Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › [REVIEW] Aurisonics AS-2's - Like being a kid in a candy store with a bag full of quarters
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[REVIEW] Aurisonics AS-2's - Like being a kid in a candy store with a bag full of quarters - Page 9

post #121 of 289

Still.... waiting for the group buy.

frown.gif


Edited by Cassadian - 8/10/12 at 7:08pm
post #122 of 289
Thread Starter 

Be patient. It's not that they dont want you business, they're just busy and wont wanna start offering a group deal and not be able to fill the order in a reasonable time. Let them get their orders settled, sorry it's taking so long.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cassadian View Post

Still.... waiting for the group buy.

frown.gif

EDIT: Listening to my AS-2's now with the Adele 21 album on and it's sounding wonderful like always. Music is just so rich with texture. It's been a joy owning them for so long. 


Edited by kenman345 - 8/10/12 at 7:22pm
post #123 of 289
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenman345 View Post

Neutral, analytical, warm....I think those are the key words you wanted. What you mean slight v-shape? They are extremely fun in the sense that they make music sound great and i love walking around dancing to the music with them on. That's fun to me :-)

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by FlySweep View Post

There was absolutely NOTHING v-shaped about the AS-2 prototype I heard.  If anything, it was slightly mid forward.  It was definitely on the neutral, slightly warm side of things.

 

This is what people said about the ASG-1 1.2 revision when it was first released...  That's the problem with that.  The words and these descriptions just don't add up.  The ASG-1 (1.2 rev) was called mid-forward as well, which it is far from.  It's nothing against you guys.  I just don't know what to trust any longer.  I'll wait until they are released to see what they are.  

 

For example, I'm trying to figure out what the different parts of the spectrum are like in Kenman's original review, and I've highlighted the information I can actually use to construct something (and what they mean to me).  Areas in read are what I attempt to interpret (numbered areas are the ones I will explain interpretation(s) of).  Cross outs are what don't matter in terms of sound signature.

 

 

 

Quote:

Sound

The overall sound signature of the AS-2's is flat (1). Each of the three normal divisions of the frequencies are equally balanced with each other and this makes for a fun experience (2). The important thing about the AS-2's is that no matter how much I have tried boosting any single part of the highs, mids, or bass the overall sound from the rest of them is still superb and unaffected. Each section is well contained and little to no leakage between them means if you like it more bass heavy, go right ahead, you will still hear everything crystal clear. A song by Bassnectar called "Ping Pong" samples a ping pong ball bouncing around. The 3D imaging is amazing on the AS-2's, but if you turn up the bass levels you will still hear the clearness of the ball bouncing around like it was a leaky faucet dripping a drop of water in an otherwise silent room (3).

 

Treble

This is the area in which those two tweeters come into play. The highs are interesting on the AS-2's. It's this part of the AS-2's that I guess one would think the tweeters are standalone and separate from the 15mm dynamic driver in them, but to my understanding this is not the case. The balanced armatures in the AS-2 seem to compliment the dynamic driver to ensure that you are not just able to hear the highs, but also hear them well and enjoy them equally (4). Listening to music with really high notes hit by a vocalist is spine chilling (5). It's a great feeling to have something that hits hard as needed in the bass and still delivers like this in the treble space (6).

 

Midrange

The midrange of the AS-2's are lush. They are warm and inviting to you as a listener (7). I find the midrange to be perfectly tuned for the other frequencies to complement them. Similar to the treble, the midrange is quite airy making the two seamlessly co-exist in a unity of spaciousness and yet similar sound qualities. The midrange is airy and textured. It really makes you feel like you are there as you hear the pluck of the guitar in front of you (8). the tweeters used for treble levels mean the midrange is not overpowering the trebles at all (9). The midrange feels like so much of the rest of the AS-2's, which is a product that you can tell took some hard work and care to make and perfect. 

