Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Aurisonics Impressions, Reviews & Discussions Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Aurisonics Impressions, Reviews & Discussions Thread - Page 69

post #1021 of 3628
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgx78 View Post

I am about to send my version 1 to get it updated to 1.2. It will be painful 3-4 weeks without it.

By the way, some of us should loan one of our ASG-1 (1.2) to joker to get it reviewed.  

People such as myself have offered him but at the time he turned it down. But maybe if we offered again now he may have time!

post #1022 of 3628
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericp10 View Post

Hello PsiCore. I have not heard the AS-1, but I did finally get in my ASG-1.2. First, thank you to Dale and the Aurisonics crew for doing a wonderful job with the update.

 

I'll get into more details later (as I haven't had a lot of time with the ASG-1.2 yet), I can say right off the back that to my ears the ASG-1.2 is a vast improvement over the ASG-1. And as a caveat, let me state that the ASG-1 was my favorite universal before deciding to move into the the next version. The ASG-1.2 now retains the title of my favorite universal (the W4 is right up there for different reasons). I am finding the ASG-1.2 to have deeper yet cleaner bass (not suggesting that the ASG-1's bass was muddy). The shoutiness in the mids - that many head-fiers who liked the ASG-1 complained about - is gone. Also, to my ears the treble is less recessed or buried in the mix with the ASG-1.2. Same great extension in the highs.

 

Actually, I don't think that the ASG-1 and ASG-1.2 sound anything alike. The ASG-1.2 seems to have been tuned to please us audiophile listeners. In other words, Dale and company read and listened to us non- professional musicians (but high-end lovers of great sound) and shaped an already fantastic product into that we could find even more enjoyable. I can see how some might still find the ASG-1 enjoyable, but to my ears, the ASG-1.2 is a vast improvement over its brother. Details, depth, weight and reverberation are still outstanding all the way through. Now, from what I've been reading, I can barely wait to make my purchase of the AS-2, which I have a feeling is going to take the Aurisonics' house sound to a whole different level. But the ASG-1.2 is the closest I've heard to custom IEM sound in a universal. In the near future I'll add specific songs and type in more detail about the many things the ASG-1.2 does so right.

 

Thanks for the impressions. These really sound interesting.

 

As I can see in your signature, you have the SM3. If I remember correctly, they're somewhat similar to UM3X. How do the Earsonics compare to ASG-1.2?

post #1023 of 3628
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgx78 View Post

I am about to send my version 1 to get it updated to 1.2. It will be painful 3-4 weeks without it.

By the way, some of us should loan one of our ASG-1 (1.2) to joker to get it reviewed.  

Do you want to do it?

post #1024 of 3628
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrkong View Post

Do you want to do it?

 

Sure, when I get my revision back I will contact him to see if he has time to review it.

post #1025 of 3628
Quote:
Originally Posted by PsiCore View Post

 

Thanks for the impressions. These really sound interesting.

 

As I can see in your signature, you have the SM3. If I remember correctly, they're somewhat similar to UM3X. How do the Earsonics compare to ASG-1.2?

Had the SM3. It's been a while since I've owned it. Anything I state is completely by memory regarding the SM3. So I can say I thought the SM3 was a pretty decent IEM, but it doesn't compare to the ASG-1.2 based on memory. The soundstage was much smaller in the SM3, less weight on instruments, and not as good instrument separation as there is in the ASG-1.2.

post #1026 of 3628
@ericp10, for sure they do vocals perfectly for me smily_headphones1.gif at least to my ears and fuze>v1de biggrin.gif
post #1027 of 3628
Quote:
Originally Posted by dogears View Post

@ericp10, for sure they do vocals perfectly for me smily_headphones1.gif at least to my ears and fuze>v1de biggrin.gif

beerchug.gif

post #1028 of 3628

Little Boy vs Fat Man(s)

 

ASG-1.jpg

 

I think this title is a very good title for what I'm about to do.  Below, you'll see 3 comparisons (one from memory) to the following IEMs:

  • Aurisonics ASG-1 (1/1.1 revision)
  • Westone 4R
  • Phonak PFE232

 

AllComparison.jpg

 

For reference, I have generated 4 graphs of the how I perceived the sound of the IEMs.  They will be shown before each comparison.  Since there is no comparison to the Aurisonics ASG-2 1.2 revision, I will be posting the graph right below its quick description:

  • Bass: The Aurisonics ASG-1 has a really full low-end that much is known for sure.  The balance in the low end is extremely beautiful and delicate, that's something I do give Aurisonics kudos for, even with the new revision, they haven't destroyed the balance.  That said, the ASGs perform beautifully with the texturing and dig deep enough to really give an ample rumble from time to time.  A bass body is what really makes these things really great, the large body allows great presence overall.  The impact is strong, but not overbearing over anything.  That said, punch may not be the tightest, but it is certainly there.

