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 159

post #2371 of 6743
Thanks kyu.

Has Rin ever messed up on a graph? Doesn't he also listen to them before writing his conclusion? If he did and they sounded great, I would think he would catch the oddness.
post #2372 of 6743
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnityIsPower View Post

Thanks kyu.

http://beatsantique.bandcamp.com/album/collide

Track # 2. How do you hear the ASG 2's perform overall? Anything seem odd with the bass?

I listened to it, and granted, I'm not sure about what I was suppose to hear but it sounded fine to me.

 

Here's another track with deep bass, a classic dance track from the 80's - the ASG2 just shows off the bass extremely well, deep and extended when needed, never distorted. I'm quite use to this song as I played it hundreds of times over a decade of djing. It was a popular song in the club I worked in.I also played it on the radio and of course in a fairly good home system that I unfortunately don't have anymore.

 

As for the other musical elements, one feels as if they are listening to full size headphones, there's a dynamic spread to the song, with the highs hitting the  high notes without being sibilant, the vocals coming through crisp and clean. The drum machine has the right ****, and notes throughout with the right decay, as I would have heard it back on my 12" vinyl record back in the day. 

post #2373 of 6743
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnityIsPower View Post

Thanks kyu.

Has Rin ever messed up on a graph? Doesn't he also listen to them before writing his conclusion? If he did and they sounded great, I would think he would catch the oddness.

Who knows, the problem there as I see it is a lack of healthy skepticism in regard to experimental results, to not even making a note to question either the results or the test subject if the there was anecdotal "evidence" to the contrary.

Edit:
The numbers themselves are fact but they only reflect test setup, conditions, and subjects, and as such are only a mirror, or maybe even a vessel.
Edited by vwinter - 8/2/13 at 8:37am
post #2374 of 6743
Elaborate vwinter.
post #2375 of 6743
There's nothing to elaborate on really. I could reword it if you like.
post #2376 of 6743

The point being - if I may presume, that graphs shouldn't be treated as sole representative of an IEM.

 

An important thing to note here, is a graph is all fine and well but we all seem to forget that all our ears have different FR, we're all different ages, are at different levels of hearing loss, and all have different preferences.

 

One set of Graphs under one set of conditions can only tell so much relevant information as far as whether we'd like an IEM or not, the most useful of which would likely be driver matching.

post #2377 of 6743

I do not like it when Rin appears in an IEM thread. I respect everyone is entitled to an opinion, the issue is that you get 20 pages of distracting non-consensus. Would much rather all such posts were spun off to sound science and leave the rest of us happy to soak up subjective personal opinions to it in the equipment forums!

 

Anyway then, are there any more comparisons against the IEM in my sig? Not a lot in this thread beyond cursory mentions...

Thanks

post #2378 of 6743
Soooo from now on... "He who shall not be named?"

I wish I could help with the comparisons. Maybe someone will come along who has those and the ASG-2.
post #2379 of 6743
Quote:
Originally Posted by LFC_SL View Post

I do not like it when Rin appears in an IEM thread. I respect everyone is entitled to an opinion, the issue is that you get 20 pages of distracting non-consensus. Would much rather all such posts were spun off to sound science and leave the rest of us happy to soak up subjective personal opinions to it in the equipment forums!

 

Anyway then, are there any more comparisons against the IEM in my sig? Not a lot in this thread beyond cursory mentions...

Thanks

 

I would try, but it has been a good 1-1.5years since I last demoed the PFE232 and as such I don't put much stock in my sonic memory. Heck, I barely remember what they sound like. I do remember liking them, and am deeply saddened that they won't be making IEMs anymore, but that's as far as I'm willing to go. 

 

I do believe there is a ASG-1 or 2 comparison with the Heir 4.Ai. If it is the ASG-1, it should be more or less the same except with more treble as the same full range driver sits in the ASG-2. It isn't perfect in that case, but it should provide you with at least a cursory idea of how the two headphones compare. 

post #2380 of 6743
Quote:
Originally Posted by LFC_SL View Post

I do not like it when Rin appears in an IEM thread. I respect everyone is entitled to an opinion, the issue is that you get 20 pages of distracting non-consensus. Would much rather all such posts were spun off to sound science and leave the rest of us happy to soak up subjective personal opinions to it in the equipment forums!

