1MORE Triple Driver Over-Ear

back to measurements

post separation

NO SMOOTHING is applied to the shown plots. Most measurement sites have some smoothing applied which ‘irons flat’ sharp peaks and ‘wiggles’. I do not use smoothing because some info about sound quality is lost when plots are smoothed.

Aside from a small correction of the microphone itself also some correction in the lowest frequencies is applied to the plots to compensate for the perceived loss of bass when using headphones. This is described HERE in more detail.
A ‘horizontal‘ frequency response curve on the shown frequency response plots on this website thus indicates a perceived ‘flat’ tonal signature.

ALL measurements are made with a good SEAL on a flatbed measurement rig.
The shape of your head, bone structure, pad size, pad ‘softness,  (compliance), hair or no hair and or wearing glasses may (drastically) change the frequency response of some headphones, so… your personal experience may differ substantially from these plots.

Frequency response (tonal balance) is the most sound-determining aspect of headphones. A horizontal line shows audible neutral response in the plots on this website. Deviations in different severities at different frequency bands have an effect on the sound character.
The bigger the deviation the stronger the effect.

Below an aid to help determining the sound character of headphones with relation to the frequency response.


 post separation
1MORE Triple Driver Over-Ear Headphones

The 1MORE Triple Driver Over-Ear Headphones is a closed ON-ear headphone.
Its MSRP is $ 199.- but I got one new for € 139.- which is a good price given the quality of what’s offered.
It may look like an Over-Ear and be called an Over-Ear but .. it isn’t, unless you have very tiny baby-ears it actually is an on-ear headphone. No idea why it has the words Over-Ear in its name.
The ‘Triple Driver’ bit is also not true. It has 2 drivers (active drivers) and a resonating passive membrane behind the driver. This can’t be called a driver though.
A more accurate name for it would be Dual Driver On-Ear Headphone
On the outside of the headphone the correct description is present ‘Multi Driver’.
Where ‘Multi’ is 2. It should be noted that this is rather unusual for a full sized headphone as the vast majority (with just a handful exceptions) has just 1 driver.
So… maybe it could have been called Multi Driver On-Ear as well. What’s in a name.
To save myself from having to type ‘1MORE Triple Driver Over-Ear Headphones’ I will use ‘1MTDOEH‘ for the rest of the review.

Now that this is out of the way, the headphone itself is really nice looking and beautifully made. The picture above absolutely does it no justice. Metal parts, really nice finish with luxury looks and feel.
The headband has soft leather but rather stiff foam pieces inside. The contact area on the head thus is a bit small meaning combined with its weight and clamping force is not the most comfortable headband but certainly not a poor headband either.
The headphone can fold its cups so it takes up less space when transporting. The cups can swivel about 45º so can’t lie flat on a surface but can swivel more than enough during usage. There is a good tilt and the headband can stretch sideways and expand far enough down that it will fit most heads.

The headphone looks as though it is ‘open’ as one can look inside but there is a piece of transparent plastic which seals it off. Outside noises are somewhat attenuated but not greatly attenuated. There is merely some attenuation not enough to block external sounds.

The pads feel very soft and appear to be real leather (manufacturer claims it is). Sadly they are non replaceable. When they are indeed real leather this is not a problem but when they are pleather the pads may start to flake after a while and cannot be replaced (easily in any case). Time will tell. The pads do have a leather smell to it which pleather doesn’t have.
Pads should provide a good seal and comfort. That last bit, the comfort part, is where the real downside is of this headphone. At least for those that dislike on-ears for that reason.
It is called Over-Ear and looks like an over ear but the ears simply don’t fit inside the available space (43mm Ø and 16mm depth). When on the head the pads compress so that distance is quite a few mm less which would mean that the ears would touch the insides anyway. The depth, however, is irrelevant as the pads simply press on the ears.
Those that bought this headphone based on the premise of its name will feel cheated.
People often buy over-ears because they do not like/prefer/want on-ear headphones.
Well you do get an on-ear in this case and it has a higher than average clamping force which is exerted on the outer side of the ears, instead of the entire ear when using a true on-ear.
This can be quite uncomfortable after a while. Those like me who (have to) wear glasses will hate this headphone as it is a quite painful experience. As it is with most on-ears with a rather high clamping force.
The ‘solution’ in this case is: take off glasses, put on the headphone, put glasses back on with the arms resting on the pads (so glasses slightly slanted downwards).
This way I can wear them for quite a bit longer. After some time my ears still start to hurt though.