    Bass: 5
  • Mids: My original opinion of the mids stands, they did take a shot (although many will disagree).  The detailing is absolutely magnificent in the midrange, something I give Aurisonics credit for.  They warmed up the midrange a ton from the more sterile sound they had before, but didn't destroy the detailing.  The clarity is ample, and may run off every now and then.  For the most part though, the midrange has good clarity despite having little transparency.  As I stated, energy is definitely there, but ample at best.  It really does need a bit more to really get the dynamics across.  Vocals are extremely lush, and offer some sweetness, but could definitely use a lot more.  Overall though, the midrange is smooth, liquid, but needs clarity and energy.


    Mids: 4.5
  • Highs: The highs still roll off, and these IEMs give a new definition to the term roll off...  So much so that if you look up treble rolloff in the audiophile's dictionary, you'll see a picture of this IEM right there.  It's not to say everything is lost though.  Aurisonics does a great job with sparkle as well as clarity as the highs are recessed, but still have great separation and ample clarity.  What they lack though is detailing.  These highs are not detailed to just about any extent.  Like the midrange, the highs lack energy, they don't have any whatsoever. 

    Highs: 4

 

The overall signature is extremely dark and hidden.  The energy that this IEM did have before has been stripped to create an extremely smooth, warm, and lush signature.  Overall score would be a 4.5 (down for the original 5, I still consider the 1.2 revision to be at the level of the 1.1/1.0 though, although those offered a slightly better sound; if the 1.2 is a 4.7, the 1.0/1.1 would be a 4.8).

 

Aurisonics12.jpg

This is a graph of what I perceive the ASG 1.2 to sound like.

 

Aurisonics ASG-1 vs Aurisonics ASG-1 (1.0/1.1 vs 1.2)*

 

The new ASG has a much warmer signature in comparison to the previous model.  It's lush, inviting midrange is a new flavor to the powerful, sweet, and energetic one of the 1.0/1.1 model.  Although it may technically be a step back.  The low end has been improved greatly, not for technically, but for enjoyability.  A larger bass body improves presence throughout. 

 

  • Bass: In reality, this is where the 1.2 version walks circles around the 1.0/1.1.  Is it technically better?  By a hair...  Is it more enjoyable, YES.  The 1.2 revision brings a much larger body to the mix allowing the thinner sound of the 1.0/1.1 to begone.  That's the main thing you get though.  The texturing, punch, and impact are all improved over the predecessor.  Although they didn't need to be, they were put up a notch due to the body.  The bass digs much deeper in more complex songs in the 1.2 as well (compared to 1.0/1.1).  That said, rumbles are bigger as well.  1.2 revision takes the win here improving on enjoyability, but not technicality.
  • Mids: OK, this is where the 1.0/1.1 takes over.  The mids in the previous model had more power, energy, and sweetness compared to the current model.  The midrange has warmed up a lot compared to the previous model.  Lushness has been incorporated, but at the expense of sweetness.  That can become a problem with the ASG-1.2.  The clarity is really a wash.  While the 1.2 does a better job with the lower midrange, the 1.0/1.1s do it better as you go up.  Detailing is a strength of both of these IEMs, so there really isn't a comparison, they both detail extremely well.  The mids are won by the old model.
  • Highs: They both roll off.  They both lack detailing.  They both have ample clarity.  They both do the same job at separation.  Although the 1.2 is a little more recessed, the differences are extremely small as it was recessed to begin with.  I can't award a win to either model here. 

 

Aurisonics1-11.jpg

Aurisonics12.jpg

Aurisonics ASG-1.0/1.1 vs ASG-1.2

 

Aurisonics ASG-1 vs Westone 4R

 

W4RCompare.jpg

 

The Westones offer a much more tonally balanced sound while the ASG-1 offers a much warmer sound in contrast. 

 

  • Bass: The low end of the new Aurisonics digs so much deeper than the 4R.  The 4R has a strong impact...  But so does the ASG-1.  The 4R has a nice tight punch...  The ASG-1 has a strong punch, but it really isn't that tight.  The 4R has excellent textrue...  So does the ASG-1.  The similarities stop there.  The ASG-1 can rumble...  The 4R cannot.  The ASG-1 digs so much deeper into the spectrum...  The 4R cannot.  The ASG-1 has a greater presence than the 4R.  The ASG-1 has a larger body overall.  Although the 4R isn't bad with any of these traits, it's simply outdone by the ASG in them.  ASG wins hands down.
  • Mids: The 4s offer a nice warm midrange, but don't lose out on energy throughout the midrange.  While the ASG now is warm, and frankly a lot warmer than the 4R, they don't carry that energy it needs.  The 4Rs may not be as lush as the ASG, but still are lush enough.  Sweetness is probably the second strongest in the IEMs compared in this post (ASG-1.0/1.1 are the sweetest).  Detailing is a wash as both are able to detail as well, although they have their strengths.  While the 4s do a much better job up top the ASG has a slight edge down low.  Clarity is where the 4Rs run away with it all.  The ASG's mids can seem veiled at times which can ruin clarity on the upper end.  The 4Rs take this round hands down.
  • Treble: The new Aurisonics did very little to improve on the treble, and it will hit hard when comparing to some shining treble that the 4Rs have (although PFE may be a bit better).  The Aurisonics have ample sparkle.  The 4Rs destroy them here as well as clarity and extension.  Detailing is decent at best with the ASG, the 4Rs do a wonderful job with detailing.  Clarity may be present in both, but much better produced in the 4s.  There is no doubt about it, ASG still needs some work on the highs (I hear the ASG-2 will fix this :)).