 

Anyway then, are there any more comparisons against the IEM in my sig? Not a lot in this thread beyond cursory mentions...

Thanks

 

I think that even with all the disagreement Rin provides a net positive for the headphone/iem community. We're able to learn more about what makes headphones sound the way they do, and our increased understanding gives us more authority with reviews and more importantly with criticism. We're empowered to hold headphone designers to a higher standard, because we can have actual evidenced reasons as to why a product should perform better. And so churning out poorly designed products becomes a much riskier endeavor. 

 

At the very least people are able to make more informed buying decisions with Rin's info. Too many subjective opinions often end up having a circle-jerky quality about them, like what the Sparrow experienced with the SM3. I'm not saying graphs are the last word in sound evaluation, but it's nice to be able to cut through the bologna sometimes.   

post #2381 of 6743
Quote:
Originally Posted by dnullify View Post

The point being - if I may presume, that graphs shouldn't be treated as sole representative of an IEM.

 

An important thing to note here, is a graph is all fine and well but we all seem to forget that all our ears have different FR, we're all different ages, are at different levels of hearing loss, and all have different preferences.

 

One set of Graphs under one set of conditions can only tell so much relevant information as far as whether we'd like an IEM or not, the most useful of which would likely be driver matching.

 

Not exactly but you make a lot of good points here that shouldn't be overlooked.

 

What, I think (lol), my main point was, if I can remember now, is that we should consider to look at the numbers not just in a vacuum but also in light of the unique set of circumstances that surround their creation, and maybe so should Rin. tongue.gif

 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by gnarlsagan View Post

I think that even with all the disagreement Rin provides a net positive for the headphone/iem community.

 

I agree with this statement entirely.


Edited by vwinter - 8/2/13 at 5:02pm
post #2382 of 6743
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by gnarlsagan View Post

 

I think that even with all the disagreement Rin provides a net positive for the headphone/iem community. 

 

I agree. I just wish he'd be less snarky with his analyses, and I'm not just referring to the one he did for the G2.

 

Imagine if scientific papers were written like his blog:

 

 

Quote:
Conclusion:
Specimen A, as shown by the data, is far superior to specimen B. In fact, superior does not begin to describe the difference. No, Specimen A makes specimen B look like a HIV patient with muscular dystrophy.
post #2383 of 6743
Quote:
Originally Posted by eke2k6 View Post

 

I agree. I just wish he'd be less snarky with his analyses, and I'm not just referring to the one he did for the G2.

 

Imagine if scientific papers were written like his blog:

 

 

 

LOL agreed. Not necessary unless his goal includes achieving  some level of notoriety.  

post #2384 of 6743
Quote:
Originally Posted by dnullify View Post

The point being - if I may presume, that graphs shouldn't be treated as sole representative of an IEM.

 

An important thing to note here, is a graph is all fine and well but we all seem to forget that all our ears have different FR, we're all different ages, are at different levels of hearing loss, and all have different preferences.

 

One set of Graphs under one set of conditions can only tell so much relevant information as far as whether we'd like an IEM or not, the most useful of which would likely be driver matching.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LFC_SL View Post

I do not like it when Rin appears in an IEM thread. I respect everyone is entitled to an opinion, the issue is that you get 20 pages of distracting non-consensus. Would much rather all such posts were spun off to sound science and leave the rest of us happy to soak up subjective personal opinions to it in the equipment forums!

 

Anyway then, are there any more comparisons against the IEM in my sig? Not a lot in this thread beyond cursory mentions...

Thanks

Quote:
Originally Posted by gnarlsagan View Post

 

I think that even with all the disagreement Rin provides a net positive for the headphone/iem community. We're able to learn more about what makes headphones sound the way they do, and our increased understanding gives us more authority with reviews and more importantly with criticism. We're empowered to hold headphone designers to a higher standard, because we can have actual evidenced reasons as to why a product should perform better. And so churning out poorly designed products becomes a much riskier endeavor. 

 

At the very least people are able to make more informed buying decisions with Rin's info. Too many subjective opinions often end up having a circle-jerky quality about them, like what the Sparrow experienced with the SM3. I'm not saying graphs are the last word in sound evaluation, but it's nice to be able to cut through the bologna sometimes.   

 

 

Some good points and definitely food for thought.

