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 146

post #2176 of 6767
Reverse psychology isn't bad either ;-)
post #2177 of 6767
Quote:
Originally Posted by eke2k6 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by music_4321 View Post

 

Get yourself a bleeding pair of PFs if you really want / need a proper R (and specially Inks) seal of approval, I say! NOW!

 

The abomination  anomaly?

 

No, "anomaly" ain't quite the right term; the politically correct term would be "an acquired taste"; the official, no-nonsense term—found on newspapers, audio journals, dissertations, the Encyclopaedia Britannica & ancient Japanese manuscripts—would be "The Abominations".

post #2178 of 6767
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gintaras View Post


then sell your 1+2 and 334 :-P


For what? I love the other too, It's just the ASG-2 bring me much more happiness

Have you tried ASG-2 yourself ?

I guess you really like the 1+2

But how about the other? You just can't make the other love your stuff

That's why there are head-fi so people can choose which one suit his/her preference

post #2179 of 6767

I finally got off work and read Rin's writeup... Man, maybe it's just me, but it seems like that guy derives waaaaaay too much enjoyment from being snarky and negative to give him too much credence. Misanthropy + measurement equipment + negative expectation bias =/= good science, IMO. Can't speak much to the technical aspects of his measurements, but I definitely find his attitude off-putting. JM2C, natch. 

post #2180 of 6767
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theogenes View Post

I finally got off work and read Rin's writeup... Man, maybe it's just me, but it seems like that guy derives waaaaaay too much enjoyment from being snarky and negative to give him too much credence. Misanthropy + measurement equipment + negative expectation bias =/= good science, IMO. Can't speak much to the technical aspects of his measurements, but I definitely find his attitude off-putting. JM2C, natch. 
It's not just you.
post #2181 of 6767
Apparently no one in this thread watches or cares about Top Gear. I should have gotten some other IEMs that come with a classier crowd.
post #2182 of 6767

I watch and love Top Gear... just not all that up to date.

post #2183 of 6767
Quote:
Originally Posted by eke2k6 View Post

It's not the scientific parts. The graphs are welcome, though the FR strikes me as erroneous in the bass and upper treble.

What is troubling is this:





tuner.jpg

Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but isn't <60hz considered sub-bass?


Then,




¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Quote:
Originally Posted by vwinter View Post

Personally just looking at the frequency response charts, I can at least say I heard 200hz - 11khz just about how it's graphed there.

Edited: down to 200, my mistake.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tinyman392 View Post

Mids and treble measure as I'd expect them to, the treble isn't forward as people say it is, still controlled and restrained, but not restrained to the point where it becomes problematic  The bass on the other hand...  Well, that's what looks odd to me. 

Quote:
Originally Posted by gnarlsagan View Post

It'd be pretty terrible if this pair was somehow defective just like Tyll's. I have to say though that I heard the bass to sound pretty much like the graph. I don't think if would sound as rolled off as it looks, since the mids and highs are comparatively less emphasized. The bass at 60Hz looks to be about as emphasized as the mids peak.

Quote:
Originally Posted by eke2k6 View Post

Exactly. A 20db drop off below 100hz? 

Please.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kyuuketsuki View Post

The problem with the treble is the roll off, which it isn't. It is more extended than that. Most of it is OK, but dropping off before 20k is definitely not the case. 

And yeah, the bass is definitely head scratching. 

Quote:
Originally Posted by gnarlsagan View Post

Well the drivers aren't matching, and the better driver with less roll off isn't so bad. Would you say that if both drivers measured like the good one then it'd look closer to what you're hearing?

Quote:
Originally Posted by eke2k6 View Post

I didn't notice the peach line. Yeah it's closer, but I clearly feel movement at 15hz, which isn't shown on the graph.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tinyman392 View Post

This one doesn't look defective.  It actually has more treble than the UE 900 which is something that Tyll spoke positively about, so the highs and mids aren't defective, they actually match what I heard.  I've seen a pattern similar to Rin's regarding the bass on my 1.2.  It didn't show a roll off, but did show a mismatch.  It turned out that the porting that's done to the driver was clogged in one driver, but not the other.  What it can't explain is the sudden roll off at 100-150 Hz (depending on left or right driver).  My 1.3 are matched a little better than your pair as well. 






A roll off starting at 100-150 Hz?  That seems well off about the measurements.  From what I heard, the ASG-2's bass sounds similar to that of the ASG-1 (rev 3) which I assure you doesn't roll off. 


Well, the roll off does start around 8 kHz, but stays extended through the 10 kHz before it drops around 12 (?) kHz.  The treble is exactly how I heard it when I demoed it, the issue is, like many have stated, the bass.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kyuuketsuki View Post

I meant to near nonexistence. The treble extension is there and exists well to 20k. It might not be prominent or forward, it is still noticeable. It struck me as odd, though definitely not as odd as the bass roll off which seems completely off. 

Quote:
Originally Posted by tinyman392 View Post

Yes, it does extend to 20kHz, the raw measurements show that. 

