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 141

post #2101 of 6766
Quote:
Originally Posted by eke2k6 View Post

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.

Lol I won't take that as an insult. I guess some other people who commented on the difference between top universals and $1k customs also have that problem. They said 10% difference. I would say 10% - 20% difference too if I didn't EQ

And that's FXZ100 comparison, I haven't seen reviews comparing FXZ200 and GR07 BE.
post #2102 of 6766
Update on impression. ASG-2 seems to articulate more. FXZ200 kind of just mush everything together and you miss some small details. Also ASG seems to have better separation. I'm not sure but I think there's less distortion.
Hard to explain, I'm not even sure myself yet.
post #2103 of 6766

Now I understand why UnityisPower and gnarlsagan didn't like these at all....

 

http://rinchoi.blogspot.com/2013/07/aurisonics-asg-2.html

 

But Ill understand more once I listen which will be soon. 


Edited by Inks - 7/31/13 at 12:24am
post #2104 of 6766

Ouch!

post #2105 of 6766

Talk about low blows....

 

CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 (using IJG JPEG v62), quality = 100

post #2106 of 6766
Looking at the FR it's no wonder I couldn't settle on an eq for the mids. It would be a very complex eq to set by ear. Also I stated earlier that I heard more apparent sub-bass in the ER4S comparatively, and that trait seems to be shown here.

The treble peak seems fit dependent like some have reported. All in all I can't say I'm surprised at the measurements. I'm surprised at myself though that it took me over 10 hours of listening to decide that the ASG-2 had issues I couldn't live with. I would have thought issues like these would be more obvious.
post #2107 of 6766

Less subbass than ER4S....oh my...

post #2108 of 6766
Abandon thread I repeat abandon thread, the Graphstaapo found us. Meet up at the usual rendez vous point.
post #2109 of 6766
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mimouille View Post

Abandon thread I repeat abandon thread, the Graphstaapo found us. Meet up at the usual rendez vous point.

Grab your pitchforks and light your torches!
Let's lynch some hybrids evil_smiley.gif

post #2110 of 6766

No lynching has started......yet. Let's try, for now, to avoid negative measurements / graphs remarks, as this could easily lead to the thread being locked. People in this thread have so far been able to freely express their opinions—good or bad—about this IEM, something not always possible in several dedicated threads.

Out of respect for the thread starter (and quite a few people following this thread) let's not spoil things.

post #2111 of 6766

Yup, no need to make things silly. 

 

Its graphs do look quite poor and there are listeners that coincide with the data, though they were overlooked. It is a new product, the trend is that users are usually very positive at first, but things settle with time. I will be able to chime in completely with listening impressions, just showing what's there for now. 

post #2112 of 6766

i am not a graph believer, i am a believer into my ears wink.gif

 

i know James444 will disagree with me tongue.gif

 

seriously, i 've read through H200 graph comment and to me that meant nothing, i am not tech savvy person so cannot appreciate things i have little understanding about.

anyway, if i would base my decision to purchase H200 exclusively on graphs i would not have H200 today.... but i am happy i pulled a trigger on H200 prior to seeing charts.

 

there is a proverb which is saying: “According to aerodynamic laws, the bumblebee cannot fly. Its body weight is not the right proportion to its wingspan. Ignoring these laws, the bumblebee flies anyway.” biggrin.gif

post #2113 of 6766
Few notes about the graphs... First is the sub bass roll off though expected seems too exaggerated. At proper insertion depth er4 does have more, but the asg-2 isn't as bad as the graph seems to suggest.

Second is the vent... If the bass port was closed I see no reason why there would be any change plugged or not. Seems like a silly second thought to me on Rin's part. He made no indication of that since that vent is meant for the bass port.

third is the fact that these still sound good to my ears. Could they use more sub bass? Yes but that's about my only complaint and hopefully the cross valve mod can fix that.
post #2114 of 6766
The dips in the upper frequency reflect how I had my eq set for eke's pair: 2 and 4.5k. The treble peak is also where I eq'd down around 8k.

As for the sub bass, eke's pair didn't sound close to that. It had a lot of air movement at 20hz, although the peak was centered around 150hz. I wonder if the adjustable bass valve has been compromised on the measured pair. From my understanding, that's what could happen from one that's been over torqued and it wouldn't take much pressure to turn it beyond the stopping points.
post #2115 of 6766
Quote:
Originally Posted by kkcc View Post

Been spending 40 hours or so with my ASG-2 and below are some initial impressions that I also shared with Eke. Need to thank him for his advices on bass port and tips.


Please note my impressions are based on my earlier expectation that it should be compared (and even favorably) with the top iems including the 334 and 1plus2 which I also own. While I agree with most qualities highlighted by Eke in his ASG2 impression, I will focus to add value to the thread by illustrating some shortcomings when compared to top performers that is not apparent to or didn't bothered Eke:


1. Bass - fast for a dynamic driver, but quantity can be too much even at very very low bass port setting. It has a certain subwoofer feel to it - it won't kick in if the track doesn't calls for the lows, but once it kicks it kicks hard, and maybe too hard. This is definitely a basshead's dream or if you listen to music at very noisy environment where bass usually suffer. Midbass is bloated as other mentioned, more so even than the 334 with stock 001 cable.


2. Mids - a presentation which can sound raw/powerful, unsweetened/unrefined, . Works better for singer with raspy voice as it showcase their voice's character but not so good for a more refined voice. Can have some metallic tint in upper mids and often made vocals interesting but unnatural. Also a lot of "sh" sound.


3. Treble - too much sibilance and very metallic. Violin sounds like they are all with steel stings for students.


4. Soundstage - decent width, but quite flat. More like in a small room or recording studio than an expansive stage.


5. Resolution/Details - decent details but with the strong bass/midbass other frequencies can be overpowered and lost. The flat soudstage also cause instruments fighting for space.


I like them more with studio recorded, electronic, western pop type of tracks. Do not like them with classical, live jazz, asian female vocals, opera/musicals type of tracks.


Another observation is that it has a small range of volume that sounded best to me. A bit too low it is lifeless, too high it becomes harsh and noisy.


Still looking to run it in more to tame the treble and get tighten the bass. I figured the metallic tint would still be there and is part of its character and what make it different. I am not used ot it and still need to figure out if I would like it. OVerall it is a vastly fun IEM that reminds me an improved H-200 from TPeos. If you like the H-200's charateristics, ASG-2 would be a very nice upgrade.


Oh, and did I mentioned they look charming? smily_headphones1.gif


I quote my own initial impression.

While they seem to collaborate with the measurement, I must stress these "flaws" can be mitigated by the right tips and insertion depth. The stock clear biflange is really the worst for me with all these flaws I listed.

With the right tips, the ortofon large size for me, (again! It is always yhe ortofon. I guess I should just order 400 pairs and use them forever and ever!! ) these flaws are less apparent and formed the unique character of this IEM that has since grown on me. It gave me a lot of enjoyment and excitement with many tracks.

Of course if I can own only one IEM and can only listen to "reference monitor" type sound, I will avoid the asg2. Glad I have er4 for that and can choose to enjoy this extremely fun sounding IEM.
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)