Select Comparisons
PLUSSOUND SONORA
Technical
The SONORA has a tri-brid configuration with dual dynamics, quad armatures, and twin electrostatics backed by a 6-way crossover.
The VOLTA shares a similar configuration with a 6-way crossover, dual dynamic drivers, and twin electrostatics but drops two balanced armatures.
The SONORA and VOLTA are made from aluminum and have the same generally bulky shape. Where they differ is in their color schemes, with the SONORA featuring a vibrant red and gold to the VOLTA’s more subdued two-tone grey, and their textured surfaces.
These models share a tellurium copper, rhodium-plated 0.78mm 2-pin setup with impressive conductive qualities. Their beefy cables are also identical, save for the hardware, which is color and texture-matched to their respective earphones.
The sensitivity of the VOLTA is 109 dB/mW @ 1kHz compared to the SONORA’s 110 dB/mW @ 1kHz. They have the same impedance of 10Ω @ 1kHz.
The SONORA should be ever so slightly easier to bring up to volume thanks to its increased sensitivity, but, in use, I didn’t notice a difference.
Design
When it comes to their designs, the VOLTA and SONORA are nearly the same, which is both good and bad.
The overall design is a plus, as the angular shells are big and bold with hard angles and squared edges. The effect is visually striking and attention-grabbing, more so for the SONORA given the red and gold color scheme, compared to the VOLTA’s more laid-back two-tone grey.
The ergonomics are not fantastic on either model, thanks to a design that goes more for form over function. They don’t conform to the outer ear particularly well, and the heavy cable tends to tug while moving and break the ear tips’ seal.
Both models come in at 8g, with no tips, which is relatively lightweight. That weight is not distributed particularly well, though, hindered further by the gorgeous but heavy cable.
Both models isolate equally well. They don’t completely separate you from your surroundings, but you’re also not required to crank the volume to drown out your environment so you can listen comfortably.
Both are beautifully constructed with perfect part alignment and zero excess glue. Since they’re both made from aluminum and share their construction techniques, neither has a physical advantage.
Since they’re built the same and come with essentially the same cable, which design you prefer boils down to the color scheme and surface texturing. Me? I like aspects of each: the VOLTA’s grey color scheme and the SONORA’s texturing.
Bass Performance
While the VOLTA and SONORA share their dual isobaric dynamic configuration, their presentations are not the same. The SONORA has a more elevated low end with a stronger mid-bass region.
The VOLTA’s more even balance from lower to upper bass gives it an edge to my ear, with slightly improved texturing and sub-bass presence. The result is a more visceral and grungy presentation.
The SONORA’s bass has a leaner note presentation with more warmth, but this warmth doesn’t carry up into the mid-range as it does in the VOLTA.
The result is a more bouncy and energetic character from the SONORA, but one that is less natural than what is experienced from the VOLTA.
The drivers in both VOLTA and SONORA offer excellent speed and control, though I find the lesser quantity of the VOLTA’s low end helps these qualities shine just a bit more than they do from the SONORA.
Mids Performance
The midrange of the SONORA is more forward thanks to a prominent 3k peak, though it also has to compete more with bigger bass and more prominent treble.
It also has a more distant default vocal positioning, all of which results in a more aggressive presentation than what is provided by the VOLTA.
Though the difference isn’t drastic, midrange clarity and detail from the SONORA are improved over the VOLTA. These qualities are exaggerated by the leaner, cooler, and more forward presentation of the SONORA’s mids.
While percussives out of each earphone are snappy and confident, the SONORA’s stronger mid-peaks give this quality more impact and urgency. Again, the difference is minimal and not something you’d likely notice outside of directly a/b’ing the two.
Sibilance management on both is top tier. They are both quite forgiving of aggressive tees and esses, smoothing out tracks with aggressively uncomfortable midrange mastering.
Treble Performance
Since both models use the same dual electrostatic setup, tuning is where they differ. The SONORA offers significantly more elevation in both the presence and brilliance regions.
While these regions are nearly equally peaked on the SONORA, the VOLTA biases the brilliance region. This means the SONORA is brighter and more energetic, and once again, it offers an advantage over the VOLTA when listening to fine details and overall clarity.
