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 140

post #2086 of 6720
I don't think you can get more treble than the Ultrasone iQ, unless you replace your eardrums with metal domed tweeters.
post #2087 of 6720
Quote:
Originally Posted by eke2k6 View Post

 

And you didn't find them necessarily better than the FXZ-200?

No. I can imagine someone prefer one over the other if they don't EQ. But if the 10 band EQ is used to make them sound similar, sound signature and everything else aside, I don't see what K3003 have over FXZ200. Ok maybe soundstage and maybe treble. I EQ'ed a little here and there. Nothing too drastic, at most 3-4 dB for each band. Switched back and forth between the IEMs for like 20 songs. Not really.

Well, I only compared rock songs so I'm not sure about other genres.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericp10 View Post

 

 

While I don't agree with eke's statement at all about the MH1c and GR07 spanking the FXZ100, I do agree with him about the ASG-2 being on a whole different plane than the JVC. To me it's way better than all three earphones mentioned (well all four if you count the FXZ200).

 

Well, probably, since they are considered as a lower tier?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by shotgunshane View Post

I don't think you can get more treble than the Ultrasone iQ, unless you replace your eardrums with metal domed tweeters.
 
I just tried along with K3003 since the shop owned had both. Yeah, the treble on IQ was pretty laid back.

Edited by Mini0510 - 7/30/13 at 7:06pm
post #2088 of 6720
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mini0510 View Post

No. I can imagine someone prefer one over the other if they don't EQ. But if the 10 band EQ is used to make them sound similar, sound signature and everything else aside, I don't see what K3003 have over FXZ200. Ok maybe soundstage and maybe treble. I EQ'ed a little here and there. Nothing too drastic, at most 3-4 dB for each band. Switched back and forth between the IEMs for like 20 songs. Not really.

Well, I only compared rock songs so I'm not sure about other genres.

 

 

Ah, ok. Makes sense now.

 

Thanks for the impressions. I'll ad them to the first post.

post #2089 of 6720
Quote:
Originally Posted by waynes world View Post

 

Curious: how do you find the ASG2's compare to the CSK1000's?

I actually find them more similar than different. A lot of substance in the mids, similar bass response in the upper mid-bass region. Highs in the CKS1000 are more sibilant to say the least. The ASG2 sounds more complete and full to my ears. I can even see the CKS1000 almost being a budget option for the ASG2. The CKS1000 does get good reviews in general in the HF community. The fit of the CKS however isn't my cup of tea, coffee, or any other beverage. ASG2 is an amazing value. There has to be a reason why it is getting compared to the upper tier of universals/mid-tier customs.

post #2090 of 6720
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mini0510 View Post

Don't know. Like I said in my last few sentences. It's all about perception and presentation. I don't see how the sound quality of ASG-2 is better than FXZ200. I made them fairly close to each other in sound signature. I'm hearing the same thing in both IEMs, you know.

Even when both are not EQ'ed, I don't really hear the sound quality difference. What's defined as quality? It seems like I hear everything the way it's suppose to for both IEMs.

So I don't know. 

You then could literally say this for anything you put in your ear. Some type of sound comes out of all IEMs, but as you move up the better quality IEMs it becomes more obvious. It's all in the details and small changes in sound that make this hobby what it is. Close your eyes when you listen to your music. If you didn't notice any difference in sound in the IEMs you tried out, you should save money and stick with your cheapest option (IEM/Headphone). It may not even make sense to even continue on searching or demoing other IEMs, no disrespect or offense. I think someone said the ASG2 is the audiophiles, fun (Neutral) IEM. I can agree with this. It really allows you to get "into" the music as well as hear details in an enjoyable presentable manner.

post #2091 of 6720
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eugguy View Post

You then could literally say this for anything you put in your ear. Some type of sound comes out of all IEMs, but as you move up the better quality IEMs it becomes more obvious. It's all in the details and small changes in sound that make this hobby what it is. Close your eyes when you listen to your music. If you didn't notice any difference in sound in the IEMs you tried out, you should save money and stick with your cheapest option (IEM/Headphone). It may not even make sense to even continue on searching or demoing other IEMs, no disrespect or offense. I think someone said the ASG2 is the audiophiles, fun (Neutral) IEM. I can agree with this. It really allows you to get "into" the music as well as hear details in an enjoyable presentable manner.

uh, I think most will agree that the difference in sound quality gets smaller and smaller as you go up in price of IEM. That's why there's such thing called diminishing returns. Quite a few Head Fi members stated that $1k customs are not drastic better than the top end universals. Some number of percent mention are 10%, 15%, and 20% difference.

And yes, I am trying to save money, keep using the FXZ200. If I don't feel that it's an upgrade, then obviously I shouldn't buy.