 

WestoneW4R.jpg

Aurisonics12.jpg

The Westones offer a more balanced overall sound to the Aurisonics

 

Aurisonics ASG-1 vs Phonak PFE232

 

PhonakCompare.jpg

 

The ASG-1 offers a much warmer signature that has less energy than the 232.  The 232 has a nice low v shape in it overall.  Once again, we deal with two different signatures.

 

  • Bass: The low end on the ASG-1 and 232, despite being the main focus on both IEMs, have their differences.  The 232s have a quicker punch that has a strong impact.  On the other hand, the ASGs have a strong impact with a punch that isn't as quick or tight.  The sub-bass of the ASG-1 is more bodied than the 232s while both offer great texture.  Both IEMs can dig pretty deep.  One improvement on the ASG-1.2 was that they dug deeper, this improvement was enough for me to say that the new 1.2s do dig slightly further than the 232s.  This is only a slight improvement though, so it's not the biggest difference in the world.  That said, both IEMs really excel well in the low end.
  • Mids: The midrange on the ASG and 232 have lots in common, as they both do have a subtle warmth to them.  The ASG is warmer overall while the detailing is the same for both, the clarity is iffy on both ends.  The 232 don't have much clarity when it comes to the lower-mids, the ASG lacks in the upper mids.  They essentially do a flip flop here.  Dynamics are won by the 232 entirely as the 232s can dig deep, and reach high while the ASGs, perfectly able to dig deep, can't reach as high.  Energy is also a place where the 232s excel over the ASG, but only in the higher instrumentals.  Vocally, the ASG and 232 has about equal sweetness in most songs, although the 232s are a little better (you'd have to AB to find it out).  However, that's most songs.  There are just a few handfulls of songs that the 232s demolish the ASG in terms of energy.  When it comes to the midrange, it comes down to energy, dynamics, and sweetness.  All of these being the ASG's weakness in the mids.  PFE takes it
  • Highs: The highs on the ASG do have some sparkle on them, but the 232s sparkle a little better simply due to the extension that they have over the ASG.  The detailing is much better with the 232s as well.  Clarity and separation are a closer game to look at.  232s offer much better clarity.  However, for what details actually are produced by the ASGs, the separation is about equal.  That said, it's really no contest, the 232s take this as well without a doubt.

 

PhonakPFE232.jpg

Aurisonics12.jpg

While the ASG-1 aims for a non-fatiging signature, the 232s go for a little more fun.

 

The ASG-1 does offer a nice unique signature, the only IEM I have that is near it is the UE500s.  The only other IEM I could think of that has a similar signature would be the MEE CW31 (have since broke :().  These are in a lower rank than the ASG though overall, but offer similar signatures (abeit more bass-focused).  I would assume that the IE80s would also have an extremely similar sound to the new ASGs as well, but can't confirm for myself :p

 

*The ASG-1 1.0/1.1 and ASG-1 1.2 comparison is from memory.  There may be differences that are or are not noted.  They do not hold as much accuracy as the rest.


Edited by tinyman392 - 6/20/12 at 5:23pm
post #1029 of 3628

Dem! You all ASG1 owners should listen to Joe Morello's Mission: Impossible (Going Places) and Depeche Mode's Halo (Violator) --- they never sounded this good!!!

post #1030 of 3628

Thanks tinyman392 that was very interesting.

post #1031 of 3628

Nice job, tinyman392...

post #1032 of 3628

Yep, kudos to Mr Tiny. I don't have the itch for PFE232 anymore biggrin.gif

ASG1+EQ FTW! cool.gif

post #1033 of 3628
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinyman392 View Post

Little Boy vs Fat Man(s)

 

Nice job, pinned

post #1034 of 3628

Great with the ASG-1.2

 

post #1035 of 3628

I've never played an Elder Scrolls game, but this soundtrack on the ASG-1 is amazing. It makes me want to get drunk in an Irish tavern

 

 

 

 

Then there's Mumford and Sons!!

 


Edited by eke2k6 - 6/21/12 at 9:34am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Aurisonics Impressions, Reviews & Discussions Thread