cosmicholyghost said:

what worrying is that someone mentioned that the AK120II sounds more or less like the iphone5, why need to spend 1000+ usd for a DAP? although the AK100II and AK120II are quite the lookers..

Click to expand...

flymetothemoon said:

  I think you may find your answer from the review that warrenpchi  done for us. He did not use balanced out for this review.

Click to expand...

hifiguy528 said:

  iphone 5 does not sound good.  

Click to expand...

hifiguy528 said:

   
I'm using standard output as well.

Click to expand...

warrenpchi said:

 

Mini Astell&Kern DAP Shoot-Out

As a lot of you might know, @mikemercer and I organized T.H.E. Headphonium this year.  So a lot of our time was spent just making sure everything was running smoothly.
 
We got to see the Astell&Kern booth get set up the day before, but the players weren't there until Friday.  And once T.H.E. Headphonium started, it was clear that a quiet environment simply wasn't going to happen.  Luckily, we got a chance to explain to Owen, James and Jimmy about our situation, and they kindly loaned us one of each unit for after hours impressions.  We supplied our own AK100 Mk2 and AK120 players.  And had the Audio360 AK240 review unit on hand.
 
As it turned out, both Saturday and Sunday evening were chock full of industry get-togethers, so we had very limited time on those nights.  But once T.H.E. Headphonium was over, we spent a considerable portion of the next three days listening and comparing.
 
Here's what happened.
 

---

Equipment & Resources
 
DAPs Compared
 

1. AK100 Mk2
2. AK120
3. AK100II
4. AK120II
5. AK240

 
Tracks Used:
 

1. Steel Dragon - We All Die Young - MP3 - 320 Kbps
2. Taylor Eigsti - Get Your Hopes Up - FLAC - 16/44.1
3. Sarah Jarosz - Ring Them Bells - FLAC - 16/44.1
4. Trashcan Sinatras w/Carly Simon - Should I Pray? - FLAC - 16/44.1
5. Claire Martin - Embraceable You - FLAC - 24/96
6. Vivaldi - Concerto in D Minor (opus 4 no 8) Allegro - DSD (DFF)

 
Output Devices:
 

1. Ultimate Ears Reference Monitor (UERM)

 
I chose the UERM because it's my neutral reference.  Plus, it offered me better isolation than any headphone I've got.  And finally, I felt it better simulated our intended usage - as a portable rig - which is why I didn't start listening to the DAPs as sources (e.g. through a LAu and LCD-X or HD 800 rig).
 
Please note that while I do have a balanced cable for the UERM, I did not test balanced output at all.  Since it's not an output mode that all of the DAPs can support, I felt it best to run single-ended the whole way through.  And honestly, the introduction of any changes in headphones or cables would have resulted in another permutation (i.e. a lot more work).
 

---

 
Methodology
 
Step 1:  Volume/Level Matching
 
This actually took MUCH longer than I anticipated.  It seems simple, but you'd be amazed how long it can take to subjectively match levels between five devices using 6 different tracks of varying genres and file qualities.
 
I began by going through all of the test tracks above to find a comfortable volume level on the AK120 - the device that I am most familiar with.  It had to be loud enough that I felt confident in hearing the most intricate of details, but not loud enough that I would be subjected to too much discomfort.
 
Once I settled on a comfortable volume level with the AK120, I then went back and matched each of the other devices to that volume level.  Here is how they matched up:

 ​

AK100 Mk2​	AK120​	AK100II​	AK120II​	AK240​
41.75​	38.5​	36.5​	36.5​	35.5​

 
* Yes, I am aware that there is no such volume setting as 41.75 on the AK100 Mk2.  There were times when the AK100 Mk2 seemed to match the AK120 exactly at 41.5.  But there were other times when 42 seemed like a better match between the two.  So, I'm simply using 41.75 here as an average of all cases.
 
Step 2:  Absolute Impressions
 
For each track, I listened to every single DAP and jotted down observations about frequency response, detail, separation, staging and imaging.  These impressions were then aggregated into a set of common characteristics that were audible for all tracks.  This allowed me to arrange and/or group DAPs by similarity.
 
Step 3:  Comparative Impressions
 
The sound signature that I was most familiar with was that of the AK120.  The sound signature that I was least familiar with was that of the AK100 Mk2.  But after ABing the AK100 Mk2 against the AK120, I was able to quickly pin down its signature, as both are from the same general family, even if they are rather different.
 