 

Lows/Bass

It's something I have been talking throughout lots of sections of the review and rightfully so. It's amazing how the 15mm driver inside this In-Ear Monitor performs so well with all the frequencies and realize that it also handles the bass at the very same time. The bass is crisp and clean (10). In the past with my headphones that I have had that were considered Basshead headphones, with great bass, I never had anything like these. On tracks I previously thought were mastered poorly because it's bass did not produce much rumble or have much depth to it. With the AS-2's, the bass still does not lack it's clarity and texture when testing with those tracks (11). The bass goes well below my previous headphones, the Denon AH-D2000's that have quite a history of Basshead territory in the audio hobbyist community (12). I highly recommend anyone worried about finding something that'll give them that bass craving they have but fear losing the rest of the frequencies or even just think it'll be too heavy. It's a bit hard to get a handle of, but I can't think of any other way than to say, the AS-2's will perform as close to how the master engineer for the song intended it to sound. If the song is meant to have light bass, that's how the AS-2's play it. Yet at the same time, if the next song calls for lots and lots of bass, it'll deliver that as well, nice and clean, without any change of settings. In actuality, that's how every headphone or In Ear Monitor should be, but I have never found one that does on such a consistent basis until the AS-2's came along.

 

The areas marked with red all can be interpreted.  The rest either is out of place, or doesn't make sense.  Or it adds nothing to the conversation by giving a vague feeling of quality to the monitor. This is how I read every review.  So lets get to comments (numbered):

  1. The signature of these headphones is flat.  OK, there are many ways to define flat.  Flat can be having a flat FR response which will have a mid-focused, sub-bass deprived sound to it with a  dip in the 2k region that is perceived.  Reading on, that isn't that phone.  So I assume you mean a balanced or neutral sound (neutral is balanced, balanced is not neutral to me).  
  2. You make a statement about normal devisions.  There are no normal devisions.  There are devisions, but none are universal.  No reviewer has come up with a universal where these devisions occur.  For example, I still consider 2k part midrange (higher-kids) while many consider this area the treble.  This is why you have to be direct with your words and look to the glossary we use and learn those terms. 
  3. It has a large sound stage.  Thanks for that information.  However, soundstage says little about the signature (analytical, neutral, balanced, v-shaped, etc.).  Generally speaking, the more colored (un-neutral) an IEM is, the smaller the sound stage.  There are exceptions though, this might be one of them.  But I'm already in doubt about either the neutral sound or huge sound stage.  
  4. Your first statements about the driver say absolutely nothing about the sound.  Dynamics can be tuned to sound like BAs, and vice versa.  The fact that you can hear highs says nothing to me as well.  Every headphone has this property, even the treble-recessed ASG-1.
  5. You created a line to start the treble between 2k and 4k (somewhere in there is where you define treble starting).  This is fine.  It does give me the first bit of information, the headphones are sweet.  That is, there is a bump around the 2-3 k region.  This is something I'm happy to hear actually.
  6. Your statement of big treble and big bass immediately have me leaning towards a V-shape.  The sentence itself is very confusing though (in my eyes).  So I may have interpreted wrong.  Reason why it's crossed out (it will not be used in my analysis of the signature).
  7. Midrange is lush means a bump prior to the 1k region for me.  This is good information.  Warmth generally means a bump in the same area (slightly before it actually) which is why lush is normally paired with warm, but not always.  Warmth can also be created by a slow decay in the lower-end of the spectrum (how the HF2s and ASG-1 (I assume) do it).
  8. Airy actually ensues an area in the higher highs.  This is well past the area of "splash" and most say is inaudible most of the time.  It is thought to create an airy feeling, and for the most part, it does (all headphones I've heard that have this are airy).  There obviously are other ways to create air, this is the most common.  You also make a statement about textured.  I myself would place this in the bass region, but it can be attributed to the midrange.  This shows an increase in the higher sub-bass.  
  9. The fact that the treble doesn't intrude the midrange is good to know quality-wise, but helps me very little in trying to construct the FR curve you're hearing.  Essentially all signature types can have it where the treble doesn't intrude.  Same applies to bass intrusion.  However, bass intrusion normally points to big bass, treble intrusion doesn't imply big treble.
  10. Clean bass implies that it isn't boomy or big.  Perfectly fine, good information.  However, lack to declare what part of the bass is clean does give less to the statement.  I've never heard crisp bass, it usually deals with treble.  
  11. Huston, we have rumble.  That normally is due to a bump in the deepest sub-bass.  It also gives the idea that the bass has good depth.  Good description here.