Wait? So are the measurements representative of my issues? 😐
post #2184 of 6767
Quote:
Originally Posted by D K A View Post


For what? I love the other too, It's just the ASG-2 bring me much more happiness
Have you tried ASG-2 yourself ?
I guess you really like the 1+2
But how about the other? You just can't make the other love your stuff
That's why there are head-fi so people can choose which one suit his/her preference

Good to see I m not the only crazy dude to own and like 334, 1plus2, and asg-2. biggrin.gif

While I don't consider asg-2 to be as all rounded and technically competent as the other two, it is still very much enjoyable. ALso, I prefer the asg2 over IE800 which to me is the closest comparison in terms of sound signature and technical capability.
post #2185 of 6767
Quote:
Originally Posted by kkcc View Post


Good to see I m not the only crazy dude to own and like 334, 1plus2, and asg-2. biggrin.gif

While I don't consider asg-2 to be as all rounded and technically competent as the other two, it is still very much enjoyable. ALso, I prefer the asg2 over IE800 which to me is the closest comparison in terms of sound signature and technical capability.

 

Which considering that the IE800 is almost twice the price is impressive in itself, even if you, personally, don't find them as technically competent as your other two TOTL. But the fact that a $550 IEM is even comparable to 1K+ TOTL IEMs is impressive really. 

 

FWIW I found the 1+2s to be a higher technical echelon too... just not $700 better. IF I had the spare money to burn, I'd probably get that and a reference monitor. Unfortunately I don't so I'm currently happy with my budget RE400s and my ASG-2s.

post #2186 of 6767
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnityIsPower View Post












Wait? So are the measurements representative of my issues? 😐

 

What were your problems specifically?  They should all be represented in the graphs unless a) something odd is going on acoustically between you and the ASG and/or b) measurements are off. 


Edited by tinyman392 - 7/31/13 at 9:35pm
post #2187 of 6767
Coming from GR07's

Found bass slow/soft/blurry/flabby/bloated('port close<--->full blast' just sounded wrong to me), mids and highs good not great(enjoyed vocals the most), highs non-fatiguing/missing detail.

Overall, rather stay with GR07's, not happy with ASG 2's.

http://www.head-fi.org/t/664613/review-aurisonics-asg-2-plus-sd3-1plus2-tg334-senn-ie800-flat-4-sui-rdb-2v1/1995#post_9647888
Edited by UnityIsPower - 8/1/13 at 8:33am
post #2188 of 6767
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnityIsPower View Post

Coming from GR07's

Found bass slow/soft/blurry/flabby/bloated(just sounded wrong to me), mids and highs good not great(enjoyed vocals the most), highs non-fatiguing/missing detail.

Overall, rather stay with GR07's, not happy with ASG 2's.

 

You got a signature that wasn't for you.  The GR07 is close to neutral, the ASG-2 is nowhere near there.  I think that's where all your problems stemmed from.  The ASG-2 was never made to be an "accurate" phone, rather a musical one.  You are a lot like me, you prefer something that's closer to accurate, a lot of people do.  There is also the crowd that likes their headphones to be colored and musical, different in a sense. That being said, I think your problems stem from sound preference rather than an actual problem with the IEM.  You were looking for a specific sound, and didn't get it. 

 

With that said, the bass can't be explained because the graph is off on the bass regions.  Looking at the measurements I do not see blurry, flabby or bloated, I find light, soft and inadequate quantity.  Point number one is that your subjective analysis doesn't match the objective data for the bass.  Something happened to the ASG-2, I can feel it that made the measurements look off.  I'll agree that the bass is slower, if you turn it down, I wouldn't say bloated or flabby.  You'll have to explain more on the mids and highs not being so great.  Where, why, how?  The highs are non-fatiguing, I did make that statement, I also made the statement that they were backgrounded a bit signature-wise.  The measurements do show missing detailing as you extend higher.  It may be that the fact that the treble is recessed a little that makes it appear to lack detail as well. 


Edited by tinyman392 - 7/31/13 at 9:54pm
post #2189 of 6767
"I find light, soft and inadequate quantity."

Yes with ports closed, but still sounds off. Opening ports then starts heading towards bloated and flabby.

Mids: I say good in that they sound clear(vocals) as you listen up from the bass. Maybe it's just the contrast that gives me that impression.

Highs: Yes, non fatiguing and missing detail.

"Point number one is that your subjective analysis doesn't match the objective data for the bass." How?
Edited by UnityIsPower - 7/31/13 at 10:31pm
post #2190 of 6767
Quote:
Originally Posted by D K A View Post

 

I guess you really like the 1+2

But how about the other? You just can't make the other love your stuff

 

Yes to the first

No to the second

:-D

 

i just share my impressions and not asking anyone to love anything.

 

i find it weird when people pick comparisons like this and make others believe in what might be untrue.

let me explain, i saw many people doubting 1+2 and putting them against some cheaper IEMs claiming the premia was not worth. it led me to purchase some IEMs which otherwise i would not. later when i got audition of 1+2 i realized how stupid i was believing all those opinions.

 

see my point better now?

 

NB: there is no invitation to like what i have but there is no sense putting bold statements that might happen to be just incorrect. Reference Monitors from UE (quickly auditioned by me thanks to James444) sounded dead clean, neutral BUT soooooooo boring and lifeless that i would not take them. HOWEVER some other people would marvel at them and most likely these people would never look at ASG2 or SD3.


Edited by Gintaras - 7/31/13 at 10:20pm
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)