After more than 2 weeks of listening I agree with Levi that the MKI is but a distant memory.
A direct A/B might be interesting to read but I know,for me, there was a major jump in the signature of the MKII. Where I notice it the most is exactly the areas that I felt were weak in the previous model.
The stage was good but not great as were the separation of tones and instruments and midrange kick. The highs are now beautifully tonal and not at all fatiguing.
Not to say that the MKI was not enjoyable.
It was a great "bang for the buck".
The MKII is "a great bang for ANY buck".
A direct A/B might be interesting to read but I know,for me, there was a major jump in the signature of the MKII. Where I notice it the most is exactly the areas that I felt were weak in the previous model.
The stage was good but not great as were the separation of tones and instruments and midrange kick. The highs are now beautifully tonal and not at all fatiguing.
Not to say that the MKI was not enjoyable.
It was a great "bang for the buck".
The MKII is "a great bang for ANY buck".