The cable is thin. The 2.5mm TRS plugs go in recessed holes in both cups. There are red (Right cup) and white (Left cup) holes in the cups. The 2.5mm TRS jacks go partly into those holes.
The plugs are marked with small white and red isolator rings between the gold plated TRS contacts. The cable part going to these plugs is quite thin and feels silicone alike. In the cable to the right cup there is a 3 button remote with a microphone. This is connected via the 2nd ring in the 3.5mm TRRS plug. The remote and mic work on an Android phone (Honor 9), can’t test it on apple products. The cable from the split down is thicker and cloth covered and terminates in a 3.5mm straight TRRS jack that also fits in the small Apple device holes.
There is some microphonics (you can it mechanically when touching the cable) but not so much when music is playing.
The 1.35m is long enough for portable and desktop duty but not for the lazy listening chair.
A strange decision appears to be the cable exit from the cups. It would have been more logical to have the cable come out more from the front instead of from the current position as most people wear the cable on the front of the body.

It comes in a really nice box as well which one most likely won’t throw away.
In that box an again, really nice, hardcase which holds the folded headphone snugly in place and has a (removable) storage pouch which holds accessories like the cable and 6.3mm (1/4″) adapter. Nothing but praise here as well.


Type: On ear, closed
Usage: Home, portable
Driver type: dynamic + ceramic
Pads: NON replaceable, leather with soft foam
Collapsible: yes, and folds to 45º
Headphone connector: 2.5mm TRS connector, color coded rings
Cable entry: dual sided, color coded
Cable: 1.35m woven cloth, terminated in 3.5mm TRRS jack plug with remote control
Driver size: 36mm + 10mm ceramic ‘tweeter’
Colour options: none
Inner Pad dimensions: depth = 14mm, diameter = 43mm
Max. power rating: 50mW
Max. voltage: 1.3Vrms (3.7Vpp)
Max. current: 40mA
Max. S.P.L.: 115dB
Impedance: 32Ω
Efficiency: 97dB/1mW (112dB/1V)
Weight: 293g. (excl. cable)
Clamping force: medium/high
Accessories: cable, hard case with removable pouch for storing the 6.3mm TRS adapter and cable.

Subjective sound description:

The 1MTDOEH is a bassy headphone, with well recorded recorded music definitely over the top and bordering on being ‘bloated/fat’ but not ‘loose/boomy’. It sounds ímpressively ‘full/warm/bassy’ even directly from a phone.
On pop music and genres like Rock etc. and on the go the extra amount of bass is welcome and the quality is actually good.
It is easy to hear different bass notes which isn’t always the case with bass heavier cans.
Bassheads may not be satisfied with the bass levels though.
The bass sounds punchy and full bodied. The bass also does not ‘bleed’ into the mids because of the small ‘dip’ around 300Hz.
The mids sound surprisingly good albeit a bit warm, sounds dynamic and has a good and wide ‘headstage’.
The treble is ‘soft’ and not harsh nor sibilant. When one turns up the volume the treble starts to become ‘poorer’ in quality. On well made (hires) recordings it becomes evident that the ‘air’ is lacking a bit and cymbals etc. are reproduced to ‘soft’ and miss the ‘shimmer’ that better headphones produce so nicely. On some recordings there is some ‘sharpness/etchyness’ in the the upper treble.
In short, a Dynamic and bassy/warm/full sounding headphones with good mids and soft treble up top. It starts to sound less well when played louder. Well suited for lower listening levels.
Those looking for a less colored hi–fi sound should EQ it or use the filter described down below.


Below the frequency response of the 1MTDOEH (Left, Right)FR 1mtd oeChannel matching is good. Bass extension (with a perfect seal) is excellent and extends below 10Hz. The ‘hump’ around 100Hz is the reason for the overblown amount off bass.
+8dB is a LOT. The response from 200Hz to 5kHz is flat within 3dB. This is where the mids are and indeed the mids sound realistic.
There is a narrow dip at 7kHz which in any case is preferred over a peak there as in the 6-8kHz range the ‘sibilance’ resides. This headphone, not surprisingly, has no sibilance. On some music you can hear a slight ‘etchy’ sound in the upper treble. This is caused by the 12kHz peak.
The dip before this peak is actually caused by the driver and ceramic tweeter that appear to ‘null’ there. Below the response from the dynamic driver and the ceramic driver.
2 drivers
This as far as I can ‘separate’ the driver responses. The main driver is a full range driver but with a reduced upper treble.
When the tweeter comes ‘in’ there is nulling from 5kHz to 8kHz. This is caused by different driver distances. Both drivers are emitting sound but as the phase is not the same the signals combine and ‘null’ as around 6kHz they are in counterphase. Above 7kHz the output of the tweeter is louder and takes over.
It does not appear that there is a crossover in there. Treble rises again after 8kHz but alas a bit too much. This is probably because the drivers don’t have the exact same efficiency. Strangely enough the output drops again from 14kHz. The fact that there is some ultrasonic (-25dB opposite the mids) presence to well above 30kHz probably earned this headphone the ‘hi-res’ logo on the box.
To me the headphone isn’t really deserving’hi-res audio’ logo at all though and drops off above 14kHz.

