accurate in the upper mids where the MR3 is a little in the background wherefore it places voices a bit further in the mix; it's probably a tie overall.
Both are more or less comparably bright in the treble - the MR3 a little more so. Cymbals sound somewhat more metallic on the MR3 in comparison (therefore the TSMR-3 Pro is a little ahead when it comes to treble naturalness but not perfect either).
Both are not far apart at all when it comes to technical qualities, nonetheless the Pai Audio in-ear is ultimately a bit ahead (somewhat tighter and better defined bass and somewhat better resolving midrange; the Tansio Mirai in-ear is, on the other hand, ahead when it comes to treble realism while the treble separation is very close (probably slightly in favour of the MR3)).
Very subjectively, the Pai Audio MR3 appears a bit more coherent sounding to me.
Both do a really good job when it comes to soundstage. While the MR3 offers just somewhat more spatial depth as well as a smidgen more spatial width and is ultimately a bit ahead when it comes to imaging (instrument separation and instrument placement precision), the TSMR-3 Pro does a very good job for a multi-BA in-ear at this price point, as do both in-ears in general when it comes to sound (the MR3 ultimately just a little more so).
Conclusion:
The Tansio Mirai TSMR-3 Pro is a good multi-BA in-ear for the price and does many things very well and has got only few flaws.
Won't replace my Pai Audio MR3 (that does a few things even a bit better) as a good-sounding multi-BA in-ear in this price range, but has got admittedly the somewhat better (less metallic) treble out of the two and is generally not far away in terms of performance, wherefore it's generally a nice in-ear with many strong features.
Won't replace my Pai Audio MR3 (that does a few things even a bit better) as a good-sounding multi-BA in-ear in this price range, but has got admittedly the somewhat better (less metallic) treble out of the two and is generally not far away in terms of performance, wherefore it's generally a nice in-ear with many strong features.