 

Using all this information, I come up with the following curve I would perceive the headphones to have using EQ.

 

 

1000

 

All descriptions are in the picture of why things are the way they are as well as the three parts that define a v-shape for me.  I don't consider this a v-shape persay, but rather a balanced sound.  Not flat, not neutral.  Warm, but not analytical.  This is the picture that I have in mind of the AS-2 (based on my interpretations of the review).  It's not going to be the most accurate, there will be guesses.  However, it contradicts what the OP says in terms of the review.  Reason why I'm confused.  What people are saying, and what their reviews say are not the same.  Hence, I am confused.  

post #124 of 289
Edit. The last FR graph should say RAW, now PERCEIVED. I'm on my iPod, so editing it at this point would be a pain in the ***


Sent from an iPod touch with TapaTalk... Autocorrect may alter the meaning of this message tongue.gif
post #125 of 289
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinyman392 View Post

 

 

This is what people said about the ASG-1 1.2 revision when it was first released...  That's the problem with that.  The words and these descriptions just don't add up.  The ASG-1 (1.2 rev) was called mid-forward as well, which it is far from.  It's nothing against you guys.  I just don't know what to trust any longer.  I'll wait until they are released to see what they are.  

 

For example, I'm trying to figure out what the different parts of the spectrum are like in Kenman's original review, and I've highlighted the information I can actually use to construct something (and what they mean to me).  Areas in read are what I attempt to interpret (numbered areas are the ones I will explain interpretation(s) of).  Cross outs are what don't matter in terms of sound signature.

 

 

 

 

The areas marked with red all can be interpreted.  The rest either is out of place, or doesn't make sense.  Or it adds nothing to the conversation by giving a vague feeling of quality to the monitor. This is how I read every review.  So lets get to comments (numbered):

  1. The signature of these headphones is flat.  OK, there are many ways to define flat.  Flat can be having a flat FR response which will have a mid-focused, sub-bass deprived sound to it with a  dip in the 2k region that is perceived.  Reading on, that isn't that phone.  So I assume you mean a balanced or neutral sound (neutral is balanced, balanced is not neutral to me).  
  2. You make a statement about normal devisions.  There are no normal devisions.  There are devisions, but none are universal.  No reviewer has come up with a universal where these devisions occur.  For example, I still consider 2k part midrange (higher-kids) while many consider this area the treble.  This is why you have to be direct with your words and look to the glossary we use and learn those terms. 
  3. It has a large sound stage.  Thanks for that information.  However, soundstage says little about the signature (analytical, neutral, balanced, v-shaped, etc.).  Generally speaking, the more colored (un-neutral) an IEM is, the smaller the sound stage.  There are exceptions though, this might be one of them.  But I'm already in doubt about either the neutral sound or huge sound stage.  
  4. Your first statements about the driver say absolutely nothing about the sound.  Dynamics can be tuned to sound like BAs, and vice versa.  The fact that you can hear highs says nothing to me as well.  Every headphone has this property, even the treble-recessed ASG-1.
  5. You created a line to start the treble between 2k and 4k (somewhere in there is where you define treble starting).  This is fine.  It does give me the first bit of information, the headphones are sweet.  That is, there is a bump around the 2-3 k region.  This is something I'm happy to hear actually.
  6. Your statement of big treble and big bass immediately have me leaning towards a V-shape.  The sentence itself is very confusing though (in my eyes).  So I may have interpreted wrong.  Reason why it's crossed out (it will not be used in my analysis of the signature).
  7. Midrange is lush means a bump prior to the 1k region for me.  This is good information.  Warmth generally means a bump in the same area (slightly before it actually) which is why lush is normally paired with warm, but not always.  Warmth can also be created by a slow decay in the lower-end of the spectrum (how the HF2s and ASG-1 (I assume) do it).
  8. Airy actually ensues an area in the higher highs.  This is well past the area of "splash" and most say is inaudible most of the time.  It is thought to create an airy feeling, and for the most part, it does (all headphones I've heard that have this are airy).  There obviously are other ways to create air, this is the most common.  You also make a statement about textured.  I myself would place this in the bass region, but it can be attributed to the midrange.  This shows an increase in the higher sub-bass.  
  9. The fact that the treble doesn't intrude the midrange is good to know quality-wise, but helps me very little in trying to construct the FR curve you're hearing.  Essentially all signature types can have it where the treble doesn't intrude.  Same applies to bass intrusion.  However, bass intrusion normally points to big bass, treble intrusion doesn't imply big treble.
  10. Clean bass implies that it isn't boomy or big.  Perfectly fine, good information.  However, lack to declare what part of the bass is clean does give less to the statement.  I've never heard crisp bass, it usually deals with treble.  
  11. Huston, we have rumble.  That normally is due to a bump in the deepest sub-bass.  It also gives the idea that the bass has good depth.  Good description here.