Here are a few things I've often seen over the years happening in many, many threads:

 

  • People who like the same phone suddenly become mates / buddies — not always a good thing for those looking to get a genuine consensus on the SQ of said phone. Why? Buddies will often have a hard time disagreeing with one another. The more buddies, the worse this can be for those looking for unbiased impressions.

 

  • People are easily influenced by others, ie if several people say X phone sounds this way, then now my ears tell me this phone sounds just like that.

 

  • Several people often do pretty well at parroting, ie just repeating what others have said — some of these people post a hell of a lot and come across as knowledgeable when often what they're doing is just picking up bits from here and there—ah, all that impressive audio jargon!—and doing a fine job at regurgitating. Some of these people can be more influential than many would realise.

 

  • If someone has an agenda—unfortunately not so infrequent—they will try to bash or praise a particular phone; this isn't as obvious as it may seem. There are perfectly nice and seemingly credible people who do have these agendas and have an influence on people; some of them are very close to effectively being what we've come to know as shills. Some of these people have got free samples or very generous discounts, often in exchange for a so-called review (which, of course, is usually quite favourable) or, if not a review, just a constant presence in several threads 'helping' those who, er, seek help, even when some of these people are not asking about that specific phone / product.

 

There's more, quite a bit more, but I'll leave it at that.


I personally don't have a problem with Rin's graphs—and appreciate the work he's put into them—, not even with some of his very harsh comments. The big problem I see is the people who take these graphs / measurements and comments, make them their own and start spreading what I'd call the "gospel of Rin", which then becomes something not unlike a new religion (I'm not trying to be remotely funny or witty here). We have Sonove graphs, Tyll's (InnerFidelity's) graphs, Golden Ears' graphs, purrin's graphs, etc., but we don't often see a Sonove / Tyll / Golden Ears / purrin religion, although they all have their (big) fans / followers, too.

 


Edited by music_4321 - 8/2/13 at 6:00pm
post #2385 of 6743
Quote:
Originally Posted by music_4321 View Post

 

 

Some good points and definitely food for thought.

Here are a few things I've often seen over the years happening in many, many threads:

 

  • People who like the same phone suddenly become mates / buddies — not always a good thing for those looking to get a genuine consensus on the SQ of said phone. Why? Buddies will often have a hard time disagreeing with one another. The more buddies, the worse this can be for those looking for unbiased impressions.

 

  • People are easily influenced by others, ie if several people say X phone sounds this way, then now my ears tell me this phone sounds just like that.

 

  • Several people often do pretty well at parroting, ie just repeating what others have said — some of these people post a hell of a lot and come across as knowledgeable when often what they're doing is just picking up bits from here and there—ah, all that impressive audio jargon!—and doing a fine job at regurgitating. Some of these people can be more influential than many would realise.

 

  • If someone has an agenda—unfortunately not so infrequent—they will try to bash or praise a particular phone; this isn't as obvious as it may seem. There are perfectly nice and seemingly credible people who do have these agendas and have an influence on people; some of them are very close to effectively being what we've come to know as shills. Some of these people have got free samples or very generous discounts, often in exchange for a so-called review (which, of course, is usually quite favourable) or, if not a review, just a constant presence in several threads 'helping' those who, er, seek help, even when some of these people are not asking about that specific phone / product.

 

There's more, quite a bit more, but I'll leave it at that.


I personally don't have a problem with Rin's graphs—and appreciate the work he's put into them—, not even with some of his very harsh comments. The big problem I see is the people who take these graphs / measurements and comments, make them their own and start spreading what I'd call the "gospel of Rin", which then becomes something not unlike a new religion (I'm not trying to be remotely funny or witty here). We have Sonove graphs, Tyll's (InnerFidelity's) graphs, Golden Ears' graphs, purrin's graphs, etc., but we don't often see a Sonove / Tyll / Golden Ears / purrin religion, although they all have their (big) fans / followers, too.

 

 

Extremely well written and couldn't have said it better myself based on my observation on the HF community  even before I joined as a posting member.  I also welcome and value positive and negative impressions/opinion in review/impression thread to give readers a broader and more complete idea, AS LONG AS those are really his/her own independent opinion.

 

Can't stand the parrots or disciples as you mentioned who induce the sound/performance based simply some Rin's graph....  

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)