Select Comparisons
Astrotec Phoenix 6
Technical
Both earphones contain multiple drivers, though the Clio is a hybrid while the Phoenix 6 is a tribrid. Contained within the Clio is a 6mm AMT and 9mm dynamic, while the Phoenix 6 utilizes quad electrostatic drivers, a Sonion armature, and a dynamic of unknown size.
Both earphones use premium materials for their shells. oBravo selected a more traditional material for the Clio, brass, while Astrotec went with a titanium alloy.
Fit and finish are equally good between the two with consistent seams between the shell components and a smooth integration of their respective cable systems (0.78mm 2-pin vs. oB-MMCX).
I’ll give the Astrotec 6 a slight edge, as I find the titanium shells to better resist scratches and dings of which the Clio already has a few.
The Clio has a sensitivity of 105 dB/mW vs. the Phoenix 6’s 108 dB, with the impedance of the Clio being 16Ω to the Phoenix 6’s 5Ω. At the same settings, I found the Astrotec Phoenix 6 to sit at a higher volume than the Clio.
Design
The Phoenix 6’s more curvaceous inner half takes inspiration from custom designs while the Clio feels more like a water-weathered pebble in its rounded smoothness.
The face of the Astrotec Phoenix 6 has an angular, geometric pattern that creates some interesting contrast when hit with light. The Clio is smooth and mostly featureless, save for the logo, relying on the glossy blue colorway to impress the eyes.
While both are comfortable, the Phoenix 6’s more form-fitting design helps provide a more secure fit with even better weight distribution, helped along further by the preformed ear guides which do a great job of managing the cable positioning.
The Clio’s simpler design and lack of preformed guides present an advantage though, allowing users to wear it cable-down if they prefer.
Passive isolation from the Phoenix 6 is improved over the Clio as the larger, more form-fitting shells and deeper insertion does a better job of blocking ambient noise.
With foam tips, the Clio offers similar levels of passive isolation as the Phoenix 6 with silicone tips, but once again falls behind when the Astrotec is fitted with the same foam tips.
Astrotec’s cable is thicker with better noise mitigation but is stiffer with similar memory tendencies. I find the hardware more visually attractive with a slightly chunkier, more industrial design.
It does provide good relief at the jack, a more effective chin cinch, and excellent preformed ear guides which double as bend protection at the 2-pin plugs.
On the other hand, oBravo’s cable isn’t stuck with only a 4.4mm balanced jack. It utilizes a modular system that enables users to switch between the three included termination styles and use the earphone across a wider variety of sources, without needing additional cables.
Bass Performance
The bass from the Phoenix 6 is more evenly emphasized through sub- to mid-bass regions but has a cooler tonality that is shared through the entire frequency range.
The Clio’s bass adds more warmth to the overall presentation and provides more physical feedback through better-replicated deep notes.
Texturing is also similarly good on the two models. However, the Phoenix 6’s less bombastic levels of emphasis give it the edge, allowing micro-details to better stand out.
Speed and articulation are also quite good on both the Clio and Phoenix 6. While I find the Astrotec to offer more control and greater delineation between individual notes, it lacks the punch and attack heard in Clio’s presentation.
Mids Performance
Midrange tones on the Phoenix sit further forward and are more prominent on the Phoenix 6 when compared to the Clio. They are thicker and stand out more during bassy sections of a track, giving vocals specifically more time in the spotlight.
While this forwardness brings vocals and instruments more prominently into the mix, it also highlights just how much more micro-detail and clarity the Clio has.
Vocal articulation and instrumental micro-detail are more prominent from the Clio, giving it a cleaner, more articulate presentation over the Phoenix 6.
Some of my test tracks have been specifically chosen for their overly aggressive vocal mastering which can make certain earphones uncomfortably sibilant.
While the Astrotec handles these tracks well, sibilance is still clearly present, while through the Clio, it does an impressive job of softening the harshness and making even the most aggressive tracks listenable.
Treble Performance
The Astrotec’s upper range presentation is more relaxed with limited brilliance region emphasis and a focus more on the presence region. The Clio provides a more balanced representation of these regions.
It remains smooth and inoffensive while producing a brighter, more energetic sound. The additional brilliance region energy brings with it a welcome shimmer and sparkle that Astrotec’s electrostats lack.
Both models go above and beyond with the level of detail and overall clarity they pull from this region. The Clio’s leaner presentation and the additional control afforded by the transient response of the AMT driver give it the technical edge, along with being more engaging and entertaining.
Staging & Dynamics
The Clio’s default vocal positioning is set just outside the inner ear, while it is more intimate on the Astrotec. This positioning combined with a more spacious bass floor results in the Clio’s staging being wider, deeper, and more convincingly encompassing of the listener.
Imaging on both models is accurate and nuanced off-center and to the edges of their respective stages. The added size of Clio’s stage makes this movement more believable and immersive, especially when using it for gaming and movies.
The Clio’s extra staging room also gives it an advantage in track layering and instrument separation. It is easier to localize and follow individual track elements and instruments through the Clio, though the Astrotec still does a very good job with these things.
Campfire Audio Supermoon
Technical
The Clio uses a dual-driver hybrid setup with a 6mm AMT and 9mm dynamic. Inside the Supermoon is a single, large 14mm planar magnetic driver.
The two take very different approaches to their shell designs. The Clio has compact brass shells with straightforward ovular curves and no protrusions.
On the other hand, the Supermoon pulls from Campfire Audio’s custom shell impressions and averages them. This results in an acrylic universal shell that is at least double the size of the Clio and filled with curves, lumps, and bumps that conform to the ear.