 

Using all this information, I come up with the following curve I would perceive the headphones to have using EQ.

 

 

1000

 

All descriptions are in the picture of why things are the way they are as well as the three parts that define a v-shape for me.  I don't consider this a v-shape persay, but rather a balanced sound.  Not flat, not neutral.  Warm, but not analytical.  This is the picture that I have in mind of the AS-2 (based on my interpretations of the review).  It's not going to be the most accurate, there will be guesses.  However, it contradicts what the OP says in terms of the review.  Reason why I'm confused.  What people are saying, and what their reviews say are not the same.  Hence, I am confused.  

 

Don't forget.  That at different volumes the lower and higher frequencies are emphasized as well as you should account for a slight depression in each freq. graph you make as the human ear naturally perceives the midrange created by the headphone to be more forward than reality.

post #126 of 289
Thread Starter 

Mighty impressive. Thanks for doing this. Sorry my original review was not as helpful as I would have liked. I meant flat as in Neutral, they are very well balanced. If you have paid attention I did a comparison with the UE IERM's at a Head-Fi Meet and they had similar qualities enough it was hard to tell which ear had which IEM in besides the slight more present and controlled bass on the AS-2's. Volume matching them made the UE IERM's sound thin compared to the AS-2's.

 

Anyways, when I say neutral, I mean each frequency is perceived to be given equal emphasis. When I say it's controlled, I mean that each frequency sounds like it is well contained and if I boosted or lowered any one of the frequencies I have not noticed it drowning out or being drowned out by the rest of the music in the other frequencies. By Midrange, I am defining around 1kHz-6kHz, that should help you out a bit. 

 

I tried to stay away from words like mid-forward as I have no idea if they really are or not. I don't know how to quantify the sound enough to say that. Maybe someone can explain it. The way I see it everyone hears slightly different so while I hope my review is helpful, it's ultimately up to each person to make a decision and hopefully more reviews will come out in the future and people will be able to make even better informed decisions. I was in a music store this week and was checking out the headphone rack and asked to A/B some of them and I got talking to the guy working at the store. Turns out he met Dale and heard the ASG-2's and when I said I owned a pair of the custom model he was stunned and also told me instantly he was very jealous. It was a great moment for me to have met someone that can understand what I have heard, even in a slightly different form (Generic model vs Custom model).

Quote:
Originally Posted by tinyman392 View Post

 

 

This is what people said about the ASG-1 1.2 revision when it was first released...  That's the problem with that.  The words and these descriptions just don't add up.  The ASG-1 (1.2 rev) was called mid-forward as well, which it is far from.  It's nothing against you guys.  I just don't know what to trust any longer.  I'll wait until they are released to see what they are.  

 

For example, I'm trying to figure out what the different parts of the spectrum are like in Kenman's original review, and I've highlighted the information I can actually use to construct something (and what they mean to me).  Areas in read are what I attempt to interpret (numbered areas are the ones I will explain interpretation(s) of).  Cross outs are what don't matter in terms of sound signature.

