[REVIEW] Aurisonics ASG-2 & 2.5 (with many comparisons)

[shotgunshane]

I think we should perhaps refrain from comment on how earphones sound, if we haven't actually listened to it or have a reliable frequency graph for reference. Just a thought but seems to make sense to me.

For what it's worth, I thought the 2v1 sounded its best on the Shozy amp.

 

[Gintaras]

Quote:

I think we should perhaps refrain from comment on how earphones sound, if we haven't actually listened to it or have a reliable frequency graph for reference. Just a thought but seems to make sense to me.

For what it's worth, I thought the 2v1 sounded its best on the Shozy amp.

that makes me curious, i have shozy amp and i found v1 synergy not being there with it no matter how i tried and wait for burn in.
 
i tried Shozy with C3, found that too sharp and mechanical for my taste, then RWAK was better but still not near T1 amp, then my daughter took Shozy on the ride with iPhone and iTouch and VOLA we found greatest synergy, Shozy paired so well with Apple stuff that i thought it was born with them, really in the end Shozy happened to be a good amp with some DAPs and not so good with other DAPs, .... still i am afraid Shozy is unable to come close to T1 i have, i truly sorry for this and can only hope Rhapsodio own amplifiers will best Shozy.
 
in any case Shozy is not Rhapsodio's own production.
 
and forgot to tell, i never use EQ except for the car
 
NB: mate, i comment on things i mostly have or tried, otherwise what's the purpose??? :-D

 

[tinyman392]

Quote:

I think we should perhaps refrain from comment on how earphones sound, if we haven't actually listened to it or have a reliable frequency graph for reference. Just a thought but seems to make sense to me.

For what it's worth, I thought the 2v1 sounded its best on the Shozy amp.

 
Frequency graph is useless unless you've heard them.  Science does a poor job predicting outcomes (even with information on hand), but does a good job explaining subjective findings. 

 

[eke2k6]

Eke, even without looking at the rest i suggest to you, please throw out Shozy PX1, it might sound good with iPhone and warmer consumerish sounding IEMs like Klipsch X10 (actually this setup my daughter is using)... i tried Shozy amp with RDB+ v1 one day and v1 sounded like a screaming cat... sorry mate, here is what i meant about synergy, Shozy with v1 is waste and no matter how much i love Rhapsodio and their products i believe Shozy is not nearly worth of a good amp, this is just an Ok amp but not more than that.

again sorry mate

i am now listening to Alan Parson's Eye In the Sky album with RWAK+T1+V1 and it sounds lovely.

but i am damn serious about tubes coming from tube background and knowing what JJ tubes are about, they are cheapo production from Slovakia and sound even worse than generic Chinese tubes.

ok, i looked the rest of your post.

now please do not misunderstand me, i own things i talking about and i come to defend things only if i love what i hear.

i can also tell you i agreed to buy demo 1P2 after hearing them because no other IEM was able to come so close to analogue like sound for me.

my portable setup includes 1P2 and RDB+v1 powered by RWAK + T1 amp and my other setup consists of lovely T-Peos H200 powered by C3 and BH amp.
my Shozy PX1 was presented to my daughter who uses it with iPhones, iPads and iPods she has in her box plus Klipsch X10i and Senns 800.

my front end consists of  Sonus Faber Cremona M  3way floorstanders + Ayon tube amp triode + penthode switcheable mode, Naim CDX2, Rega DAC, Metrum Octave DAC, dedicated Mac Mini + Audirvana Plus, plus some Atlas, Chord, Van den Hul and Inakustik silver reference loudspeaker cables.

my music preferences come from playing acoustic piano, having done DJing in younger years and playing for school rockband. i also been to pro recording studios and know what neutral sound is all about. i never would want neutral sound on my system because this is so dull... but is so precise and uncolored as well.

going to one of the best musical halls of the world called Wiener Musikverein i never could find neutral sound because hall acoustic is what this all is about.