The leaner presentation we heard in the SONORA’s mids is present here too, which helps push the detail and clarity forward, requiring less effort from the listener at the expense of the potential for greater fatigue. The extension is equally good, with neither having a notable advantage.
Each earphone is equally quick and well-controlled, free of unwanted splash or looseness. The leaner note presentation of the SONORA helps provide additional air and spaciousness to the staging, which we’ll look at next.
Staging
Both models excel in their staging presentation, though the SONORA’s presentation is the more expansive of the two. The SONORA’s staging is wider and deeper but not as evenly well-rounded when compared to the VOLTA.
Neither has an advantage in their imaging performance. They are equally accurate with their presentation of channel-to-channel movement and are equally nuanced off-center and to the edges of their respective stages.
The SONORA’s leaner presentation gives it an advantage in the way it layers different track elements. It also has a slight advantage in the way it separates individual instruments, offering an improved sense of depth and spaciousness, leading to a more dynamic listening experience.
oBravo Clio
Technical
oBravo’s Clio features a hybrid driver configuration with a 9mm dynamic and a 6mm AMT tweeter. In contrast, the VOLTA uses a tri-brid configuration with dual isobaric dynamics, two balanced armatures, and two electrostatic tweeters.
Both models are all-metal, though they use very different materials. oBravo went with something traditionally found in musical instruments, brass, while the VOLTA is aluminum.
PLUSSOUND chose a common 0.78mm 2-pin plug style for the VOLTA, while oBravo utilizes a proprietary version of MMCX they call oB-MMCX. While neither model includes a stock cable I’d want to replace anytime soon, it will be easier for the VOLTA, given the abundance of 0.78mm 2-pin cables on the market.
The sensitivity of the Clio is 105 dB/mW @ 1kHz compared to the VOLTA’s 109 dB/mW @ 1kHz. The Clio’s impedance is 16Ω @ 1kHz compared to the VOLTA’s 10Ω @ 1kHz.
Getting up to comfortable listening volumes takes less effort with the VOLTA.
Design
PLUSSOUND and oBravo have gone in completely different design directions. The VOLTA’s aggressively angular design is contrasted with a fairly tame two-tone, monochromatic color scheme, while the Clio’s shells are more traditional in shape with a bold, chromatic blue colorway.
The Clio’s shells are small, with a simple heart or bean-shaped design that wouldn’t feel out of place on a more budget-oriented set. It is well-built with an acceptable fit and finish, but the seams between the two halves of the shell are uneven.
In contrast, the VOLTA’s design is considerably more complicated, with ample texturing that differs from the front and rear halves of the shell. Fit and finish are also flawless, with excellent alignment between all components.
Despite being a third of the size with a simpler driver configuration, the Clio is more than half a gram heavier (8g vs 8.6g). This is noticeable in the ear, but thanks to the size and shape, the Clio is the more comfortable product.
It slots more naturally into the outer ear and requires fewer adjustments to address a broken seal. Isolation levels are similar, but the Clio is more effective in noisy environments because it filters out midrange tones better than the VOLTA.
The Clio’s cable is a downgrade from the VOLTA’s in terms of visual appeal and hardware, but it has a few features that I value.
It is thinner and lighter with better handling, but more importantly, it features a modular plug system that enables the user to swap between single-ended and balanced configurations.
The VOLTA’s Copper XL cable has more unique and high-quality hardware, alongside thicker, more durable wiring, but you’re required to choose your termination at the time of purchase and need a whole new cable or an adapter to change it.
Bass Performance
The low-end performance of Clio’s 9mm dynamic driver is good, but the dual isobaric dynamic configuration of the VOLTA has some distinct advantages.
The VOLTA has a better balance of mid- and sub-bass, despite its slight sub-bass bias, while the Clio is considerably bassier overall.
Despite the Clio’s increased bass quantity, the VOLTA’s dual dynamics dig deeper, provide more impact, and, in general, provide a more visceral and engaging level of feedback. The VOLTA’s configuration also provides increased micro-detail and texture.
