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 62

post #916 of 6737
Seems his hitting the emails atm then. Happy to hear idsy!
post #917 of 6737
*uncontrollably sobbing*
But I don't want to wait a monnnnnnth...

Is he responding to information requests or just sending out shipping notices unprovoked.
post #918 of 6737
Nah I emailed Andy last night. He told me about two weeks ago that mine was shipping at the end of last week, so i followed up on Sunday. So true to his word he's about on schedule. So from the time you send your phones in, I'd expect. 2/3 week turnaround.
post #919 of 6737
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnityIsPower View Post

Shall we buy matching t-shirts? I know this guy....

x-Large, blue color.

 

 

 

 

 

 


Proud owner of an ASG-2

EMAIL CONFIRM 6-24-13


Edited by Carlsan - 6/24/13 at 8:53am
post #920 of 6737
Quote:
Originally Posted by vwinter View Post

*uncontrollably sobbing*
But I don't want to wait a monnnnnnth...

Is he responding to information requests or just sending out shipping notices unprovoked.

He sent me a invoice. Says about 2 weeks till they are ready.

Carlsan, lol. Now we are talking mate. I was thinking hot pink but blue is good also. 😉
post #921 of 6737
Quote:
Originally Posted by james444 View Post

 

Care to explain the essential difference? wink.gif

Sure!

 

1)If people are truly hearing something different, that implies that the raw data conveyed by the earphone and received by each person's ears and primary auditory cortex in the temporal lobe of the brain is actually different. Whether two examples of the same earphone are performing differently (as can happen), or, each person's ability to hear and process raw sonic information is different from everyone else's.

 

This is a popular idea, but probably in many cases it isn't true (barring defective sets of earphones or poor QC or hearing damaged listeners). But two people hearing, for example, the same set of earphones in a physiologically differently way? Not so much. Why? How we hear is actually very well understood and the way that innovations like cochlear implants have come on the scene proves this. We don't have anything like that for vision, for example, although vision is very, very well understood, too. So, the likelihood that people who perform in normal range on hearing tests actually hear and process the raw data differently is unlikely.

 

2) So, if the raw data is processed more or less the same, then that leaves us with the more subjective idea of what are we attending to, what are attaching importance to, as we sort out that raw data. Here is where, for example, someone may not like hearing the difference between driver types in a hybrid whereas another person may like it or not care. Also, someone may be coming from hearing a very neutral sounding earphone and love that, so how they enjoy a new earphone or what they attend to about its performance will be different than someone coming from a warm, bass-rich earphone to that same new earphone. These are more subjective measures and that's why it's nice to hear from different people's articulate takes--they help us to understand how we ourselves may enjoy a new earphone.

 

I do think people when people try to attribute differences to 1) when it's really 2) then that can be either confusing or a way to push aside valid input on a given earphone. In other words, "oh everyone hears it differently" can be a brush-off, when, in fact, what's really happening is that people are hearing the same thing and giving more or less importance to various qualities of an earphone's performance. What is actually giving us more information then gets misconstrued as incoherence when it's actually valuable.

post #922 of 6737
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kunlun View Post

Sure!

1)If people are truly hearing something different, that implies that the raw data conveyed by the earphone and received by each person's ears and primary auditory cortex in the temporal lobe of the brain is actually different. Whether two examples of the same earphone are performing differently (as can happen), or, each person's ability to hear and process raw sonic information is different from everyone else's.

This is a popular idea, but probably in many cases it isn't true (barring defective sets of earphones or poor QC or hearing damaged listeners). But two people hearing, for example, the same set of earphones in a physiologically differently way? Not so much. Why? How we hear is actually very well understood and the way that innovations like cochlear implants have come on the scene proves this. We don't have anything like that for vision, for example, although vision is very, very well understood, too. So, the likelihood that people who perform in normal range on hearing tests actually hear and process the raw data differently is unlikely.

