Crap, sorry I meant KZ BA10 vs ASF
Actually, this is probably the best question regarding comparisons and here is why.
The BA10 and ASF are very much alike while simultaneously they are very different.
Sounds like doublespeak so I'll be more specific.
How are the BA10 and ASF alike?
a) bass texture, decay and cleanliness
b) the presentation balance between low, midrange and upper frequencies.
In other words their relation to each other.
For example, on a scale of 1 to 5 the bass level would be 4, midrange level would be 4 and the treble level would be a 3. This is true on both the BA10 and the ASF.
How are the BA10 and ASF different?
a) with the BA10 you are at a concert positioned several rows back from the stage and you're hearing the performers as you are seeing the performers. In other words you see the performers onstage as a group from left to right.
b) with the ASF you are at the same concert but you are actually on stage with the performers surrounding you. They are close in and are performing for you and you alone.
Someone referred to Breaking Benjamin earlier so I'll use that track.
Here, the lead singer and all band members are practically staring you down as if to say "check me out" or "can you feel me?".
It's pretty cool, actually.
In an earlier post I commented on Sade's "Mr. Wrong". and Federico Aubele's "Postales". I enjoy both presentations equally but the difference is that the ASF delivers a more emotional presentation because the instruments and vocals are more forward and individually highlighted. It's a one on one experience as opposed to the BA10's equally impressive but less direct approach.
I think the differences are due more to the housing design of the BA10 vs the ASF. For the last two years I've wondered what the BA10 would sound like with similar tuning if KZ designed an in-ear that employed the internal acoustic structure found in the AS10. I did not want to try the AS10 due to its elevated mid-bass punch but if I could get an AS10 without the mid-bass punch I'd be all over it. Again, I don't own the AS10 but it seemed to me that directing those frequencies through ducts/channels would increase the focus. That is the way I hear the ASF. A direct and focused delivery as opposed to taking everything in as a whole.
With the ASF I am in the forest admiring the character of each particular tree.
With the BA10 I am admiring the forest from a slightly further vantage point.
On some recordings the ASF sounds natural and amazing. On Sade's "Mr. Wrong" the percussion on the left and drums on the right (at 56 seconds) sound very natural. I found that the following tracks convey a good sense of emotion on the ASF.
On other recordings the internal acoustic structure can overcook the upper midrange frequencies. It depends on the dynamics of the recording. With some electronic tracks you can definitely hear the digital processing in the recording.
The ASF shares the same weakness that the ZS3 has, namely that the sound being channeled through a tube on the ZS3 and "internal acoustic structure" on the ASF can sometimes exacerbate a peaky upper midrange.
I need to spend more time with the ASF for classical and rock genres so the jury is still out on compatibility there, for me, but personally, I'd put the BA10 and ASF on equal footing being mindful of their respective strengths and weaknesses.
The BA10 would be less controversial for folks who seek "air" via treble extension (despite the ASF and BA10 similarities). I wouldn't call the ASF "airy" but I wouldn't call the ASF "congested" either. It's simply a one-on-one performance that works for me.
