Latest Thread Images

asg2.5.jpg
Capture+_2017-05-13-21-15-22.png
Capture+_2017-05-13-21-15-42.png
20170515_014934.jpg
20170515_015008.jpg
IMG_9662.png
IMG_9663.png IMAG0359.jpg 20160523_180432.jpg IMAG0349.jpg IMAG0348.jpg IMAG0352.jpg IMAG0374.jpg IMAG0420_1.jpg 13927455031918878710.png IMAG0397.jpg 20170307_185955.jpg 20170301_165734.jpg 20170307_190046.jpg 20170210_130841.jpg
See full thread gallery...
[REVIEW] Aurisonics ASG-2 & 2.5 (with many comparisons)
Sep 30, 2013 at 12:33 PM Post #3,676 of 7,021
inks said:
James graph is misleading as the same study shows another graph that shows little variance when faced with more data. 

Even a layman can know what sounds good, no need for credentials.
Click to expand...


Interesting, more data as in more subjects tested or more testing done on the same subjects?

Yea, but personal preference will dictate the extent to which "good" can be seen as a constant. The IE800 should be a personal example of that for you, no? That's why the ideas that are coming out in terms of testing this seemingly flittering concept of "good" are so interesting. It's also why what's currently seen as good might be uprooted to some degree later on.
 
Sep 30, 2013 at 12:46 PM Post #3,677 of 7,021
vwinter said:
Interesting, more data as in more subjects tested or more testing done on the same subjects?

Yea, but personal preference will dictate the extent to which "good" can be seen as a constant. The IE800 should be a personal example of that for you, no? That's why the ideas that are coming out in terms of testing this seemingly flittering concept of "good" are so interesting. It's also why what's currently seen as good might be uprooted to some degree later on.
Click to expand...


If people were given a flat speaker as a baseline for "good", and then asked to match that sound to an iem, then we would have a lot less variance in terms of what people deem to be "good". Sure there'd still be variance, but not as much as we see here.

Inks, could you be more specific? What you're saying sounds interesting but I don't know what you're referring to lol.
 
Sep 30, 2013 at 12:49 PM Post #3,678 of 7,021
inks said:
James graph is misleading as the same study shows another graph that shows little variance when faced with more data. 

Even a layman can know what sounds good, no need for credentials.
Click to expand...


"More data" becomes irrelevant when you are the one with the 10db hearing spike at 2k.

It's like having a drug that causes spontaneous castration in .001% of patients. It's still significant.
 
Sep 30, 2013 at 12:57 PM Post #3,680 of 7,021
2-4k regions are the most perceptable, but in terms of acoustics theres no spike there but a dip, degree based on the individual but not huge variances
 
Sep 30, 2013 at 1:08 PM Post #3,681 of 7,021
inks said:
2-4k regions are the most perceptable, but in terms of acoustics theres no spike there but a dip, degree based on the individual but not huge variances
Click to expand...


What would you say is not huge? We trouble ourselves with nanodetails here lol. Also eke brings up a good point, even one in ten people with an outlying result would make a difference in a forum like this, especially depending on the loudness of said individual lol.
 
Sep 30, 2013 at 1:10 PM Post #3,682 of 7,021
gnarlsagan said:
If people were given a flat speaker as a baseline for "good", and then asked to match that sound to an iem, then we would have a lot less variance in terms of what people deem to be "good". Sure there'd still be variance, but not as much as we see here.

Inks, could you be more specific? What you're saying sounds interesting but I don't know what you're referring to lol.
Click to expand...


That's kind of my point though. You'd be giving them "good" rather than testing the variance of what could be considered good.

He's referring to the law of large numbers, kind of invariably, but exactly in reference to which part of the experiment and the data was my question too.
 
Sep 30, 2013 at 1:19 PM Post #3,683 of 7,021
You guys need to get the Cardas EM 813 in this discussion. A well burned-in Cardas is amazing! I haven't heard the other earphones you are comparing except for the Aurisonics, but the Cardas easily competes with the ASG-2 (and I'm a huge fan of the ASG-2).
 