2) So, if the raw data is processed more or less the same, then that leaves us with the more subjective idea of what are we attending to, what are attaching importance to, as we sort out that raw data. Here is where, for example, someone may not like hearing the difference between driver types in a hybrid whereas another person may like it or not care. Also, someone may be coming from hearing a very neutral sounding earphone and love that, so how they enjoy a new earphone or what they attend to about its performance will be different than someone coming from a warm, bass-rich earphone to that same new earphone. These are more subjective measures and that's why it's nice to hear from different people's articulate takes--they help us to understand how we ourselves may enjoy a new earphone.

I do think people when people try to attribute differences to 1) when it's really 2) then that can be either confusing or a way to push aside valid input on a given earphone. In other words, "oh everyone hears it differently" can be a brush-off, when, in fact, what's really happening is that people are hearing the same thing and giving more or less importance to various qualities of an earphone's performance. What is actually giving us more information then gets misconstrued as incoherence when it's actually valuable.

Agreed that 2) is definitely an issue, but regarding 1), doesn't everyone have a different head related transfer function? I wonder how much ear shape plays into iem sound impressions. Could it be possible that different HRTFs could explain some of the major disagreements here as well?
Edited by gnarlsagan - 6/24/13 at 9:35am
post #923 of 6737
Quote:
Originally Posted by gnarlsagan View Post


Agreed that 2) is definitely an issue, but regarding 1), doesn't everyone have a different head related transfer function? I wonder how much ear shape plays into iem sound impressions. Could it be possible that different HRTFs could explain some of the major disagreements here as well?

 

The answer is not too much unless it is radically different. There are also differences over time that are created from hearing loss. These too have an impact on the first scenario. But in the end, they are physical malformations rather than a change in mental processing. And usually if there is a difference in mental processing the difference is severe. And really these physical malformations, whether it is damaged hearing from going to too many concerts or oddly shaped ear or something similar, the overall differences on hearing isn't that substantial, unless it gets into extreme levels. Is it measurable? Yes. Is it so extreme that two people listening to the same headphone can hear the same headphone completely differently? No. For headphones it is usually something wrong with the fit rather than the ear itself if it is an actual perceivable difference in sound.

 

What is more interesting is learned hearing. What people become accustomed to, which is really #2. I often say people hear differently, and go on to explain how people grow up with different things and that impacts what they perceive as sonically pleasurable or at least desirable. But again, that all has to to with learned personal preference. Everyone has their own preferences and we really can't get around that. 

post #924 of 6737
Quote:
Originally Posted by gnarlsagan View Post


Agreed that 2) is definitely an issue, but regarding 1), doesn't everyone have a different head related transfer function? I wonder how much ear shape plays into iem sound impressions. Could it be possible that different HRTFs could explain some of the major disagreements here as well?


Ah, well, fit issues and ear canal shape are something I should have mentioned, thanks! Fit issues are definitely something to mention, yes. Vaccuum fit and no seal both have their negative effects on sound. But, a good fit is basically a good fit.

 

As for ear canals, you know the acoustics of the ear canal have been studied a lot as well. Actually, Dr. Michael Santucci of Sensaphonics has done a lot of work on it as have many others over the years. Some of that work is proprietary, but much of it is public. There are definite consistencies in which frequencies get eaten and which get exaggerated for people. So, it's something that audio companies can control for and really a minor issue (although maybe a headache for audio engineers). While I don't doubt there may be some variance, it's not a free-for-all (not that you were saying this).


Edited by Kunlun - 6/24/13 at 9:54am
post #925 of 6737
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kunlun View Post

Sure!

 

Fair enough, but you were actually responding to Gintaras saying that "one finds 1+2 too aggressive and detailed, the other one finds 1+2 not enough detailed", to which you replied "Actually, quite a number of people find the 1plus2 to be fatiguing in the treble".

