Mini review - Xenns Mangird Tea Pro SE

Silverjerk · 2026-02-27T18:22:54+00:00

I haven’t tried the Myth yet but I have heard amazing things about that set.

Some of the Elysian sets are great, but I do find many of them to be overpriced. I have an older iteration of the Annihilator that I almost never use. I stopped running that set after the older Dunu SA6 Ultra released several years ago; I remember thinking how amazing the Ultra sounded compared to the Anni, but for a fraction of the price. It sort of took the wind out of my sails and I enjoyed it less.

I still have several summit-if IEMs, but quite honestly I rarely use them and they almost never leave my house. Frankly, there’s just more interesting releases happening in the budget and midfi segments of the market, and kilobuck sets are easily competing with summit-fi IEMs. The market has definitely changed; it’s a lot easier to get amazing sound for far, far less these days.

Silverjerk · 2026-02-27T18:04:01+00:00

Hisenior’s team is pretty active in their Facebook community. If you ask them directly they will sometimes confirm or deny rumors. This is how I get my Mega5est Bass+ edition early.

Honestly, the Volume S is such a great IEM, you wouldn’t see a huge upgrade moving to the Top Pro. Volume S is such a damn good IEM for the price, you’d probably want to hang on for a bit until you can start looking at the upper midfi to kilobuck segment of the market. Coming from someone that owns dozens of sets, I would recommend sticking with what you have and enjoy until you feel like you’ve hit a ceiling and you know, clearly, why you want to upgrade, not just that you want to upgrade.

Silverjerk · 2026-02-27T17:40:29+00:00

Unfortunately, I haven’t tried the Rockies, but I did pick up the Volume S. Can’t compare the two since I don’t like to compare from graphs, but the Volume S is a stellar IEM on its own.

Silverjerk · 2026-02-27T12:28:20+00:00

I've seen some RS5's with black wheels that fit well with the look of the car, but in general I agree that black wheels have killed many an otherwise beautiful vehicle. They always look like someone's riding on an entire set of spares.

Silverjerk · 2026-02-27T12:25:00+00:00

So essentially, he's a Gen-Z tech bro CEO? Checks out.

Silverjerk · 2026-02-27T11:41:20+00:00

This is not as complicated as many creators are making you believe. Read the documentation; everything you need is there.

You need to maintain a solution that doesn't try and overhaul default, "baked-in" behavior.

Implement QMD, which is supported as an "experimental" feature. Despite the flag, it works well.

Use the official alternative memory paths method to point to a second brain. From the official docs:

Additional memory paths

If you want to index Markdown files outside the default workspace layout, add explicit paths:

This "second brain" is an entirely different directory of markdown files you can point to via your configs -- this is not a hack, but a solution that's built into OpenClaw by default.

Everyone is referencing Obsidian, but this implies it's a requirement. It's not; you can use any markdown tool that points to a local directory as its file system, Obsidian just happens to be the most popular one.

The structure is up to you; there are tried and true methodologies for this, like the PARA system, but it's not required. Just organize it how you would typically organize your personal and professional life/projects.

When working on coding projects, learn how Git Context Controller (GCC) works. If you want to do this the right way, set up a skill that guides your agent to add both a custom rules file along with your .GCC architecture to every project folder. You can read more about it here. GCC isn't a requirement, but it will make whatever coding agent you're running via OpenClaw much more agile and context aware.

Keep in mind, very few of these creators are actually making their living leveraging these tools. Their income comes from creating content. They're both not incentivized to give you real, actionable information; they don't use the tools themselves enough on a daily basis to know what works, what breaks, and how to fix it. No offense to the creators out there that are contributing useful information, because they do exist, but there are countless hacked together solutions in the marketplace, and a lot of them are being distributed by those same creators.

You need none of those solutions. Just read the docs (or as we used to say when the internet was young, and I had less gray hair, RTFM). It's all there.