 

 

 

 

The areas marked with red all can be interpreted.  The rest either is out of place, or doesn't make sense.  Or it adds nothing to the conversation by giving a vague feeling of quality to the monitor. This is how I read every review.  So lets get to comments (numbered):

  1. The signature of these headphones is flat.  OK, there are many ways to define flat.  Flat can be having a flat FR response which will have a mid-focused, sub-bass deprived sound to it with a  dip in the 2k region that is perceived.  Reading on, that isn't that phone.  So I assume you mean a balanced or neutral sound (neutral is balanced, balanced is not neutral to me).  
  2. You make a statement about normal devisions.  There are no normal devisions.  There are devisions, but none are universal.  No reviewer has come up with a universal where these devisions occur.  For example, I still consider 2k part midrange (higher-kids) while many consider this area the treble.  This is why you have to be direct with your words and look to the glossary we use and learn those terms. 
  3. It has a large sound stage.  Thanks for that information.  However, soundstage says little about the signature (analytical, neutral, balanced, v-shaped, etc.).  Generally speaking, the more colored (un-neutral) an IEM is, the smaller the sound stage.  There are exceptions though, this might be one of them.  But I'm already in doubt about either the neutral sound or huge sound stage.  
  4. Your first statements about the driver say absolutely nothing about the sound.  Dynamics can be tuned to sound like BAs, and vice versa.  The fact that you can hear highs says nothing to me as well.  Every headphone has this property, even the treble-recessed ASG-1.
  5. You created a line to start the treble between 2k and 4k (somewhere in there is where you define treble starting).  This is fine.  It does give me the first bit of information, the headphones are sweet.  That is, there is a bump around the 2-3 k region.  This is something I'm happy to hear actually.
  6. Your statement of big treble and big bass immediately have me leaning towards a V-shape.  The sentence itself is very confusing though (in my eyes).  So I may have interpreted wrong.  Reason why it's crossed out (it will not be used in my analysis of the signature).
  7. Midrange is lush means a bump prior to the 1k region for me.  This is good information.  Warmth generally means a bump in the same area (slightly before it actually) which is why lush is normally paired with warm, but not always.  Warmth can also be created by a slow decay in the lower-end of the spectrum (how the HF2s and ASG-1 (I assume) do it).
  8. Airy actually ensues an area in the higher highs.  This is well past the area of "splash" and most say is inaudible most of the time.  It is thought to create an airy feeling, and for the most part, it does (all headphones I've heard that have this are airy).  There obviously are other ways to create air, this is the most common.  You also make a statement about textured.  I myself would place this in the bass region, but it can be attributed to the midrange.  This shows an increase in the higher sub-bass.  
  9. The fact that the treble doesn't intrude the midrange is good to know quality-wise, but helps me very little in trying to construct the FR curve you're hearing.  Essentially all signature types can have it where the treble doesn't intrude.  Same applies to bass intrusion.  However, bass intrusion normally points to big bass, treble intrusion doesn't imply big treble.
  10. Clean bass implies that it isn't boomy or big.  Perfectly fine, good information.  However, lack to declare what part of the bass is clean does give less to the statement.  I've never heard crisp bass, it usually deals with treble.  
  11. Huston, we have rumble.  That normally is due to a bump in the deepest sub-bass.  It also gives the idea that the bass has good depth.  Good description here.

 

Using all this information, I come up with the following curve I would perceive the headphones to have using EQ.

 

 

1000

 

All descriptions are in the picture of why things are the way they are as well as the three parts that define a v-shape for me.  I don't consider this a v-shape persay, but rather a balanced sound.  Not flat, not neutral.  Warm, but not analytical.  This is the picture that I have in mind of the AS-2 (based on my interpretations of the review).  It's not going to be the most accurate, there will be guesses.  However, it contradicts what the OP says in terms of the review.  Reason why I'm confused.  What people are saying, and what their reviews say are not the same.  Hence, I am confused.  

post #127 of 289
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cassadian View Post

 

Don't forget.  That at different volumes the lower and higher frequencies are emphasized as well as you should account for a slight depression in each freq. graph you make as the human ear naturally perceives the midrange created by the headphone to be more forward than reality.