Sep 30, 2013 at 1:21 PM Post #3,684 of 7,021
ericp10 said:
You guys need to get the Cardas EM 813 in this discussion. A well burned-in Cardas is amazing! I haven't heard the other earphones you are comparing except for the Aurisonics, but the Cardas easily competes with the ASG-2 (and I'm a huge fan of the ASG-2).
Click to expand...


Eke has one on the way :D

But it's not like we really talk about IEMs in this thread anyway. :p
 
Sep 30, 2013 at 1:28 PM Post #3,685 of 7,021
There's variance here cause of bias, reading impressions and posting them already skews things a lot, simple as that. The part where users rated the flatter headphones higher was always consistent.

The variation from what I remember seeing was no more than 6db.
 
Sep 30, 2013 at 1:35 PM Post #3,686 of 7,021
vwinter said:
That's kind of my point though. You'd be giving them "good" rather than testing the variance of what could be considered good.

He's referring to the law of large numbers, kind of invariably, but exactly in reference to which part of the experiment and the data was my question too.
Click to expand...


Yeah I don't disagree with you. With speakers, what is considered good seems to have less variance than iems imo. It's easier for people to say "this is a flat set-up and this sounds nice." So matching iems to a speaker base line makes sense.

I'm not sure how one could test for a variance in iem preferences without a base line like that. It'd be interesting have more data though, that's for sure.
 
Sep 30, 2013 at 1:50 PM Post #3,687 of 7,021
gnarlsagan said:
Yeah I don't disagree with you. With speakers, what is considered good seems to have less variance than iems imo. It's easier for people to say "this is a flat set-up and this sounds nice." So matching iems to a speaker base line makes sense.

I'm not sure how one could test for a variance in iem preferences without a base line like that. It'd be interesting have more data though, that's for sure.
Click to expand...


No given baseline? With a lot of effort lol.

Do it like an eye exam. Don't tell them anything, then a ton of "Better or Worse?"
I dunno, I didn't go into science. I feel like Dr. Olive is making an attempt at something in reference to this.
 
Sep 30, 2013 at 2:34 PM Post #3,688 of 7,021
Got the ASG-2's in the mail today and I am happy to say that I am impressed. They are a far cry from the auditory abomination known as the ASG-1 (version 1). They also are able to sit in my concha like a real custom which didn't quite work out with the ASG-1 so I think that there was ergonomic tweaking done with the universal body. Hats off to Dale at Aurisonics for creating such a beast of an iem. So far I listened to Daft Punk and The Eagles. The ASG-2's easily got me involved in the music. I put on the single flange TF10 tips and I got a great fit with great sound right off the bat. I can unequivocally say that these are the best sounding telephone receivers I have ever heard!
 
Sep 30, 2013 at 3:25 PM Post #3,689 of 7,021
rip n' burn said:
  Got the ASG-2's in the mail today and I am happy to say that I am impressed. They are a far cry from the auditory abomination known as the ASG-1 (version 1). They also are able to sit in my concha like a real custom which didn't quite work out with the ASG-1 so I think that there was ergonomic tweaking done with the universal body. Hats off to Dale at Aurisonics for creating such a beast of an iem. So far I listened to Daft Punk and The Eagles. The ASG-2's easily got me involved in the music. I put on the single flange TF10 tips and I got a great fit with great sound right off the bat. I can unequivocally say that these are the best sounding telephone receivers I have ever heard!
Click to expand...

 
LOL. Nice. I would have to agree with that statement.
 
Oct 1, 2013 at 1:06 AM Post #3,690 of 7,021
rip n' burn said:
Got the ASG-2's in the mail today and I am happy to say that I am impressed. They are a far cry from the auditory abomination known as the ASG-1 (version 1). They also are able to sit in my concha like a real custom which didn't quite work out with the ASG-1 so I think that there was ergonomic tweaking done with the universal body. Hats off to Dale at Aurisonics for creating such a beast of an iem. So far I listened to Daft Punk and The Eagles. The ASG-2's easily got me involved in the music. I put on the single flange TF10 tips and I got a great fit with great sound right off the bat. I can unequivocally say that these are the best sounding telephone receivers I have ever heard!
Click to expand...

Thumbs up!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 6 (members: 0, guests: 6)
Back
Top