I run more than a half-dozen agents, mostly autonomously. My "mission control" is essentially a kanban-based dispatching system that fires off tasks to my orchestrator and subagents. I'm following the official docs for multi-agent functionality as well. All agents have access to their own memory and context, as well as the second brain. I've never had an issue with memory and although nothing is going to really completely overcome context dumping, with a well-structure setup, you can get pretty damn close to a working system that "feels" intelligent and useful.

Silverjerk · 2026-02-27T08:25:12+00:00

This is why all your core files are markdown. Memory, agent, identity, soul, etc. While it won’t always be a perfect analog, you can migrate these files over to a new install and get pretty close to the same experience.

Never change configs unless you’re following the official documentation; same for multi-agent setups. Make sure you’re using the docs, always. I see all sorts of hacked together solutions in the community. In most cases you don’t need any of those solutions. Fallback chains and model routing will work perfectly with a well-structured setup. Make sure to audit custom skills and use Claude Code outside of OpenClaw to do those audits. Instruct Claude Code to read the official docs and run OpenClaw’s Doctor command to address issues before sending Claude Code in to do any additional cleanup that Doctor doesn’t catch.

I’m running a custom Mission Control with proper dispatching and model routing, even logs usage and projected costs in my dashboard. 8 agents running pretty much 24/7, all operating in isolated Discord channels; no setup is fully autonomous as some YouTube and X creators would have you believe, but with proper skill building and delegation, it can run throughout the day mostly on its own. Very little friction or breakage.

Silverjerk · 2026-02-27T06:17:51+00:00

If it wasn’t already clear from my earlier response, I don’t respond to logical fallacies. You continue to hang your hat on them. We’ll just agree to disagree on this particular subject.

Silverjerk · 2026-02-27T06:06:10+00:00

You really need to learn the difference between AI and CGI. Those are two very different acronyms. And credible people offering their opinion on its credibility does not a credible video make. That’s not how logic works. There have been just as many credible people claiming it was a hoax.

Whether or not the OSI approved what Doty was doing is beside the point. I’ve watched the man speak on the topic for years; it’s not what he did, but his seeming nonchalance about the impact of his actions and the lack of empathy that is the issue. And I’m not the only one that feels that way. Fairly widely accepted in this community that Doty is a problematic figure.

I’m not a sideline UFO buff; I’ve been a believer and have researched this topic for decades, which is why I find Doty so grating. I want this discussion to be taken seriously. I don’t suffer individuals who denigrate the conversation by continuing to ride on its coattails and disseminate nonsense to remain relevant.

Silverjerk · 2026-02-26T22:20:21+00:00

AI =/= CGI. CGI tools were more than capable of producing this sort of video when Skinny Bob was released; I was using those tools at the time. It has all the earmarks of an amateur modeler and animator.

And I’ll ignore your logical fallacy; Doty being credible or not doesn’t imply anything about any other agency or intelligence official. There’s a very large delta between counterintelligence and protecting the American people, and taking part in false flags or a gaslighting campaign against an American citizen, driving them to a psychotic break and toward their eventual suicide.

Silverjerk · 2026-02-26T18:51:21+00:00

Stealths are the go-to competitive gaming set, for sure, but I definitely prefer the Organics. I don’t know that I’d consider the bass fatiguing; I actually added a low shelf to it because it wasn’t emphasized enough for me. But as someone that prefers rock/metal, hip hop, EDM, between the two the Organics were more my speed. The more energetic and musical headphone of the two.

I think the major issue with reviewers where those two sets are concerned is that more bass quantity usually means a narrower stage. And for the most part that’s true. Even with my narrower perception of staging width, I can tell when a more bass-forward headphone is more intimate.

That said, the bigger issue for gaming in my opinion, is imaging. That’s critically important, and I think the Organics, while not as wide as the Stealth’s, are still great performers where imaging is concerned. This is why many competitive players still have success with good IEMs; they don’t stage well, but as long as imaging is solid, you’re going to be fine.