Getting a good seal is important when using this headphone. usually on-ears may not seal very well as the shape of the ear isn’t ‘flat’.
Below the response of the TDOEH with a perfect seal and when using glasses as well as with a substantially broken seal
Bass extension will suffer from a broken seal which may skew the stereo image to the side that has a better seal. This can annoy me to no end and have to re-seat the headphone in that case. With the seal slightly broken (hairs, glasses, positioning) the tonal balance actually gets even better. When this headphone sounds bass-shy and ‘hollow’ a loss of seal might well be the cause. Pressing the headphones on to the ears would make this clear though. Seal is very important for this headphone to sound good.

compared to

There are other headphones that also have a warm/bassy/full sound signature but most of them differ in character. Below some comparative plots. All plots are1/3 octave smoothed so the tonal character/balanced can be judged more easily.
Below 1MTDOEH vs Sony MDR-1Acomp MDR1A
The MDR-1A is actually closest in ‘signature’ to the 1MTDOEH. The MDR-1A is even bassier/warmer. The treble of the 1MTDOEH is better in quality.

Below 1MTDOEH vs Meze 99 (Classics)comp Meze 99The Meze also is darker and has recessed upper mids (= less forward sounding). Bass bleeds into the mids a bit more in the Meze 99 Classics.
The 1MTDOEH is the better sounding one but if you don’t like clear mids the Meze 99 may be your headphone of choice.

Below 1MTDOEH vs Takstar Pro 82  (bass setting ‘2’)comp to Pro82-2 The advantage of the Pro82 is that the amount of bass can be adjusted with slide switches on the cups. The mids sound ‘clearer’ but lack ‘clarity’. This means the mids sound ‘thinner’ but lack ‘nuances’. Here too the treble quality of the 1MTDOEH is ‘softer’.

Below 1MTDOEH vs Master & Dynamics MH40  comp MH40
The MH40 also is made of mostly metal parts and appeals to the ‘quality in the hand’ feeling. The bass on the MH40 is noticeably more lifted and bleeds into the mids.
Treble on the MH40 is comparable to the 1MTDOEH and sounds soft and pleasant.

Below 1MTDOEH vs NAD VISO HP50comp HP50
These headphones have some similarities in how the bass sounds but the HP50 is noticeably less ‘forward’ and ‘clear’ sounding and lacks clarity. Here too the tonal balance of the 1MTDOEH is better. Bass is of the HP50 better integrated in the mids. Treble quality differs. Both are ‘smooth’ in the treble (just like MH40, Meze99 and MDR1A) but the details in music are better in the 1MTDOEH.

output resistance / damping-factor

As this is a low impedance headphone the impedance may not be flat and thus the frequency response could be amplifier output resistance dependent.
Instead of showing impedance plots, which are hard to interpret properly when it comes to assessing the effect in the real world, the 1MTDOEH is measured via a low resistance output (0.2Ω) and a high resistance output (120Ω).R 120 (-13,3dB)On a high output resistance amplifier the output level will be about 13dB lower as well. To compensate for this loss and see tonal balance changes more clearly the amplifier is cranked up to the same level (at 1kHz). This way the plots are overlaid and it is easier to see how the tonal balance changes.
The tonal balance does not change much which means it is no problem to drive this headphone from most amps and can even be connected to high impedance desktop amps. Only in the lowest part of the frequency range there is a small increase in impedance. It shows the resonance frequency of the driver/bass reflector is very low (around 40Hz)
The good thing is that a passive filter can easily be constructed that lowers the amount of bass and the peak around 11kHz.
Will look into this shortly.

Below the distortion measurements of the 1MTDOEH (Right channel).THD RThe plot above shows the level differences (in dB) between the signal and the harmonics. Most people prefer to see percentages instead of level differences so below the exact same plot except ‘normalised’ to the actual signal and level differences given in percentages.THD R percentDistortion levels are quite high. Around 5% 3rd harmonic distortion below 70Hz. The 2nd harmonic distortion below 100Hz are also somewhat high. The higher amount of 3rd harmonic distortion points towards ‘clipping alike’ behaviour which is often seen at low power rated and small drivers.
The actual 2nd harmonic distortion above 1kHz may well be lower than 0.5%. A shortcoming of my measurement rig.
The good news here is that distortion above 200Hz remains low. Higher distortion in the lows usually isn’t as audible as in the middle to higher frequency range. Especially in the 300Hz to 8kHz range distortion is low which ensures a ‘clean’ sound.
Add to that the distortion will be lower at lower listening levels as well. Measured at 80dB SPL the 3rd harmonic dropped below 2%

Time domain

Below the CSD (waterfall) plot of the 1MTDOEH. (Left and Right are overlaid)CSDAbove 2kHz the CSD is quite decent. The ceramic tweeter seems to have a small preference to vibrate at around 11kHz. Mids are lingering a bit longer than desirable.

Below the spectrum plot of the 1MTDOEH (Right channel). This basically is a CSD (Waterfall) plot but viewed from above where the level differences are colour coded instead of being in the vertical axis. Also the frequency range of the spectrum plot is wider (from 100Hz up instead of from 500Hz). The time span is also bigger in the spectrum plots and expired time is shown from below to top where in the CSD the time is shown from rear to front.spectrThere is some (low level and not really audible) lingering around 1kHz and 2kHz. This headphone is performing quite decently in the time domain though.

Below the step response of the 1MTDOEH (Left and Right are overlaid)stepThis actually is quite good response. The ‘hump’ from 1.5ms to 2.5ms shows the warm and bassy character of this headphone. The fact that the horizontal line doesn’t drop down is testimony to the excellent bass extension.
The initial rise is lacking about 2dB compared to the mids (200μs to 1ms) which shows this headphone has a natural sounding pulse response only slightly lacking in the upper region (air and cymbal ‘splash’) but not much. There is very little and well damped resonances visible which usually translates to good ‘resolution’ in the sound.

Passive filter

Instead of using targetted (parametric) EQ one can also use the passive filter shown below. Those who cannot build it can buy a built version here.1MTDOE filter schematic

One thing must be taken into account when using this filter. The remote control/microphone functionality is no longer available/working any more.

The filter reduces the surplus of bass and removes the 12kHz treble peak.
Below the effect of the filter is shown compared to the stock headphone.filter action

The plot below shows how the headphone measures and sounds like with the filter.
(Left and Right channel)
FR filtered
Great bass extension but on the correct level. There is still some (+4dB) audble bass boost but not too much. The 12kHz treble peak is gone.

Distortion also dropped from 5% to 2% at 90dB SPL (Right Channel)Dist filtered

CSD is also cleaner around 12kHz (Left and Right are overlaid)CSD filtered

Below the Spectrum plot which shows a faster decay in the lows.spectr filtered

And finally the step response (Left and Right)Step filteredThe rising edge now is only -3dB and then rises to 0dB. The bass emphasis is gone and reaches the same level as the first part of the plot. This indicates a realistic sound where impulses are reproduced at the same level as the lower mids and bass.


If one can look past the rediculous naming and advertising nonsense about $ 200.- gets you a nice looking and sounding (albeit a bit too bassy/warm) sounding headphone.
It sounds quite good from portable equipment and on the go. Especially with pop music and recordings that lack fullness/bass.
Hi-Fi afficianodos may not like the overly bassy character and will be wanting a bit better quality treble. One can use the filter mentioned above, or apply PEQ which transforms this headphone to a neutral headphone with excellent bass extension.
When using the filter the microphone and remote will not be working any more.
The filter should only be used when you find it too bassy and can always get a perfect ‘seal’.

The case that comes with it is very nice and offers good protection, it is a bit bulky because the cups don’t swivel flat the height of the case differs from most other cases.

There are downsides to this headphone as well. One of them is the low power rating (50mW). This is not a problem when using it from a phone. It can be a potential problem when connected to a higher power amplifier/source and the sound is accidentally turned up while lying on a table or so. While on the head you will have turned the volume down already. This is no downside for most people though when using it with a phone.
The biggest gripe, however, is the fact that this is an on-ear headphone and presses down on your Pinnae which may be unpleasant to some.
Also the pads aren’t replaceable and have no idea how long the pads will last.

In its price class this is a well sounding (especially with EQ/filter) headphone that seems to be sturdy and well made. It looks very nice to me as well.
The ‘on-ear comfort’ is something to take into consideration.
Seal issues may totally change its sound signature.
Excellent Value For Money but not a TOTL performer … but close with EQ.

post separation
back to measurements