 

In my understanding, you were both talking about subjective impressions ("one finds..." , "people find..."), not objective raw data (1). So I really don't see why you accused him of "being a bit misleading". confused.gif

post #926 of 6737
Thanks for the response guys. Differences in HRTFs are definitely something I've been meaning to learn more about. I don't think it can explain large differences in what people hear, but since a lot of our comparisons focus on minutia I'm still curious as to exact variance. Like can one person's HRTF cause a bump at 1-3khz for example, and if so what is the variance of that bump? One, two dB? More?

Also am I correct in assuming that HRTF variance exists regardless of fit? While fit is definitely issue, I see it as separate from HRTF. The latter would exist under all listening conditions I think.
post #927 of 6737
Quote:
Originally Posted by james444 View Post

 

Fair enough, but you were actually responding to Gintaras saying that "one finds 1+2 too aggressive and detailed, the other one finds 1+2 not enough detailed", to which you replied "Actually, quite a number of people find the 1plus2 to be fatiguing in the treble".

 

In my understanding, you were both talking about subjective impressions ("one finds..." , "people find..."), not objective raw data (1). So I really don't see why you accused him of "being a bit misleading". confused.gif

Not quite! Remember that both 1 and 2 are subjective in the sense that we are not opening up the can of worms that is the debate over external measurements--those worms are yours alone!. Suffice it to say I think he's over-simplified things to make it seem as though different takes cancel each other out whereas I think they are not necessarily in disagreement when read in full (so (1) is the same), just that different folks are listening with different perspectives and with different backgrounds (so (2) is different) and this actually adds to our understanding, rather than leading to no valid information.

post #928 of 6737
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kunlun View Post

Actually, quite a number of people find the 1plus2 to be fatiguing in the treble. Those that don't are usually low-volume listeners. I don't want to exaggerate that, though, as the 1plus2 is a very nice iem. I think you are being a bit misleading to say that people are hearing it completely differently rather than people are listening for different things when they listen to their iems.

yes, i listen at not so loud volume but James found this loud during our meeting. actually concept is simple, you listen loud only when music requires this, otherwise decibels you get in live event are not comparable to damage you will do to your ears with overly loud listening.

no, i did not find 1+2 fatiguing or bright, rather i found very good crossover like blend across the entire range.

however i suppose we talk about ASG2 so i do not grasp why all this talk about other IEMs...

And one more thought, if you have not driven a Ferrari this does not stop it from being an excellent car :-P

talking about IEM my greatest interest is in hearing comparison between ASG2 and InEar StageDiver3 which lie in same price category and wow people having them. i know Sinth most likely hears it the way i would, but ASG collects such rave responses that it makes me wonder what if... of course i could make it easier by taking Audeze or similar but i never liked helmets for wearing despite their superior sound. so i stick to IEM which makes choice more difficult but allows me to keep it truly portable since i do not use IEM at home often and their purpose is mostly travel with me.
Edited by Gintaras - 6/24/13 at 12:02pm
post #929 of 6737
kyuuk, no, people do not hear earphones differently, they hear music differently, it all depends on your hearing and musical background. my friends musicians hear music very different from us, actually i took some learning from them which made my ears open to completely different way of listen, i search for harmony in first place, and not so much about detail or neutral unless we mean by neutral a live like natural sound.
post #930 of 6737
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gintaras View Post

kyuuk, no, people do not hear earphones differently, they hear music differently, it all depends on your hearing and musical background. my friends musicians hear music very different from us, actually i took some learning from them which made my ears open to completely different way of listen, i search for harmony in first place, and not so much about detail or neutral unless we mean by neutral a live like natural sound.

Could you give an example of how this translates to people describing how they hear an IEM or headphone?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Idsynchrono_24 View Post

Nah I emailed Andy last night. He told me about two weeks ago that mine was shipping at the end of last week, so i followed up on Sunday. So true to his word he's about on schedule. So from the time you send your phones in, I'd expect. 2/3 week turnaround.

Gotcha.

@Unity
You made it sound like you got a shipping confirm. I was very jealous lol.
Edited by vwinter - 6/24/13 at 12:08pm
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)