Sure, if you can hear the difference, that's great. I have spent enough time to compare and with a little EQ, I can make both IEMs sound very similar in sound signature wise. It sounds more or less the same. Everything is there, clear, well presented... Don't know which one truly outperform the other.

post #2092 of 6720
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eugguy View Post

..... I think someone said the ASG2 is the audiophiles, fun (Neutral) IEM. I can agree with this. It really allows you to get "into" the music as well as hear details in an enjoyable presentable manner.

 

Those of you who had read my initial impressions on ASG-2 will recall I wasn't overly thrilled with it.

Having said that I really do not feel FXZ200 would even compare to the ASG-2. The only scenario I can see is if one prefer really boomy sound with loads of midbass and spicy treble (my impression of the fxz200) - and yes, you can get the ASG-2 to sound like that. However, the reverse is not true. You cannot (well as least I can't in the limited time I had with the fxz200 demo) tune it to extract the level of details and clarity, layering, or timbre that the ASG-2 can provide. If these aren't important to you, or your source is not able to provide an appreciable difference in these areas, then yes, ASG-2 or other "higher-end" IEMs would be a waste of $$$.

I have to agree ASG-2 is a basshead audiophile's fun IEM. It plays this exact role for me when I feel like I gotta move-it move-it..... :D
Edited by kkcc - 7/30/13 at 8:12pm
post #2093 of 6720
Honestly, I found that after buying my first iem over 300, I found the need to keep trying, buying, testing more iems. I think I would have been completely happy with the first iem I purchased. When I really think about it, I've spent alot of money on something that got the job done the first time. Since this is such a subjective hobby, and even though you can be detailed with an objective mindset in your reviews, what you hear is so personal that anyone who tells you a headphone is better is incredulous.
post #2094 of 6720
Quote:
Originally Posted by kkcc View Post

 

Those of you who had read my initial impressions on ASG-2 will recall I wasn't overly thrilled with it.

Having said that I really do not feel FXZ200 would even compare to the ASG-2. The only scenario I can see is if one prefer really boomy sound with loads of midbass and spicy treble (my impression of the fxz200) - and yes, you can get the ASG-2 to sound like that. However, the reverse is not true. You cannot (well as least I can't in the limited time I had with the fxz200 demo) tune it to extract the level of details and clarity, layering, or timbre that the ASG-2 can provide. If these aren't important to you, or your source is not able to provide an appreciable difference in these areas, then yes, ASG-2 or other "higher-end" IEMs would be a waste of $$$.

I have to agree ASG-2 is a basshead audiophile's fun IEM. It plays this exact role for me when I feel like I gotta move-it move-it..... :D

Well, just sound quality wise, even if ASG is better, it's not like fxz200 is muddy and ASG is crystal clear. I'm using 320 aac music files. It's not like i'm using low quality mp3 files. And iPod Touch 5th gen is a pretty good dac. Well, I don't really want to carry an amp in pocket.

 

The bolded words, that's actually close to what I prefer. One other aspect is that, ASG might have better separation, but I'm not sure since I didn't listen to it long enough.

and I have no idea what "level of details and clarity, layering, or timbre" you are talking about. I didn't hear anything in ASG-2 that I didn't hear in FXZ200. THe bass is kind of different between FXZ200 and ASG-2.

It's not like FXZ200 bass vs FX700 bass.

post #2095 of 6720
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mini0510 View Post

uh, I think most will agree that the difference in sound quality gets smaller and smaller as you go up in price of IEM. That's why there's such thing called diminishing returns. Quite a few Head Fi members stated that $1k customs are not drastic better than the top end universals. Some number of percent mention are 10%, 15%, and 20% difference.

And yes, I am trying to save money, keep using the FXZ200. If I don't feel that it's an upgrade, then obviously I shouldn't buy.

Sure, if you can hear the difference, that's great. I have spent enough time to compare and with a little EQ, I can make both IEMs sound very similar in sound signature wise. It sounds more or less the same. Everything is there, clear, well presented... Don't know which one truly outperform the other.

 

Hm. I'll make one recommendation: try out the Vsonic GR07 (bass edition or MKII is your choice). I think it's the best deal in portable audio under $500, and its sound signature is damn close to perfection in terms of balance without being anemic. It works well for literally everything, and will be a good place to exit head-fi.

 

As for diminishing returns, I understand. I think your (and Unity's) perspective is that "it costs so much money. Why isn't it giving me an orgasm?" And there's nothing wrong with that. Heck, the difference between Beats and an LCD-3 isn't objectively large enough to command the massive price difference. However, this is a subjective hobby, where music is the drug, and the gear should only be the means of administration. In the same way that we all prefer different types of music, we will ultimately prefer different aspects of audio presentation. For some, it will be the sound signature. For some, it is the detail, refinement, PRAT, and other audiophile words. For others, it will be how neutral they think the gear is.

