MusicalChillies
Previously known as Sinth.
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2009
- Posts
- 855
- Likes
- 62
Missed delivery today, neighbour was out also... ugh...
Just got my R2As. Here are some way too early impressions using the Shozy Alien as my source.
They are incredibly spacious for IEMs and not just spacious but realistic sounding. You can hear sounds layered in across different distances in the soundstage and you can hear those distances change as say a voice gets further from the mic. It's just a remarkably real sounding experience of sound in space, for lack of better words. This is really the highlight of these for me.
Not only is the sense of space great, but the size of the sound is more like a headphone than an IEM. By that I mean you feel like you're listening to a real sized band with real sized instruments rather than a miniature version like with most IEMs.
Bass is great. Probably a bit more than neutral but not much bleed into the mids.
I don't hear deficient highs and I'm using the complys. They don't exaggerate the highs to accentuate detail, instead they let their excellent mids reveal details what to me sounds very naturally.
I tried the JVC spiral dots but they sounded thin.
The y splitter is absurdly clunky and heavy. But because of the seal of the complys they stay in the ears nevertheless.
Cable is ok. If I had sprung for the more expensive R2Pros I'd be disappointed though.
They are incredibly small.
They are signficantly better than the Rockets. Much bigger sounding, more spacious, better bass. Several leagues above the Tenores.
Given how good these are I'm in the paradoxical position of thinking I got an incredible steal for USD 120 but curious of how much better the R2Pros might sound.
How is Female Vocals sound with R2A?
Specifically the non-Whitney Houston non-Mariah Carey vocal range?
You know, the... middle to lower-register female vocals pitch...
How deep does the bass extension go?
Guys I have been extensively comparing the R2A and pros and these are some of the differences that I have found.
1) The pros are a step up in resolution with better detailing. The R2As can in fact hadle most tracks very well but on large choirs and bigger orchestras, you can hear the pros pulling ahead. Depending on tip selection, the pros can also be slightly harsher on certain tracks.
2) The R2As have a potentially more musical signature for some. They have a bigger bass, more mellow tonality and are less harsh. The pros have a more reference tonal quality to them which may not be what everyone is looking for. The bass of the pros are tighter and better controlled. However neither earphone's bass bleeds into the mids.
3) The R2As have a noticeably larger stage. This is where things get interesting. The pros have a pretty unique presentation. They are more forward sounding while the r2a's sit back a bit more with more distance. The pros are as destrozer describes, a crossfeed done right. Stage width remains good with many instruments going further out when need be. However, it does not widely pan everything out like many earphones with larger staging properties do. Instruments that are supposed to be near will be nearer and those that are further will be further. And yes the z axis comes into play more than many other earphones do in the pros. The R2As have a more "normal" staging characteristic. Also, the pros have a tighter, more accurate image. What is the result then? The result is that the R2As, to me, are more enjoyable on simpler tracks, where the spaciousness really give a big edge. However, when things get complicated, the r2a's start to lose focus due to the les accurate imaging. On complicated tracks, the r2 pros maintain the image much better. However, due to the crossfeed like effect, many sounds take a more central position resulting in a potentially slightly congested feel to things. Again this is all up to your own personal preferences.