doublea71
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2011
- Posts
- 3,077
- Likes
- 568
IEM Review: Aircom A3 + A5
A3 A5
Perhaps a month ago, I read about this company on another thread as member was asking about them and if anybody had tried their products. Nobody had replied to this person, so I did a quick search and found the company website (http://www.aircomaudio.com/). What I found there was an entirely different approach to iems - those aren't cables in the photo above, but flexible plastic tubes which act as a conduit for the dynamic drivers which are a good 7 inches below. It struck me as interesting and I was asking myself obvious questions such as 'Is it a gimmick?' and of course 'How do they sound?' There simply isn't any press on these, so I'm going to attempt to shed some light on them. Upon visiting the website, one learns that use of the plastic tubes is referred to as "airtube technology" and was originally implemented with a different intention in mind, according to Aircom's President, Ryan Tsui. I won't get into the details of the original purpose of the sound tubes other than to say that it is related to radiation omitted from cell phones. Interestingly, there are actually similar products available on Amazon, but the Aircom seems to be the first company that is focusing on the sound rather than any health-related benefits, and that will be the focus of the review.
Packaging and Accessories
The packaging for both were rather spartan despite the A5 and A3 being priced at $69.99 and $59.99 respectively. They both come with a couple sets of eartips and a shirt clip and the lower-priced A3 also comes with some outer rings which are meant to provide a bit more isolation beyond the tips, as well as a thin nylon pouch which seemed like a bit of an afterthought as it wasn't made with what I consider quality material. I have to say that it was a bit curious that the higher-priced A5 came with no pouch, but such things do occur with review units on occasion. Here are a few pics of the packaging and accessories for the A3 and A5 taken at Saigon's best coffee shop, Awesome Coffee:
Build Quality + Design
I think these are pretty well made (and yes, they are made in China), and I didn't have any problems with the airtubes, which are quite flexible and don't seem to suffer from any kinking with normal use. They operate under the same principal as a doctor's stethoscope, so microphonics are noticeable if the sound tubes are bumped. They are actually flexible enough to be worn over-the-ear, which is a nice option as long as you don't wear glasses - the sound tubes are a bit thicker than your standard cables, so it's a bit cumbersome in this case. The cables (oxygen-free copper) seem to be of adequate quality - I had no problems with the sound cutting out or any sort of durability issues over the last few weeks with them. The A3 has a rubber-encased cable which didn't tangle easily, so I have to give them a thumbs-up on that one even though it's clearly not the high-end stuff they're using - it does retain slight kinks after awhile. Also the slider seems to be made of the same material as the cable sleeve and it doesn't slide easily enough. Part of the issue I think is the size - it's a bit difficult to get a good grip on it to get it going. The A5 uses the same rubber covering down to the split, after which the cable has what I believe is nylon sheathing that is actually pretty supple and doesn't tangle at all, and its slider doesn't have the same problem as the A3 though it is equally as small. Both have identical straight 3.5mm jacks with the company name printed on them and there were no durability problems, so I can't complain. The split on the A3 is made of metal and actually looks nicer than that of the A5, which appears to be made of plastic. Again, a bit curious in my opinion, but it's not as though the A5's looks bad - it's black and very nondescript while the A3's pops a bit more due to its shine. Both also come with a mic that you can turn on or off by giving it a bit of a squeeze - you can feel the slight 'click' of a button beneath the rubber casing. Another nice touch is the magnets that are in the earpieces - since the drivers aren't inside of them, Aircom cleverly gave you a way to connect them together behind your neck so that you don't have to hold them or stuff them into a shirt pocket when you need to take a pause from listening - pretty cool, eh? A Few Specs + Graphs
Driver Type: Dynamic
Impedance: 16 Ohms
Sensitivity: 95.6 dB @1kHZ
Comfort + Fit
As far as how they sit in the ear, the A3 has better ergonomics - they have a design that reminds me of my old Audio Technica CKM50s and angle into the ear fairly well, though they are by no means flush. The A5 are a whole different story as they are perhaps a bit too much like actual stethoscopes and just stick out of the ear more than I prefer. The nozzles on the A3 and A5 are a bit wide for my ears and this prevented me from getting a good seal that I could forget about as the pressure on my tragus was always noticeable.