Having been one of the first to review the AK240 in-depth, I was also very familiar with its signature as well.  And while the AK100II and AK120II are relatively new, they retain enough similarity to the AK240 such that I was able to get a pretty good handle on their signatures relatively quickly.  Unfortunately, they were/are similar enough that it took a lot more listening to get a solid bead on the differences between them.
 
Step 4:  Final Impressions
 
Finally, I went through a final track-by-track A/B/C/D/E session to verify, correct or refine any previous impressions.  This last step was pretty easy because the first two sets of impressions were fairly consistent throughout all tracks and DAPs.
 

---

 
Findings
 
As one would expect (and as many of us know) the AK100 Mk2, AK120 and AK240 sound very different from each other.  Here is what I've heard both previously and in gathering these impressions.
 

Warm​	Warm-Neutral​	Neutral to Neutral-Bright​
AK100 Mk2​	AK120​	AK240​
Very warm and boosted low end, most noticeably in the mid bass, which can get woolly on certain tracks.  The mids are slightly recessed, but quite veiled especially in tracks that are sweet and not very bright to begin with.  Highs are distant from upper mids on, and prematurely rolled off.  Detail resolution is moderately good, but separation could be a lot better.  The soundstage is fairly intimate. *versus the AK120:  Moar bass, lower detail resolution, definitely inferior separation, closer staging.	Prominent low end that is north of neutral.  This contributes to a warmer tilt overall, without overdoing it.  The mids are slightly pulled back but not veiled in any way.  The upper mids are never fatiguing, but by the same token they can be soft and splashy (indistinct) during complex percussion.  The highs are reasonably well extended with a very easy-going roll-off. * versus the AK100 Mk2:  Much more balanced, far more detail, more expansive soundstage, and a smoother and more refined signature overall. * versus the AK240:  Warmer sub-bass through lower mids, not necessarily recessed mids but definitely less-forward mids, less extended in the highs, somewhat less detailed but noticeably lesser in separation (especially in the mids).	Balanced and neutral signature throughout, with: tight, accurate and fast bass characteristics; fairly forward mids especially in the human vocal range; slightly elevated highs that are very airy; and good extension in all three axes.  Detail and separation are top-notch, contributing to the outstanding transparency.  Staging is very expansive and holographic.  All of this is tied together with a sense of refinement that I have not encountered in other DAPs. * versus the AK120:  Flatter response, far better detail and separation, more expansive staging, very noticeable boost in transparency and refinement.

 
Once the new AK100II and AK120II were factored in, I was amazed that all of the DAPs sounded different, albeit to varying degrees.  I definitely didn't expect this, as I believed that both the AK100II and AK120II would sound nearly identical - if not identical - to the AK240.  Well, surprise, they didn't!   However, this is not to say that there were huge differences between all of the new units (AK100II/AK120II/AK240), only consistently noticeable ones.  Here's how the new players fit in to scheme of things signature-wise.
 

Warm​	Warm-Neutral​	Neutral to Neutral-Bright​
AK100 Mk2​	AK120​	AK100II​ AK120II​ AK240​

 
Now let's zoom in on the new generation of players to get a look at the finer points of their SQ and presentations.
 

AK100II​	AK120II​	AK240​
In terms of frequency response, the AK100II is very, very close to the AK120 (and the AK120II for that matter).  What it lacks - in minute but consistently noticeable amounts - versus the AK240 are: (a) the uber clarity and coherency found in the AK240 - especially from the mids through the highs; (b) a bit of the AK240's separation prowess; (c) the amazingly holographic soundstage of the AK240; and (d) overall sense of refinement that makes the AK240 "the ultimate."	The AK120II gets even closer to the AK240, but continues to hit shy of the mark.  Like the AK100II, it shares the same basic frequency response as that of the AK240.  It addresses some of the AK100II's shortcomings by offering improved clarity and coherency - especially in the lower mids, as well as better separation throughout.  However, it still doesn't match the AK240 in staging, and still seems to lack the AK240's overall refinement.	From above:  Balanced and neutral signature throughout, with: tight, accurate and fast bass characteristics; fairly forward mids especially in the human vocal range; slightly elevated highs that are very airy; and good extension in all three axes.  Detail and separation are top-notch, contributing to the outstanding transparency.  Staging is very expansive and holographic.  All of this is tied together with a sense of refinement that I have not encountered in other DAPs.

 
To my ears, the AK240 is easily the best.
 
 

---

 
Personal Preferences

For me, I prefer the units above in the following order:
 

• AK240
• AK120
• AK120II
• AK100II
• AK100

 
That's right, I've put the AK120 ahead of the two new players.
 