Fit and finish on the two is excellent with the Supermoon having an advantage. Despite a more complicated design that combines 3D-printed acrylic and stainless steel, the many pieces that make up the Supermoon fit together just as tightly and accurately as the two halves that make up the Clio.
The Clio’s impedance is 16Ω to the Supermoon’s 15.5Ω. With the same settings, the difference in volume between the two is negligible.
Design
Despite both having universal designs, they couldn’t be much more different. The Clio is compact and low profile with gentle curves and zero protrusions, allowing it to rest gently in the outer ear.
The Supermoon is quite large, enough to fill the entirety of my outer ear. There are plenty of lumps and bumps that fit into the various features of the ear, ensuring it is a snug, secure fit.
The face of the Clio is just as featureless as the inner half, save for a subtle debossed logo. The Supermoon also has a debossed logo on the faceplate, which is an angular slab of chromed stainless steel with a footprint that approaches the size of the Clio.
While the Supermoon is not uncomfortable, the large size maxes out what my ear can handle. As a result, the pressure of it touching all aspects of my ear is ever-present, so it never leaves my mind.
The result is that the Clio is easily the more comfortable model of the two to wear for long periods. Small and light with nothing to cause hotspots or discomfort, I can wear it considerably longer than the Supermoon before a break is necessary.
While the Supermoon’s supersized shells negatively impact comfort, they positively aid isolation. Even with foam tips installed on the Clio, it offers a fraction of the isolating qualities of the Supermoon with silicone tips installed.
Both earphones come with high-quality cables. oBravo’s cable has higher-quality metal hardware with a modular plug system.
Campfire Audio’s cable better handles noise, tangling, and memory, and has a universal MMCX design with durable beryllium copper ports. You need to select your termination style at the time of purchase though, so you need to swap cables if moving between balanced and single-ended sources.
Bass Performance
The Supermoon does not shy away from providing a big bass experience. Not only does its planar dig deeper than the Clio’s smaller dynamic, but it better handles congested sections due to improved control and speed.
Notes hit harder, decay faster, and provide a more visceral feel when needed. Notes are also thicker but with a similar level of warmth, and a similar balance of mid- and sub-bass emphasis.
Texturing is also a step ahead on the Supermoon, with finer micro-details being brought forward. The Clio’s dynamic still does a great job, but these qualities are simply lessened.
While the Clio is no slouch in the low end, the Supermoon is really in its element here and does everything just a little bit better.
Mids Performance
That changes as we head into the midrange. Emphasis is similar between the two which means instruments and vocals stand out more on the Clio since they’re not battling with a dominant low end.
Not only are the Clio’s mids more natural sounding, but the vocal performance it outputs is clearer and more articulate. The Clio also does a much better job of addressing sibilance.
On tracks where the Supermoon’s tees and esses are overly aggressive and fatiguing, the Clio remains smooth and clean. It is genuinely impressive how well the Clio addresses sibilant tracks compared to its peers.
General clarity and micro detail are also a step ahead through the Clio. Since its presentation is similarly weighted as the Supermoon, these qualities stand out more.
Treble Performance
Leading into the treble the Clio continues to shine when compared to the Supermoon. The emphasis on the brilliance and presence regions is smoother and more even with a less aggressive upper end.
Notes are less splashy and better defined, and overall presented with greater refinement. This results in a presentation that is cleaner and less fatiguing, especially at higher volumes.
The Supermoon’s upper ranges come across as a touch crispy with notes that are looser with poorer definition. While the Supermoon doesn’t provide quite as snappy of attack and decay, it still provides a lot of detail and clarity, just not to the same extent as the Clio.
Staging & Dynamics
The Supermoon has a more intimate presentation than the Clio with a closer default vocal presentation. The massive low-end emphasis helps to widen and deepen the stage, just not to the extent of what the Clio offers.
The Clio’s larger stage presence is obvious in how much less intimate the vocal presentation is. The more forward nature of the Supermoon’s upper treble also closes in the presentation with heard next to the Clio.
Imaging on both models is fantastic with smooth and accurate channel-to-channel transitions. The smaller staging of the Supermoon does not hinder this quality, even just off-center or to the edges of the stage where movement is clear and nuanced.
They also compete directly with how well they layer track elements, though here the additional depth of the Clio gives it an advantage. The additional spacing also makes separating and singling out individual elements just a tad easier.
My Verdict
Despite my initial misgivings, I find the Clio a strong performer. I love what the AMT driver brings to the mids and treble regarding clarity, coherence, and detail.
There are few products I’ve heard that perform on the same level in those regions, and for those that find joy in those areas, you will likely adore the Clio.
The low-end performance is also quite good, but not up to the standard of the rest of the signature since the tonality is just a little off, the speed isn’t quite there, and the bass quantity is a bit much.
Swap the dynamic for a speedy, mid-size planar magnetic and I bet you’d find a better match for that gem of an AMT. Maybe name it the Apollo, in keeping with the music-focused God theme.
In addition to sounding great, the Clio is comfortable and well-built. The accessory kit needs some attention though.
The quality of the case is unsatisfactory for a product at this price point, and the tip selection lacks variety. The cable could also use some added strain relief to ensure longevity but is otherwise fantastic, particularly the modular aspect of the plugs.
Overall, the Clio is a very performant earphone with some minor shortcomings, most of which could be easily rectified with a revision, or even a sequel to address everything. If you can deal with that, you’ll find something special in this earphone.
oBravo Clio Technical Specifications
- Frequency Response: 20Hz–40kHz
- SPL: 105 dB/mW @1kHz
- Impedance: 16Ω
