or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › [REVIEW] Aurisonics ASG-2 & 2.5 (with many comparisons)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[REVIEW] Aurisonics ASG-2 & 2.5 (with many comparisons) - Page 108

post #1606 of 6743
I agree on bass. Good bass is not recessed or rolled-off, it's appropriately present with real energy.

As for treble, I've heard it said, and I find for myself, that peaks in the treble and ringing are what brings fatigue. Even totl ciems can have treble spikes thanks to the twfk family of BAs.

I like how Dale chose a special set of new armatures for the AS-2 and ASG-2, this choice makes all the difference to me for the treble.
post #1607 of 6743

I didn't find the treble boosted on the ASG-2 when I auditioned it.  It was still laid back IMO. 

post #1608 of 6743
Mine with bass closed has spikes but in no way fatiguing.
post #1609 of 6743

With the bass ports set to .5, there is at least as much treble as there is bass, and a bit more than the mids. At least, with 105 hours burn in as of now.

 

I'm still finding the treble to be a bit hot, but i think that might be because my ears haven't quite recovered from the ASG-2 earlier this week. they definitely have tamed out a little, and i'm not getting much vocal sibilance that isn't already in the track. The ASG-2 just seems to emphasis it, and only on a few albums.

 

You can hear the "s" on what i consider to be tame IEMs, but it's not offensive. with the ASG-2 it just punches.

post #1610 of 6743
Quote:
Originally Posted by vwinter View Post


If your point was that the ASG-2 is treble "boosted" then it's only been "proven" in a relative manner. But it seems like your point is really that some people don't like treble or are medically sensitive, which isn't really a point. Also, to say that "boosted" treble absolutely creates sibilance is not just not very correct at all.

Just an FYI, bass loudness is harder to judge than treble or midrange loudness and you're likely damaging your hearing, even assuming you actually measured the output that you listen to at 90db.

 

 

the thing is, audiophiles seem to be very sensitive to bass-emphasis, but when it comes to too bright or sharpness in the treble people don't seem to care as much and they think of incredible clarity and realism...

post #1611 of 6743
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nestroit View Post

 

 

the thing is, audiophiles seem to be very sensitive to bass-emphasis, but when it comes to too bright or sharpness in the treble people don't seem to care as much and they think of incredible clarity and realism...

 

I tend to think on both sides. Depending on how the treble is done I'm ok with bright.  But I don't want it to be harsh or overwhelming. The same goes for bass being so prominent that it just muddys up the presentation.

post #1612 of 6743
Try a double or triple flanged tip, if you haven't already. The longer tip may attenuate the area of FR you have an issue with.
post #1613 of 6743

a good example:

 

HD800 and T1 being too bright or very realitstic?

 

I think that there are too many people who don't know that it's artificial if it's super clear/bright, like they are addicted to it and can't get enough,  just saying. Be careful and don't get fooled. :D


Edited by Nestroit - 7/16/13 at 1:38pm
post #1614 of 6743

The HD800 sucks and it seriously lacks bass.

post #1615 of 6743
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nestroit View Post


the thing is, audiophiles seem to be very sensitive to bass-emphasis, but when it comes to too bright or sharpness in the treble people don't seem to care as much and they think of incredible clarity and realism...

not true, hard core audiophiles will care about entire freq range and especially bass, actually when picking loudspeakers i look at low freq and crossover freq, plus a few other things. bright sounding equipment is not often liked and many prefer rich melower tonality.
post #1616 of 6743
Quote:
Originally Posted by music_4321 View Post

The HD800 sucks and it seriously lacks bass.

The bird has spoken :D
(It does lack bass though)

post #1617 of 6743
I bet most of the people tend to recognize a little too dark sooner than a little too bright, but to be fair: both are inaccurate, the difference is that you notice too dark but you get fooled on the too bright. wink.gif


Whatever, back on topic.
post #1618 of 6743

Always nicer to be fooled and happy than live in the dark.

post #1619 of 6743
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nestroit View Post

a good example:

 

HD800 and T1 being too bright or very realitstic?

 

I think that there are too many people who don't know that it's artificial if it's super clear/bright, like they are addicted to it and can't get enough,  just saying. Be careful and don't get fooled. :D

 

The T1 is too bright and lacks bass, and the HD800 is borderline for my tastes. The SD3 is as dark as the T1 is bright, IMO.

post #1620 of 6743

System synergy. HD800 on something like Dac1 for example is too clean and smooth.

 

Anyway are we getting more ASG2 vs SD3 comparisons?

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › [REVIEW] Aurisonics ASG-2 & 2.5 (with many comparisons)