The positives for the VOLTA do not end there, with its dynamic drivers showing off greater note control and speedier attack and decay qualities. The Clio’s dynamic does a good job, but it lacks the same level of note definition that is evident on highly textured and busy tracks.
While the low-end performance of the Clio is quite good, the VOLTA offers a stronger performance in nearly every metric.
Mids Performance
The midrange of the VOLTA is better balanced with the rest of the signature compared to the Clio. Still, both do a great job of keeping the presentation of vocals and instruments unaffected by the surrounding frequencies.
The VOLTA’s midrange is warmer, meatier, and fuller than the Clios. While this sounds more realistic, it also means the VOLTA gives up raw detail and clarity to the Clio.
The Clio’s timbre can be dry and metallic at times. This is not an issue with the VOLTA, resulting in it sounding more natural and accurate in comparison.
When it comes to managing sibilance, both models do a fantastic job. The Clio is one of the best I’ve heard for curbing this quality, with the VOLTA slotting in closely behind.
Treble Performance
The Clio’s unique 6mm AMT driver is a fantastic performer that easily competes with the VOLTA’s dual electrostatic setup.
The Clio is more presence region biased compared to the VOLTA which is biased towards the brilliance region. This means the VOLTA offers more sparkle and shimmer.
The Clio’s AMT has a less natural presentation and a leaner sound than the output from the VOLTA’s electrostatic drivers. The Clio’s AMT is snappier, though, with an even more rapid attack and decay pattern.
Refinement goes to the VOLTA with a note presentation that is smoother and more natural, with improved note definition and control.
Neither is fatiguing, even at higher volumes than I generally listen at, with the VOLTA being even easier on the ears thanks to a more even presentation and smaller, less aggressive peaks.
The treble extension from the two seems similarly excellent, well exceeding what I’m capable of hearing.
Staging
While the VOLTA’s stage is good, the Clio betters it in this respect. The Clio has an advantage right off the bat, thanks to a default vocal positioning that is further from the ear with the ability to get just as intimate when called for on a track.
While they both offer a well-rounded soundscape with an even balance of width, depth, and height, everything about the Clio’s presentation is just a bit more spacious. It is more comparable to the SONORA in this regard.
Channel-to-channel movement from the pair is nuanced and accurate, with the VOLTA having a small advantage in the accuracy of off-center movement. Their performance at the edges of their respective stages is on par.
Aspects of layering and instrument separation are nearly equal, with the Clio having a slight advantage. The additional staging size, combined with slightly improved technicals, results in a more dynamic and immersive presentation than what the VOLTA can produce.
My Verdict
After experiencing the SONORA first, which is a top-of-the-line gem, I wouldn’t have been surprised if the VOLTA sounded good but fell short of its higher-end sibling. What I was not expecting was to prefer the VOLTA.
The VOLTA’s tune is even more balanced, and while it gives up some technical competence to the SONORA, its more natural presentation is worth it.
I’m happy to give up a bit of micro-detail and staging dynamics for more realistic voicing, better sub-bass, and a more even presentation from top to bottom, though I can see plenty gravitating towards the SONORA’s more energetic presentation.
In addition to sounding fantastic, the VOLTA comes with the same extensive accessory kit as the SONORA. You get everything you need and more, and the quality is top-of-the-line.
Of course, with all this goodness, there are some flaws. The VOLTA’s ergonomics are not fantastic, and while I love the cable, the weight doesn’t do the shells’ weight distribution qualities any favors.
Beyond that, there’s nothing to complain about here. The VOLTA is just as good as the SONORA, better in some respects and worse in others, but just as competitive in the TOTL landscape.
If you want a more neutral-leaning tune from your god-tier, kilobuck earphone, and don’t mind slightly compromised ergonomics, the VOLTA is a charming pick that provides the goods from both visual and auditory perspectives.
PLUSSOUND VOLTA Technical Specifications
- Frequency Response: 10Hz–40kHz
- Sensitivity: 109 dB @ 1 kHz
- Impedance: 10 Ohms @ 1 kHz