You would think that I'd favor the AK120II and AK100II ahead of the AK120 - especially since they carry the same basic signature as that of the AK240, which I consider the best of the bunch - but in this case, I simply can't.
 
For me, all of this has to do with what I think each DAP was trying to be.
 
I think the AK240 sets out to be a neutral, transparent and detailed player - and it absolutely nails it.  But the new players sound lesser and diminished from that.  Both the AK120II and AK100II have a less expansive soundstage than the AK240.  And the AK100II's coherency and separation further falls behind that of the AK120II.  In short, they sound like AK240 wanna-bes.  Good wanna-bes, but wanna-bes nonetheless.
 
At the same time, I think the AK120 wanted to carry a warmer and sweeter signature.  And even though its not as balanced or detailed as the newer players, it does hit the target it sets for itself.  It wanted to be a warmer, sweeter and more musical player... and ended up hitting the mark spot on.  Basically...
 

Unit​	Tries to Be​	Result​
AK240​	Neutral/Transparent/Detailed/Spacious​	Nailed it!​
AK120II​	Neutral/Transparent/Detailed/Spacious​	Almost, but not quite​
AK100II​	Neutral/Transparent/Detailed/Spacious​	Still a little ways to go​
AK120​	Warm/Neutral/Smooth​	Nailed it!​
AK100​	I honestly don't know...​	Um, I guess...​

 
 
 

---

Next Steps
 
 
First of all, we'd like to thank Astell&Kern for the loaner units they provided on short notice.  Thanks guys! 

 
While we've spent quite a bit of time gathering our initial impressions so far, we'd like to spend even more time with them to bring you a full review.  A three-day stretch is enough to get a good bead on the players for initial impressions... but an adequate review period (at least for Audio360) it is not.  We hope Astell&Kern doesn't need these units back right away so that we can bring you some detailed coverage (including balanced output).  Keep your fingers crossed. 

 
I'm also curious about Glove Audio's DAC/amp offering for the AK100/AK120.  Personally, I prefer a single low profile unit, which is the entire reason why someone would opt for an uber audiophile DAP.  But I'll admit, I am curious as to what it sounds like.  We'll be seeing if we can get one of those in the house for review as well. 

Click to expand...

shigzeo said:

 

warrenpchi said:

  Step 1:  Volume/Level Matching
 
This actually took MUCH longer than I anticipated.  It seems simple, but you'd be amazed how long it can take to subjectively match levels between five devices using 6 different tracks of varying genres and file qualities.
 
I began by going through all of the test tracks above to find a comfortable volume level on the AK120 - the device that I am most familiar with.  It had to be loud enough that I felt confident in hearing the most intricate of details, but not loud enough that I would be subjected to too much discomfort.
 
Once I settled on a comfortable volume level with the AK120, I then went back and matched each of the other devices to that volume level.  Here is how they matched up:

 ​

AK100 Mk2​	AK120​	AK100II​	AK120II​	AK240​
41.75​	38.5​	36.5​	36.5​	35.5​

 
* Yes, I am aware that there is no such volume setting as 41.75 on the AK100 Mk2.  There were times when the AK100 Mk2 seemed to match the AK120 exactly at 41.5.  But there were other times when 42 seemed like a better match between the two.  So, I'm simply using 41.75 here as an average of all cases.

Click to expand...

 
Warren, I applaud your efforts, by why did you volume match by ear? It's never accurate. Just volume match to a pre-generated neutral signal via a signal splitter and an external sound card. Any differences you find afterward indicate the differences you should be listening for. Even given 4 of the same device that themselves provide 100% equal outputs, you will never be able to accurately match volumes, especially when matching to a bunch of different songs. 

Click to expand...

doublea71 said:

  My impression of the AK100II:   Looks like a million bucks, sounds like 500 or so. It does sound very nice, but it just didn't blow me away as I was hoping; I think it's in the same territory as the X5 and DX90 (from SE HO). I think a lot of people will be happy with it, though. The UI is really solid, and the build quality is top-notch. I still kind of want it even though it didn't knock me off of my feet sonically - it's hard to take your eyes off of the darn thing. I only had my GR07s with me, so I didn't have a chance to try the balanced-out. 

Click to expand...

levanter said:

   
Like i thought, the best bang for buck
Top build/design quality, great UI and packed with features. I think the retail price is reasonable even if the SQ is on par with X5/DX90. 

Click to expand...

doublea71 said:

 
Yeah, it's kind of like an X5 designed by Ferrari or something. Would I pay $900 for an X5 designed by Ferrari? Maybe. I think buyer's remorse would be impossible with those looks.

Click to expand...