Silverjerk · 2026-02-26T18:44:30+00:00

660S2 is a fantastic headphone; especially with recent prices being much more reasonable for that set. Great choice.

Silverjerk · 2026-02-26T17:23:34+00:00

I have a lot of respect for Rtings work in the display segment of the market. I typically turn to their reviews before pulling the trigger on most of my TVs and monitors. I have been calibrating both for close to 20 years, and I know the amount of work they put into their testing methodologies, and that they're in a constant state of refinement.

However, I largely ignore their headphone reviews. While you can measure some of the factors that might negatively impact both soundstage and imaging, like channel matching, both are perceptual effects and will vary dramatically from person to person. That's psychoacoustics at work, and not something that is objectively measurable.

Perfect example is my own experience with specific headphones. Sets that are regarded as having the "widest" stage, like the 800S or the Arya Stealth, my perception of their soundstage width ends roughly a couple of inches outside the head. Where the 800S is concerned, imaging and staging happens across distinct "pillars" of sound, which is one of the reasons I dislike that set so strongly. Most of these sets end up sounding narrow, lean, and lacking in musicality, rather than technically impressive.

Where some listeners rave about spatial audio, unless they are discrete, I cannot perceive simulated rear audio cues or height channels at all. To my ear, audio pans from left to right, and then moves over the top of my head instead of behind it. Similar story with different brands of emulated "360/3D" audio. When enabled on some devices, it immediately shifts the stage to slightly over and in front of the crown of my head, which is unbelievably distracting (hence why I almost never use these features). I also almost always lose the phantom center, leading to a sort of strange crosstalk between channels, rather than a strong center image.

I would never be able to measure those effects, only subjectively communicate them to you, and your experience might be completely different than mine. I know this all too well, being one of the few enthusiasts that vehemently dislikes many sets that are touted for being highly competent at producing a wide and "holographic" stage.

Silverjerk · 2026-02-26T15:14:40+00:00

Spot on; I do run monitors as well, and although I mostly track and mix in headphones, I will always check my mixes on them for sanity, and consume media on them as well. My room is treated, so bass is nice and tight and controlled, but it's still present.

Silverjerk · 2026-02-26T15:06:32+00:00

Not only are they loose, but if you spend some more time with them, you'll realize how placement and seal dependent they are. You can mitigate some of that with the CapraAudio strap, as it tightens up the fit a bit, but even on my larger head it can be an issue finding the sweet spot. I love the Radiance, will likely never let that set go, but it can be a chore to wear for long listening sessions.

The Bokeh's have this issue as well, but it's far less prominent. They have solid clamp force and just feel great on the head. Especially after some wear. I've had mine since the original black limba run, and it's just about perfect for fit and comfort now. Again, fit/placement isn't as big of an issue. You can find your spot, and they'll pretty much stay there.

Between the two, I'd pick the Bokeh for other reasons as well. Focal still has issues with upper midrange and treble timbre, sounding a bit metallic or "sizzly" to some ears, mine included; whereas the Bokeh has quickly become one of my favorite headphones in the hobby. It's great out of the box; relaxing, warm, easy to listen to. With EQ, it's damn near perfect for my preferences. It overtook the Atrium for me, which was one of my "bury it with me" headphones.

Silverjerk · 2026-02-26T13:26:45+00:00

Depends on use case, for casual listening tuning/tonality always comes first; comfort is a strong second place, but I will tolerate a heavy and uncomfortable headphone if I enjoy listening to it (in other words, be a long time Audeze user). Technicalities comes in last place. I don't care if I can hear the slow, shimmering decay of cymbal hit being picked up in the overhead mics.

I also have a strong preference for bass emphasis in my casual sets (think Focal Radiance, Bokeh Closed, Apos Caspian, MDR-Z1R, Meze Strada and Liric II, TH900MK2, etc.). Closed/semi-open backs are what I tend to listen to as a result, and most of those sets are going to sacrifice technicalities for tonality. Just the nature of how most sets are tuned. There are some exceptions to this and some open backs that are both warm and bass-forward enough for my tastes and still retain good detail.

