[high-fidelity]

Did anybody compare with Latoo Paw Gold ?
 
Somebodies say Lotoo is better.But,I didn't listen it yet.

 

[Mimouille]

Did anybody compare with Latoo Paw Gold ?

Somebodies say Lotoo is better.But,I didn't listen it yet.

I did, they sound comparably good. Lotoo had a bit more depth and power and very slightly less clarity. Quite neutral too.

 

[high-fidelity]

I did, they sound comparably good. Lotoo had a bit more depth and power and very slightly less clarity. Quite neutral too.

 
Hmm.You mean,they are in same class,right?
 
If you get these impressions with stock 240,I can think RWAK should be better or same quality with Lotoo.

 

[Mimouille]

Hmm.You mean,they are in same class,right?

If you get these impressions with stock 240,I can think RWAK should be better or same quality with Lotoo.

I have the RWAK240 sorry, which IMO is in the same class as Lotoo Paw.

 

[MikePortnoy]

Paw Gold has better resolution than both 901 and Rwak240. The problem with Paw is that it is dark and a bit bassy sounding dap with a bit narrow stage.

 

[Mimouille]

I find the Paw neither dark nor bassy. A bit narrow yes, but reasonably so.

 

[MikePortnoy]

If we take 901 as reference, it is bassier and darker. In my opinion it is not good for already bassy and dark sounding phones.

 

[Mimouille]

Your ears vs. mine...I own most high end DAPs and tested it for over an hour. Did not find it dark nor bassy. Neither did Anakchan in his review. Neither did Audionewbi. So please keep in mind sound opinions are always relative.

 

[MikePortnoy]

Surely, people hear differently. Please let me ask you, so Paw has same bass quantity with 901? 901 has balanced frequency quantities overall, in my opinion.

 

[high-fidelity]

I have the RWAK240 sorry, which IMO is in the same class as Lotoo Paw.

 
Oh,I thought you have stock 240.Got it.

 

[Mimouille]

I only compared to AK240, which is quite neutral. The 240 does not have more bass than 901 and the Lotoo does not have more bass than the 240. Well at least with my SE5 and Roxannes.

 

[AnakChan]

Paw Gold has better resolution than both 901 and Rwak240. The problem with Paw is that it is dark and a bit bassy sounding dap with a bit narrow stage.

 
I don't have my AK240 as it's being repaired/replaced. I listened extensively between the Paw Gold and 901 (with Angel card mostly and sometimes with balanced). I didn't find the Paw dark or bassy at all. To me the HM-901 had more bass bloom compread to the Paw Gold. As for the soundstage, I thought it was great but not at the Flow or Hugo level. It's a pity I had to return the Paw before I got my AK240 back.

 

[MikePortnoy]

I don't have my AK240 as it's being repaired/replaced. I listened extensively between the Paw Gold and 901 (with Angel card mostly and sometimes with balanced). I didn't find the Paw dark or bassy at all. To me the HM-901 had more bass bloom compread to the Paw Gold. As for the soundstage, I thought it was great but not at the Flow or Hugo level. It's a pity I had to return the Paw before I got my AK240 back.

Perhaps they have same same punch power, but mid bass section is different in my opinion. Paw locates mid bass presentation more forward, 901 locates it a bit back compared to Paw Gold. Also, balanced card has more mid bass body compared to Minibox. I haven't heard Angel, so that I can't share my impressions about it.

Paw has a bit darkish and perhaps blacker sound, for example h8p would suit better than Se5 with Paw.

 

[AnakChan]

Perhaps they have same same punch power, but mid bass section is different in my opinion. Paw locates mid bass presentation more forward, 901 locates it a bit back compared to Paw Gold. Also, balanced card has more mid bass body compared to Minibox. I haven't heard Angel, so that I can't share my impressions about it.

Paw has a bit darkish and perhaps blacker sound, for example h8p would suit better than Se5 with Paw.

 
Here's what I I wrote in my review of the Paw vs the HM-901 :-

"Compared to the HM-901, it feels somewhat more sterile but by no means no less musical. The HM-901 has a more warmer, mature and meatier sense of grasp of the music tracks but lacks the clarity and transparency in the trebles of the Paw Gold. As such the Paw Gold also feels somewhat fresh with a sense snap crispness giving it more air and spaciousness over the HM-901. The HM-901 felt more intimate with greater sense of depth due to it's warmer bass but the Paw Gold seems to have the edge of headroom."

 

[Saraugie]

Here's what I I wrote in my review of the Paw vs the HM-901 :-


"[COLOR=3B3B3B]Compared to the HM-901, it feels somewhat more sterile but by no means no less musical. The HM-901 has a more warmer, mature and meatier sense of grasp of the music tracks but lacks the clarity and transparency in the trebles of the Paw Gold. As such the Paw Gold also feels somewhat fresh with a sense snap crispness giving it more air and spaciousness over the HM-901. The HM-901 felt more intimate with greater sense of depth due to it's warmer bass but the Paw Gold seems to have the edge of headroom."[/COLOR]

And of the 3 (+AK240) Sean, which one gets 1st place?