So where the heck are the drivers, you ask? Before you look at the pictures below, the drivers are of the dynamic variety and are manufactured by Dongguan Yuyinteng Audio Company Limited according to Ryan. I'm not sure of the size of the drivers, but I'll make sure I ask Ryan the next time I message him and yes, they are encased in those little capsules at the bottom of the tubes. It does look a bit strange and is certainly unconventional, but it stands to reason that having more space at hand could possibly do some good things with the sound if properly implemented. It immediately made me think about speaker enclosures and how they can be manipulated to good benefit. They allow for 6 times the normal amount of air space than conventional IEMs according to the company website, but I can't say I have the expertise to say whether this makes a noticeable difference or not - I have to rely on my ears like most mortals.
The Sound
Overall, I found both the A3 and A5 enjoyable to listen to. I'm not sure how much of an impact the sound tubes make since I don't have a frame of reference, but I do think there is a discernible room-feel to these things - I won't go as far as saying that they make music sound as though you're in Royal Albert Hall or anything, but there is something interesting going on with my overall sense of perceived space when I use them, as if the room is a bit larger than what I'm used to. It is more pronounced on some tracks than others, yet it's there. This could very well be expectation bias, so take this with a big pinch of salt. In spite of that caveat, I do like the way these sound, especially the more cohesive and consistent A5.
Both fare pretty well in the bass department - it's not the tightest, fastest bass out there, but I think they hold their own. I used "Long Distance Runaround" by Yes and "Shining Moon" by The Cowboy Junkies to see what they could do with Chris Squire's angular noodling and Alan Anton's slow-burning rumble, and I didn't come away disappointed with either the A3 or A5. I do think the bass is a bit loose, but it is by no means messy or completely lacking control - it sounds more like a bit of a warm tilt than anything. I myself prefer the super-tight and completely-under-control variety, but what these offer is fine at this price in my opinion, as they don't go into basshead land (about as appealing to me as a holiday aboard a cruise ship). I guess I will characterize them as having a mildly fun low end.
The mids strike me as being a bit forward, certainly more so than my GR07s, and the A3 I think goes a little further than the A5 in this respect. Vocals sound pretty good on both, but there were times when the A3 was just a little too forward for my tastes - it's a bit hit or miss with different recordings and I wonder if it has anything to do with the difference in material used in the driver and earpiece enclosures. The A5 just sounds a bit clearer and has a more consistently natural-sounding timbre than the A3, and this is probably the area that offers the most significant difference between the two models.
The upper registers of both are pretty good - they pick up details without sounding harsh or sibilant while sounding fairly natural. They aren't world-class detail monsters, but I can't really point to a major fault in this area considering the price point. Elvin Jones' cymbals sounded right to me while I was listening to 'My Favorite Things', as did Neil Peart on 'The Spirit of Radio'. I never got a sense that I was missing out on much, so I think they tuned these pretty well for this part of the sound spectrum.
Sound stage is pretty good on these, possibly due to the sound tubes. Again, my impression is that the room the music is being played in is a bit bigger than what I'm used to hearing with very familiar recordings. It's not an echo or reverb, but there is a subtle change that I hear (is that you, Mr. Expectation Bias?). I really don't know the answer to this, so I'll leave it at that. Perhaps the only way to know for sure is to have a set with the same drivers in the earpieces minus the sound tubes.
In Summary
I think these are an interesting, unconventional product and have the potential to be something special in its price range with a bit of tweaking. The A5 sounds very good to me, but the ergonomics need to be improved - the level of comfort just isn't on par with their sound yet. I really think they should try to get these to be as low-profile as possible with the sound tubes and perhaps use the earpiece design of the A3 instead. As they are now, they aren't a bad first effort at all, but I do hope they can come up with something that 'disappears in the ear.' If they can make their comfort level approach that of the sound, I think they'll do well in the increasingly-crowded entry-level segment. My feelings towards the A3 are a bit ambivalent; they sound quite good on some tracks and rather ordinary on others. In this case, the sum of the parts yield inconsistent results for me and I point back to my comment about the A5 having a more cohesive sound - it was just a more consistent performer for me. Based on sound alone, the A5 is the better of the two, but Aircom needs to bring the comfort level up a few notches to compete in a very crowded marketplace. A few more pictures before I depart:
I would also think that a selling point would be using tubes to go right into the ears be small and just a tube and tip and not have a secondary housing. Discrete and low profile and better for hoods and hats or something not just like other earphones structure-wise. So, kinda like regular earphones but with thicker than average cables being the tubes. I agree though and am forgiving of first attempts. Get it workable then maybe really advance for future models to take full advantage. Maybe even have the tube connect be a sound bore to come off and use them as regular earphones w/o the tubes if wanted. An over ear design using a hollow tube or structure may be an idea as well.