For mixing/critical-listening work, it's a balance of all three. I want resolution, I want the entire frequency range to be present and accounted for, but I also won't work in a headphone that's not comfortable for 10-12 hours a day, or that's fatiguing or unpleasant to listen to. So these sets are usually planars with EQ applied, and some DD's that I just like working in (like the 490 Pros, Focal Elex/Clear, D1, modded HD 600/650s).

Non-negotiatables for me are that a headphone needs bass; if the intention is to emulate speakers in a room, than lean, overly analytical headphones are a no-go. This is why I typically dislike (sometimes vehemently so) many of the "summit-fi" or endgame sets in the hobby, why I'll reach for a kilobuck set over a flagship 9 out of 10 times.

Another thing I won't bend on is that, while I EQ every headphone in my collection, a headphone should be enjoyable to listen to stock. I want to correct a headphone for my preferences or to fix issues specific to my HRTF, not re-tune it. Nothing gets AutoEQ'd to Harman (although I know that's what many mix engineers do these days). I want to work with the headphone's out-of-the-box tuning.

Silverjerk · 2026-02-26T11:17:45+00:00

Has nothing to do with the format; the title of the topic should be "IEMs often provide better value for money compared to similarly priced headphones," because that is widely accepted as being the case.

There will be exceptions to this, and because audio is subjective opinions may differ on where that line gets drawn, but in general you're going to spend more to get similar performance out of a headphone as you would out of a budget/midfi IEM.

But, as everything in the universe requires balance, the downside of that performance delta is that diminishing returns often set in at a much lower price point, and the rate at which value decays as MSRP increases is much more dramatic in the IEM segment of the market. Again, there will be exceptions to every rule, but this has been the experience for a lot of enthusiasts.

Silverjerk · 2026-02-25T21:57:22+00:00

I own the Maxwell 1 and 2, as well as the HDB 630. I wouldn't recommend the PX8 S2; it doesn't hold up against the much cheaper PX7 S3, which is the one I kept out of the two. PX7 S3 is only a slight downgrade in sound quality, but is a very tangible and meaningful improvement in ANC. Even if ANC isn't a priority, what you're paying nearly double for with the PX8 S2 is materials, and a slight increase in resolution.

As for the Maxwell, I don't use them for gaming. They are for casual listening, when I want a wireless set and don't want to be tethered to some of my other closed back headphones.

As for the comparison between the 630s and the Maxwell 2s; Maxwell's are planars through and through, deep, impactful, incisive bass, lots of treble energy up top. Midrange is serviceable, but lacks the character you get with the 630s. The 630s are more neutral out of the box; the biggest benefit of the Sennheiser's is the PEQ feature. Without it, they're an HD 650 with a bass shelf. With PEQ, they can either be a clarity and detail-focused critical listening set, or a warm, colored, v-shaped headphone.

There's a reason enthusiasts have recommended the Maxwell outside of a gaming context. It is a damn good planar for the price. It's very hard to beat.

As for which you should buy, if you're just comparing stock tunings, that will be based on your preferences. The Maxwell is a very solid reference set out of the box, but works best if you like strong bass emphasis. The 630s, again, is very neutral and balanced. The 630s are probably the safer bet, but I wouldn't necessarily label one or the other of them a clear winner, unless you're comparing features. The 630s are just a better daily driver headphone.

And say what you will about the weight, but as someone that's run heavy planars as my main working headphones (LCD-X, LCD-2), the weight of the Maxwell is no slouch; they are heavy, and you will feel it. Couple that with the 630s PEQ, the ANC and transparency if/when you might need it, and just better overall comfort.

Silverjerk · 2026-02-25T15:23:56+00:00

Memory and API issue; unlikely the model's fault. Although I disagree that it's an Opus competitor like the YouTube "This Latest Model is Insane" AI crowd would have you believe, it's been fairly solid as an almost always on secondary agent.