 

I should add that this is what I see as neutral.  Deviation from this base line can have accepted values +/- 2 dB in order for me to declare it neutral (the rises on the ends are not required) to my ears.  Again, I'm very tight on that definition (about giving lee-way).  So far I've found about 5 IEMs that actually match this description (and file as neutral): Phonak PFE 1xx [grey] == ACS T15 == HiFiMan RE0 == Etymotic HF5 > Etymotic EtyKids.  They are listed in closes to this "ideal" curve of mine to least.  Note that none of these are "perfectly" neutral in my eyes.  Phonak rolls off highs too early.  ACS does the same thing.  HiFiMan doesn't have the spike perfect (loss of energy/sweetness), Etymotic has too much treble focus (both of them, the EtyKids more than the HF5).

 

 

1000

Please ignore the roll offs on the edge of the charts.  Audacity automatically does this with their EQs :p

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kenman345 View Post

Mighty impressive. Thanks for doing this. Sorry my original review was not as helpful as I would have liked. I meant flat as in Neutral, they are very well balanced. If you have paid attention I did a comparison with the UE IERM's at a Head-Fi Meet and they had similar qualities enough it was hard to tell which ear had which IEM in besides the slight more present and controlled bass on the AS-2's. Volume matching them made the UE IERM's sound thin compared to the AS-2's.

 

Anyways, when I say neutral, I mean each frequency is perceived to be given equal emphasis. When I say it's controlled, I mean that each frequency sounds like it is well contained and if I boosted or lowered any one of the frequencies I have not noticed it drowning out or being drowned out by the rest of the music in the other frequencies. By Midrange, I am defining around 1kHz-6kHz, that should help you out a bit. 

 

I tried to stay away from words like mid-forward as I have no idea if they really are or not. I don't know how to quantify the sound enough to say that. Maybe someone can explain it. The way I see it everyone hears slightly different so while I hope my review is helpful, it's ultimately up to each person to make a decision and hopefully more reviews will come out in the future and people will be able to make even better informed decisions. I was in a music store this week and was checking out the headphone rack and asked to A/B some of them and I got talking to the guy working at the store. Turns out he met Dale and heard the ASG-2's and when I said I owned a pair of the custom model he was stunned and also told me instantly he was very jealous. It was a great moment for me to have met someone that can understand what I have heard, even in a slightly different form (Generic model vs Custom model).

 

The thing is that your descriptions don't match with neutral.  Even when you say it now, your descriptors you've flagged this IEM with don't say neutral.  Comparing to a universal model (non custom to you) is not enough as customs can sound very different with a proper seal.  So although you did listen to a neutral UERM (I'm assuming that's what you mean by UE IERM), it may not have been neutral as you had a different fit with it.  

 

Your midrange of 6 kHz is fine.  I'll accept that.  Why do you talk about mid-range sweetness in the treble?  Not attacking you here.  But it may be a good idea to move that area into the midrange section as it currently resides in the treble.  You do a lot of switching of bass-treble and bass-mids, treble-mids as well mixing each section into a melting pot.  It makes reviews harder to read.  I'm not discrediting the quality mind you.  I'm discrediting the signature type that it's been said to have.  Many (just about everyone who heard the ASG-1) told me the lows were flat with the mids (some even went on to say the mids were forward) in the ASG-1 (1.2 revision).  It wasn't even close.  Even Ekes pointed to a graph of the X10 (Klipsch) and stated it's graph looked similar to what the ASG-1 would sound like (with added treble).  I agreed (we did hear the stock ASG-1 the same sig-wise).  However, the X10 is bass-heavy.  I feel that everyone dropped the ball on this one.  

 

The idea of neutrality and flatness, etc require an idea of bass-heavy, mid-heavy, treble-heavy, etc.  You've stated you don't have that yet.  It's good to know that Aurisonics did change the one area that I felt lacked on the ASG-1, so your review was useful in finding out that it still had a warm midrange with a sweet sound (normally leads to a very beautiful, intricate midrange :)), and retained the same bass properties (possibly being more controlled and balanced).  However, your description still leads me to think balanced (slight V), not neutral.  In essence, your review did help me realize that quality has improved.  I won't know if it's straight fives until I hear them though.  

 

Off-topic, well not 100%: I feel that the words, neutral, flat, and natural have all been thrown around way too much lately and have really mislead a lot of people into what they are getting.  The ASG-1 was read to be flat up to the end of the midrange (where the treble dropped off) while things like the Monster NCredible were called neutral (I haven't heard them, but I doubt they are) as well as the MEE A161p (they are close, but need more treble) all being called neutral (or flat).  None of these claims are true.  Natural is different to everyone.  The GR07 has also been called (perfectly) neutral by everyone as well.  However, when people describe it in extensive works, it doesn't read as if it is.  Once again, it reads more like balanced.  I have a feeling that the AS-2 sounds a lot like the GR07 signature-wise though.  Which is a good thing really (they are well regarded around here).  That means very musical, but also holds its own with a respectable amount of accuracy.

 

Neutral really lies as a very delicate state between every single norm (to me).  It's not boomy, nor recessed, it's present, but not overly present, it textures neither fluidly or solidly (actually should have both traits), it's not warm, nor cold (actually it's both warm and cold; AS-2 sounds more warm to you), lush nor sweet (AS-2 fufills this one in your words)...  Etc.  In order to have this delicate balance, the headphones can't deviate too much, and with the AS-2 as I read it, it seems to deviate.  In the lows and highs actually (boosted).  Reason why I'll believe it's warm and analytical.  

 

I swear I edited this about 5 times since I wrote it, adding as I went :p  Additions (if any) are added as whole paragraphs or to the end of paragraphs where they fit in.  


Edited by tinyman392 - 8/10/12 at 9:00pm
post #128 of 289
Thread Starter 

I like this part the most. It's hard to use terms that everyone knows until you have figured out who you share a same definition with. Unfortunately I can't really help you out unless you help me out. So if you want please PM me and we'll talk about how I can help get you the information you need. (Or the quick and easy answer.....you should get them if you can). I havent heard the GR07's, I think you may be onto something. But I don't think these have a respectable amount of accuracy, I think they have a heavy dose of accuracy. I can't stand listening to low quality music with them as it literally sounds terrible. Sometimes the artifacts are so clear and often I can hardly recognize the song. It's just a no go for me with that. And 100% musical is a perfect word for the AS-2's. 

Quote:
Originally Posted by tinyman392 View Post

Off-topic, well not 100%: I feel that the words, neutral, flat, and natural have all been thrown around way too much lately and have really mislead a lot of people into what they are getting.  The ASG-1 was read to be flat up to the end of the midrange (where the treble dropped off) while things like the Monster NCredible were called neutral (I haven't heard them, but I doubt they are) as well as the MEE A161p (they are close, but need more treble) all being called neutral (or flat).  None of these claims are true.  Natural is different to everyone.  The GR07 has also been called (perfectly) neutral by everyone as well.  However, when people describe it in extensive works, it doesn't read as if it is.  Once again, it reads more like balanced.  I have a feeling that the AS-2 sounds a lot like the GR07 signature-wise though.  Which is a good thing really (they are well regarded around here).  That means very musical, but also holds its own with a respectable amount of accuracy.

 

post #129 of 289

Good info & cool graphs.

 

I'll go ahead and reiterate this.. and I feel quite comfortable in saying that know a thing or two about headphones, frequency curves, and technicalities.. there is NOTHING v-shaped about the AS-2.  rolleyes.gif

post #130 of 289
Thread Starter 

But they are most definitely fun (I believe a bunch of people feel V-shaped IEMs are fun, but that's not the only way to be fun)

Quote:
Originally Posted by FlySweep View Post

Good info & cool graphs.

 

I'll go ahead and reiterate this.. and I feel quite comfortable in saying that know a thing or two about headphones, frequency curves, and technicalities.. there is NOTHING v-shaped about the AS-2.  rolleyes.gif

post #131 of 289

I don't want to get carried away...  But I would have to agree with the post that I will be linking to.  Headphones like those created by Etymotic are not what I consider neutral.  They are overanalytic.  True neutrality should be something along the lines of transparent.

 

http://www.head-fi.org/t/564465/misconception-of-neutral-accurate

post #132 of 289
Thread Starter 

Yea, i don't wanna get carried away either. I know you guys try to help but the more you make suggestions at how it sounds the more I feel like I am giving a misrepresentation of the sound as they have so many lovely characteristics. What Aurisonics has pulled off is amazing, and the balance between all it's many qualities is spectacular. 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cassadian View Post

I don't want to get carried away...  But I would have to agree with the post that I will be linking to.  Headphones like those created by Etymotic are not what I consider neutral.  They are overanalytic.  True neutrality should be something along the lines of transparent.

 

http://www.head-fi.org/t/564465/misconception-of-neutral-accurate

post #133 of 289
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlySweep View Post

Good info & cool graphs.

 

I'll go ahead and reiterate this.. and I feel quite comfortable in saying that know a thing or two about headphones, frequency curves, and technicalities.. there is NOTHING v-shaped about the AS-2.  rolleyes.gif

 

That was my fault.  I should have said balanced which has a slight V in it (I say slight ~ 1-2 dB average).  

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cassadian View Post

I don't want to get carried away...  But I would have to agree with the post that I will be linking to.  Headphones like those created by Etymotic are not what I consider neutral.  They are overanalytic.  True neutrality should be something along the lines of transparent.

 

http://www.head-fi.org/t/564465/misconception-of-neutral-accurate

 

I can definitely see why you'd say this (and have read that thread, the OP at least a while ago).  I do agree that the Etymotic is analytical (towards that side), but the degree isn't enough for me to not call it neutral.  The EtyKids I'm still debating keeping in that list.  It's really the turning point for me of overly analytical.  I'm still debating whether or not I should call it neutral as it sits that fine line.  At the moment, it's in there, but it's been in and out.  

 

Do note that I did say that the Etymotic was a little too treble-focused to be perfectly neutral.  So there is no disagreement there.  The closest to neutral I have right now is either the ACS or PFE.  The RE0 really doesn't have enough midrange energy for me (it drops the ball there a bit).  Both the ACS and PFE drop the treble a bit early for me as well (lack full extension).


Edited by tinyman392 - 8/10/12 at 9:49pm
post #134 of 289

I really want to see a picture of other customization options and the Black Rhodium AS-2.  Acquiesce to my demands oh Head-Fi Gods!  
:3  

 

On a side note:  From my perception (I have not tried any IEMs from Etymotic), there seems to be a general consensus or at the least a large number of people who consider the Etymotics to be bass light, detailed/analytic, and slightly thin.  I cannot say for a fact that these claims are based on truth, but if they are the truth then I would say that is not neutrality.  To find perfect transparency is a noble feat, yet extremely difficult and quite possibly impossible.

post #135 of 289
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cassadian View Post

I really want to see a picture of other customization options and the Black Rhodium AS-2.  Acquiesce to my demands oh Head-Fi Gods!  
:3  

 

On a side note:  From my perception (I have not tried any IEMs from Etymotic), there seems to be a general consensus or at the least a large number of people who consider the Etymotics to be bass light, detailed/analytic, and slightly thin.  I cannot say for a fact that these claims are based on truth, but if they are the truth then I would say that is not neutrality.  To find perfect transparency is a noble feat, yet extremely difficult and quite possibly impossible.

 

I can see where some people would get that from (and it's not wrong). If I had to place it, I'd put it right below neutral (bass-wise).  while the treble is slightly above neutral.  Which is where people would say it's analytical/detailed or creates the idea of bass-light.  I do agree it's on the lighter-side bass wise with strong detail.  I wouldn't call it thin though, the slow bass-decay stops that from happening.  

 

As for more pictures, I can't post this one myself as I don't own it.  So look towards their Facebook.  It's in their wall photos album.  The one in the center is most likely the Black Rhodium :)  Looks to be a wood one too!  Such beauty really :)  


Edited by tinyman392 - 8/10/12 at 11:07pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › [REVIEW] Aurisonics AS-2's - Like being a kid in a candy store with a bag full of quarters