 

All in all, you're right not to spend your money on something you think isn't worth it. 

post #2096 of 6720

Well put, Eke. Except any comparison of the Beats and Audeze tends to get my skin crawling in unhealthy ways... ;)

post #2097 of 6720
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theogenes View Post

Well put, Eke. Except any comparison of the Beats and Audeze tends to get my skin crawling in unhealthy ways... ;)

 

Ha. No, really. I have a friend who I let listen to the 1Plus2. When he did a quick comparison to his throwaway buds, he didn't seem really impressed. I let him use it for a few hours while I did some work, and he ended up falling in love with how it made his music come alive again. I told him the price, and I saw him fight to straighten the reflexive disgusted look on his face. Still, he actually said they were worth it.

 

He heard his music like never before, and was transported to another world inside his head. The thing is...what price would you be willing to put on that? What about the person who collects art? Who knows what emotions each piece draws from him? 

 

I've been listening to The Lumineers for the last hour or so from an Etymotic HF5, an iem I didn't know I liked until recently, and I was grooving and singing at the top of my lungs with the music. It was just a reminder of what this hobby is supposed to be about.

post #2098 of 6720
Quote:
Originally Posted by eke2k6 View Post

 

Hm. I'll make one recommendation: try out the Vsonic GR07 (bass edition or MKII is your choice). I think it's the best deal in portable audio under $500, and its sound signature is damn close to perfection in terms of balance without being anemic. It works well for literally everything, and will be a good place to exit head-fi.

 

As for diminishing returns, I understand. I think your (and Unity's) perspective is that "it costs so much money. Why isn't it giving me an orgasm?" And there's nothing wrong with that. Heck, the difference between Beats and an LCD-3 isn't objectively large enough to command the massive price difference. However, this is a subjective hobby, where music is the drug, and the gear should only be the means of administration. In the same way that we all prefer different types of music, we will ultimately prefer different aspects of audio presentation. For some, it will be the sound signature. For some, it is the detail, refinement, PRAT, and other audiophile words. For others, it will be how neutral they think the gear is.

 

All in all, you're right not to spend your money on something you think isn't worth it. 

I think I'm slightly different. I'm willing to spent the money if I can hear the difference that I want to hear, if that make sense. But so far, the only thing that's satisfying me is the isolation. I can EQ the treble. I'm still undecided if I like the bass. But I'm going to say no for now.

 

I was told that the bass of GR07 bass edition doesn't go as deep as FXZ200. That's why I didn't bother to buy one to try it out.

post #2099 of 6720
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mini0510 View Post

I think I'm slightly different. I'm willing to spent the money if I can hear the difference that I want to hear, if that make sense. But so far, the only thing that's satisfying me is the isolation. I can EQ the treble. I'm still undecided if I like the bass. But I'm going to say no for now.

 

I was told that the bass of GR07 bass edition doesn't go as deep as FXZ200. That's why I didn't bother to buy one to try it out.

 

If the IE800, K3003, etc didn't do it for you, I'm afraid one of your parents listened to the SR-007 or SR-009 while you were yet in the womb. You'll just have to go straight to that route.

 

In all seriousness, try to head to the next head-fi meet in your area to audition gear first.

 

The GR07 actually goes slightly deeper. I've felt it move air at 10hz with sinegen. If it's sub-bass you want, the MH1C gives that in spades while keeping the mids clearer than the FXZ-100's. Here:

 

http://www.head-fi.org/t/646964/review-jvc-fxz-100-fun-o-phile

 

It may/may not apply to the z200, but take from it what you can. 

 

Oh, and the review was done with the MKII, so the bass edition may be better suited to your tastes.

post #2100 of 6720
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eugguy View Post

I actually find them more similar than different. A lot of substance in the mids, similar bass response in the upper mid-bass region. Highs in the CKS1000 are more sibilant to say the least. The ASG2 sounds more complete and full to my ears. I can even see the CKS1000 almost being a budget option for the ASG2. The CKS1000 does get good reviews in general in the HF community. The fit of the CKS however isn't my cup of tea, coffee, or any other beverage. ASG2 is an amazing value. There has to be a reason why it is getting compared to the upper tier of universals/mid-tier customs.

 

Cool - I've got me some budget asg2's lol! Interesting impressions - thanks. Btw, when I first got my 1k's, they did at times verge on sibilant. Now though I have quite a few hours on them, and although I'd say that the treble is still aggressive, I don't detect sibilance any more and I am really loving them. As far as fit goes, I found some tips that work really well for me with the 1k's, so that's covered as well. The asg2's (and some of the other big boys) are perpetually on my radar though for when I win the lottery lol. For now the 1k's (and h200's) will have to keep me happy :). Thanks again.

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)