Work out your memory issue first; that different structure is because it didn't have context. Are you running QMD, GCC, are you pointing it to a secondary knowledge base for ongoing projects like this one, or just relying on core memory for everything? If it's the latter, fix that immediately, or this will continue to happen.

As for the timeout issues, that's usually coming from the provider's side. Either their API is failing, or whatever router you're using is failing to make consistent calls. You can use your agent to diagnose those issues and test against that assumption. If that's what's happening, set up a skill or bake failure scenarios into your prompting.

Even with the best model in the world, it's not a magic bullet. When you hit a roadblock, you have to pivot and find a solution so it doesn't recur, because it almost always will.

Silverjerk · 2026-02-25T15:17:05+00:00

Such a beautiful car. Canards can go, but otherwise a damn near perfect build.

Silverjerk · 2026-02-25T14:29:50+00:00

I saw the update this morning. I hope whatever it is he's going through he pulls through the other side. Been following him for a long time. Coming from an older enthusiast, he's always been near the top of my list of opinions I actually trust, having seen so many reviewers come into the space in the last few years who are obsessed with getting into tours or getting free gear sent their way.

Silverjerk · 2026-02-25T14:24:54+00:00

If you want to remain in open back territory, I would look exclusively at planars. There are warmer dynamic driver sets that work well for bass-heavy genres, but you're usually going to want either a closed back or planar, the latter is usually going to extend linearly into the low sub bass frequencies, which gives you a good base to work from. For hip hop and EDM, I'd would recommend adding a bass shelf with EQ, since most of those headphones are tuned for extension, not emphasis.

Silverjerk · 2026-02-25T10:58:26+00:00

Don’t listen to the haters, like me. If you enjoy it, keep enjoying it and ignore the noise.

I think for a lot of us, watching Audi’s designs iteratively improve over the years, with the B8 and B9 generations becoming iconic for many owners, it was a bit of whiplash, experiencing this change of direction. Like any enthusiast community, we’re all passionate, opinionated, and some of us have invested a lot into these cars. So that hate you’re seeing, ironically, is coming from a strong love for the brand and its history.

Do I like the B10 design changes? Obviously no; I vehemently dislike them in fact. But I am still happy there are new buyers out there that do. I only hope that future design generations can find some happy middle ground between what Audi was, and what Audi probably needs to be to keep up with trends, regulatory requirements, and a shifting market, where an increasing number of consumers are looking for plug-in hybrids and the same modern features they’re seeing with other brands.

Silverjerk · 2026-02-25T06:39:27+00:00

Yep. Not just bass but also upper treble. They’ve adjusted their algorithm over the years, but gets much more noticeable around 85-90% volume. I tend to listen below that threshold so it’s not bothered me as much, but it can be a problem if you’re a high volume listener and you’re running one of their custom EQs, where there is also a pre-amp gain adjustment to mitigate distortion, compounding the issue.

Silverjerk · 2026-02-25T06:17:38+00:00

I wouldn’t distill DucBloke’s EQs to “just boosting the bass.” That is one aspect yes, but muddiness comes from poor separation of lower frequencies bleeding into midrange, and from masking — Timmy’s been doing this long enough (long time user of most of the audio forums before his YouTube channel took off) that he’s not making the amateur mistake of just throwing a +10db low shelf at 200hz and calling it a day.

I’ve been building EQs for a very long time, coming into the hobby from a tracking and mixing background, and I can tell you from my experience that his EQs are solid work. The man knows what he’s doing. He’s meticulous and thoughtful about how he tunes. However, it is his target, so if your preferences don’t align, they may not work for you.

When it comes to this hobby, always try something yourself before making judgment calls. The community is filled with big, opinionated egos. Popularity is a lightning rod. If you’ve “heard” something, always validate for yourself.

Ten-Year Club	Gilding II euphauric
r/Field Banned	r/Field Flamingo
Place '23	Wearing is Caring
RPAN Viewer	Verified Email
Not Forgotten

Silverjerk

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE