By aspect — in detail
One of the sharper splits in the record, and it does not track price or expertise — it tracks what the listener is comparing against. Reviewers coming from dynamic headphones and other cheap planars hear unusually strong, well-defined low end; reviewers coming from better planars hear notes that arrive without weight underneath them. Both are describing the same measured shape: more bass than its $299 planar rivals, but presented lean rather than loud. The one point of near-agreement is texture — nobody calls it bloated or slow, and the complaints are about foundation and nuance, not control.
Measured
On the G.R.A.S. 43AG rig, “The M1060s have a flatter measured response than the other planar-magnetics, with more bass” — compared there against the HiFiMan HE400S and Tidal Force Wave 5 at the same $299. Butterworth attributes some of that to the plush faux-leather pads sealing well on the simulator, which is also the first hint that pads matter a lot here.
⚠ vs. listeners — The graph says more bass than its rivals; half the listeners say less body than they wanted. Both can be true — quantity is not weight, and a lean midbass with a soft top can make a well-extended headphone sound hollowed out. If you are coming from a dynamic headphone, expect the flatter reading to feel like less bass rather than more.
Where it splits
Unusually strong and well-defined for a cheap planar — kick and definition where rivals go thin.54%
“Their bass is stronger and better defined than I’ve heard through other relatively inexpensive planar-magnetic headphones”
SoundStage! Solo (Brent Butterworth)
Present but weightless — it goes low enough without ever building a foundation, and it is one-note next to better planars.46%
“Bass is there, yet lacks sense of foundation and body.”
Super Best Audio Friends (purr1n)
Sources split on direction as well as quality. A minority hear a clean, clear midrange that serves vocals well. The majority — including both people who measured it — hear either too much midrange or the wrong texture in it: grainy, dry, brittle, or plainly coloured. The descriptions are consistent enough to be one phenomenon rather than taste alone, and they line up with the measured mid-treble behaviour and the 1 kHz bump visible in the SBAF waterfall.
Measured
Butterworth's G.R.A.S. traces flag that “there’s an apparent mismatch between the right and left channels between 1 and 4kHz” — the best match he could get across many attempts with both earpieces. SBAF's cumulative spectral decay shows a semi-broad bump at 1 kHz, which purr1n names as the most bothersome element precisely because the bass and lower mids sit gently underneath it.
Where it splits
Clean, clear and accurate — vocals come through smoothly, and female voices in particular are a strength.33%
“they have a clean, clear, detailed midrange”
SoundStage! Solo (Brent Butterworth)
Coloured and grainy — too much midrange energy, with a dryness that makes voices sound tense rather than natural.67%
“A lot of mids, more mids than expected. Hollow coloration.”
Super Best Audio Friends (purr1n)
The most consistent finding in the whole record: the top end is soft. Reviewers who like the headphone and reviewers who dislike it both report a shortage of air, shimmer and cymbal ring, and the measurements agree. Underneath that agreement sits the M1060's most famous argument — a narrow resonance around 4.5 kHz that some listeners cannot detect and at least one finds physically intolerable. It is not a dispute about whether the peak exists.
“their treble response seems muted, which detracts from the detail and sense of space”
SoundStage! Solo (Brent Butterworth)
“there is nothing outright difficult from the lower treble onward, fairly smooth actually”
Super Best Audio Friends (purr1n)
“These headphones have one flaw that makes them unusable, at that is a 5K ring.”
Linus Tech Tips forum (Max_Settings)
Measured
Two rigs, one shape. On the G.R.A.S. 43AG, “the response between 8 and 16kHz is lower than I’m used to seeing” and the spectral-decay plot shows “a strong series of resonances centered at 4.5kHz”. SBAF's independent measurement finds the same spike and calls it excessive, especially on the right channel. DMS3 TV's home-rig experiments locate the cause in the hardware rather than the driver: removing the outer grilles moves 3.71 kHz and 4.52 kHz by 1–2 dB and fixes a 15 kHz dip, “leading me to believe that the grills are the cause of our issues rather than these foam disks”.
⚠ vs. listeners — Everyone sees the peak; almost nobody agrees on hearing it. purr1n, who measured it, writes that “There is debate to whether these are audible with music” — narrow peaks in this band often are not — and adds that listeners with hearing damage tend to have nulls right there, himself possibly included. Max_Settings, reviewing the same revision, reports a headache within minutes. If 4–5 kHz is a sore spot for you, assume the critical account describes your experience.
Measured, it is close to flat with a soft top octave; heard, it draws the word “coloured” more often than not. The split is not really about the graph — it is about whether a lean low end plus a quiet top makes the midrange sound pushed forward. Reviewers who came to it cold call it neutral; reviewers with reference planars to hand call it mid-forward and unfinished. Nobody describes it as bright, and nobody describes it as warm.
“The response seemed essentially flat and uncolored”
SoundStage! Solo (Brent Butterworth)
“While the overall sound is fairly neutral, there’s definitely a bit of a mid bump”
SoundGuys (Chris Thomas)
“the overall audio signature sounds rough and unfinished”
The Master Switch
Soundstage
Contested · 6 srcSources genuinely contradict each other here, and the divide runs between people describing openness and people describing geometry. Those who praise it are talking about the airy, unboxed quality of an open-back planar. Those who criticise it are talking about where sounds actually sit: hard left, hard right, little centre, almost no depth. Both readings recur too often to dismiss, and they are compatible — a wide, flat stage can be open and shallow at once.
Measured
The likely physical cause is in the treble data rather than anything spatial: the G.R.A.S. traces show output between 8 and 16 kHz sitting below what Butterworth normally measures, and top-octave energy is what most listeners read as “air” and hall depth. In his own comparisons the HiFiMan HE400S at the same price gave a deeper, more detailed stage.
Where it splits
Open and airy — the hallmark out-of-head space that open-back planars are bought for.44%
“The sound has a refreshing openness to it, with an airy quality and an excellent level of detail that are the hallmarks of the technology.”
The Master Switch
Wide but flat — sounds sit at your ears, split left and right, with little centre fill and almost no depth.56%
“Its headstage is also very much left-or-right, with a lack of center and pretty much zero depth.”
Head-Fi (junki)
The technical case for the big driver: separation and instrument placement draw consistent praise, with one dissenter who found the placement itself odd on orchestral material. The important caveat is not subjective — both laboratories that measured a sample found a channel-matching problem, which is exactly the kind of fault that makes centre images drift.
“the 106mm ortho drivers' technical prowess in speed and instrument separation is excellent compared to the HD650”
Head-Fi (junki)
“The little electronic squiggles that percolate through the track were nicely spread around from left to right, and seemed to emanate from different distances”
SoundStage! Solo (Brent Butterworth)
“There is plenty of separation between instruments, and the synthesized sounds image well.”
AVS Forum (SqeeksMcGee)
Measured
Two independent samples, two channel-matching findings. Butterworth reports an apparent mismatch between right and left between 1 and 4 kHz — “This is the best match I was able to get after many attempts with both the Monoprices’ left and right earpieces.” purr1n, measuring a different unit on a different rig, writes that “There's some channel level and diaphragm tension imbalance with this unit.”
⚠ vs. listeners — Reviewers praise separation on samples that measure imperfectly matched, which is less contradictory than it sounds — separation and channel balance are different things — but it does mean imaging is the aspect most likely to vary between two pairs of the same headphone.
Broadly positive, with the enthusiasm concentrated in reviewers judging it against its price and the reservations concentrated in reviewers judging it against better headphones. What everyone reports is a headphone that separates cleanly and exposes bad recordings; what the sceptics miss is the fine tail of the sound — hall reverberation, decay, the last of the shimmer — which is consistent with the soft top octave rather than with any lack of driver resolution.
“In my six plus years covering audio equipment, I’ve never heard a set of sub-$500 headphones this clear.”
SoundGuys (Chris Thomas)
“what is missing are micro-details like the reverberation of the hall and other spatial cues that let a listener know the size of the recording venue”
Head-Fi (macdonjh)
“I still often catch myself thinking that I am noticing sounds I shouldn't be noticing when listening on these”
Head-Fi (junki)
Measured
The distortion data supports the optimistic reading — Butterworth reports that “The M1060s’ total harmonic distortion (THD) is about as low as I’ve measured”, excellent even among the planars he has tested. Whatever the M1060 is missing, it is not being lost to distortion.
Mixed, and closely tied to the bass argument. Percussion punch and macro swings get credit; what is questioned is the sense of scale underneath them and, from one listener, the way a flat stage flattens impact. The recurring practical note is amping: several sources report the headphone opening up on a desktop amp, even though it does not need one for volume.
“when powered by an external desk-top amp, their sound filled out and dynamics opened up”
Head-Fi (macdonjh)
“The drums have a good bit of punch”
AVS Forum (SqeeksMcGee)
“the M-1060 bass is one-notey, it goes deep enough to satisfying, but lacks the nuance the HE-500 can display”
Head-Fi (macdonjh)
Measured
Sensitivity is measured, not guessed: “The sensitivity of the M1060s, measured between 300Hz and 3kHz with a 1mW signal, is 100.5dB.” Impedance is essentially flat at the rated 50 ohms with a small bump to 57 ohms at 4.4 kHz, and with 70 ohms of source output impedance added, “The difference is negligible; the M1060s’ tonal balance won’t change depending on the amp used.” A weak amp will not colour this headphone, only limit it.
⚠ vs. listeners — “Unlike some planar-magnetic designs, the M1060s are sensitive enough to achieve a satisfyingly loud volume from any source device,” Butterworth found — yet listeners keep reporting that a desktop amp transforms it. Both hold: 100.5 dB/mW gets you loud from a phone, but current delivery on dynamic peaks is a separate question from average level.
Most sources are surprised by how well a 500 g headphone wears, crediting deep angled pads and low clamp; a minority find the frame itself the problem rather than the mass. The dissent is specific and worth knowing: unstoppered gimbals that let the cups rotate freely, and a thin headband strap that concentrates weight. Nobody disputes the weight — they dispute whether the suspension handles it.
Measured
The mass is the fixed fact everything else negotiates with: SoundGuys weighs the M1060 at 1.1 lb (500 g), and notes that “the sheer mass of the headphones is tough to deal with in a good way”. Three hours is the point at which several reviewers independently start noticing it.
Where it splits
Comfortable for hours — deep pads and moderate clamp carry the weight better than the spec sheet suggests.66%
“The M1060s’ faux-leather earpads and moderate clamping force made them comfortable to wear for hours”
SoundStage! Solo (Brent Butterworth)
The frame lets it down — free-swivelling gimbals and a thin band make a heavy headphone feel worse than it should.34%
“Funky ergonomics. Gimbals and cups swivel around all over the place.”
Super Best Audio Friends (purr1n)
The most polarised aspect in the record, and the two camps are not describing different units so much as different standards. One reviewer rates it the best-made headphone he has tried at the price; several others find bent sheet metal, creaking contact points, glued pads and no left/right markings on the headphone itself. The history is on the sceptics' side — the model went through documented fixes for failing MMCX connectors, a headband strap that pulled out of its adjuster, and wood that cracked because it was not sealed inside the cups — and on the defenders' side too, since those fixes happened.
Measured
Not a lab finding, but a documented one: SoundGuys records that “Some people had a little trouble with the MMCX interconnects in the ear cups; so they were replaced by 2.5mm jacks.” and that the wood cracked until the polyurethane seal was extended inside the earcups. The LTT review lists the same three fixes in the V2. Which revision a given review describes matters more here than anywhere else in the record.
Where it splits
Well made for the money — solid in the hand, good hardware, and nothing that feels like it will fail.33%
“The Monoprice M1060s are easily the best-made, most comfortable headphones I’ve tried for $299 or less.”
SoundStage! Solo (Brent Butterworth)
Budget engineering with real durability questions — bent sheet metal, creaks, and a history of parts that failed.67%
“There is still some metal on metal contact points that creak. Feels cheap, not $300.”
Super Best Audio Friends (purr1n)
Isolation
Strong consensus · 4 srcNone, by design, and unusually little even for an open-back — the grilles are wide open and the cups are large. Sources are unanimous, and the measurement confirms it. Treat this as a room headphone: it will not travel, it will not work in an office, and anyone near you will hear what you are playing.
“The M1060s offer about the same isolation as most open-back models: almost none.”
SoundStage! (Brent Butterworth, measurements)
“they leak sound like crazy”
Linus Tech Tips forum (Max_Settings)
“Since they are open-back, the M-1060 don’t really have much isolation.”
Head-Fi (macdonjh)
Measured
Measured against an 85 dB SPL external noise field on the G.R.A.S. rig, attenuation is essentially nil across the band — the same result as most open-backs.
At $299.99 the majority verdict was emphatic: a taste of planar sound for a third of what planar sound used to cost. The dissent was equally emphatic and came from the people who had the closest rivals on the desk, who argued the money was better spent on a HiFiMan HE400S with better pads. The catch for a reader in 2026 is that every one of these verdicts was written against $299.99, and Monoprice's own store now asks $399.99 while listing its own M1070 at $344.99 and the closed M1060C at $315.99.
Where it splits
Exceptional at $299 — the cheapest honest route into planar sound, and it holds up against much dearer headphones.72%
“If I had to choose a pair of $299 headphones to listen to for a couple of hours, I’d definitely pick the M1060s”
SoundStage! Solo (Brent Butterworth)
Not worth it — the obvious rivals at the same money do more, and this one needs mods to compete.28%
“You are much better off with a HiFiMan HE400S plus Focus pads.”
Super Best Audio Friends (purr1n)