as regards wear and fit, i must concur that all boils down to personal preferences. i agree, for someone using portable during activity neither 1P2 nor v1 would do it... but then i am afraid many IEMs will be not so good for gym or running as regards wear and fit :-D

else assured i love music and i always pay attention to many sonical attributes except for that i never cared to measure output and else things for which i have no time nor willingness... i just trust my ears.

no, i do not believe in price tags, this is why i first see, try and then ask for the price... happens with gear and wine all the time, sadly i am always leaning towards costlier things.
consider, i was not even planning 1P2 and was sceptical when received them, yes i knew they were expensive and still after listen i was ambushed and decided to buy them, stupid and silly me and my wallet hates me but i could not pass the IEM which sounds sooooooo analogue like in my setup. i even wrote back to Tralucent about this because i was so curious how on earth they could achieve this.

as regards users, i got a PM from one chap who told me he sold his TG334 after hearing 1P2. i think this says a lot.
as regards RWAK, 1P2 and else expensive gear i believe talking mostly about their steep price is not wise approach, same like cheaper IEMs and DAPs can sound very good too and i would never base myself on the price tag considerations. H200 is a true GEM costing little and pushing high and is a living proof why this hobby is so exciting.

NB: and please mate, change JJ tubes, believe me you can achieve much better sound with better tubes, i was in the same boat some years ago and tried many, so i can tell for sure JJ tubes are worst crap i have heard sound wise.

Yes, please keep talking. Especially about gear you haven't heard.

You're my favorite type of audiophile.

 

[shotgunshane]

Frequency graph is useless unless you've heard them.  Science does a poor job predicting outcomes (even with information on hand), but does a good job explaining subjective findings. 

I can certainly know if something has too much bass for me from a graph or if the midrange will be too recessed. Graphs are wonderful for helping me find products I haven't heard but want to know if they align with my preferences. Plenty can be gleaned from them for my usage.

 

[Gintaras]

Eke, whatever if this helps you but please change your car and also radio in it 

 

[utdeep]

Eke, this was a terrific review. I'm glad it is highlighted on the front page. I've owned the 1plus2, TG334, and IE800 recently and I love the way that I can relate to your impressions. I don't think the source would have made a huge difference. I used a WA7 on my desktop rig and an ODAC to QuickStep on my mobile rig and everything you've said still resonates with me.

 

[eke2k6]

Eke, whatever if this helps you but please change your car and also radio in it 

Now why would I do that when it sounds like the wonderful RDB+ 2v1?

 

[kyuuketsuki]

Quote:

 
Frequency graph is useless unless you've heard them.  Science does a poor job predicting outcomes (even with information on hand), but does a good job explaining subjective findings. 

 
This. Exactly this. A FR graph coupled with your personal subjective impressions is a powerful tool. A FR graph on it's own is all but useless. If I hear something off in a headphone I can usually find what that was when looking at a FR graph. However it only explains what I heard. There are many things in sound that can alter sound that may or may not be reflected in your ears. 
 
The M-100s for example. I personally heard a distinct 10k spike. Looking at the graph it was there clear as day. However, I can't begin to tell you how many people I've talked to that look at that FR graph and claim they just don't hear that spike. That 10K spike in general is an anomaly to me, since, though noticeable, it doesn't sound bad to my ears.

 

[Gintaras]

What's Your Frequency?
You now know the secret: a frequency response specification is a very weak predictor of the actual performance of a loudspeaker. A frequency response chart can be more helpful, but it's missing the important time measurement. You now know to look for overall curve smoothness and to avoid rapid swings in amplitude. Some magazines and review sites publish MLSSA graphs of reviewed speakers, and now you'll understand how to interpret them. More power to you!
No matter how adept you might be at interpreting frequency response data, it should only be one data point among many in choosing a speaker. There is so much more to a speaker's performance than just its response – like its dispersion and imaging, dynamic range and detail resolution as well as size, cosmetics and price. Looking at good frequency response data can help you eliminate speakers with obvious and obnoxious errors. Once you've eliminated the boom & tizz pseudo-fi speakers, you can settle down to careful listening and making a more informed choice.
 
look here: http://www.ecoustics.com/articles/understanding-speaker-frequency-response/
Sound systems come in all shapes and sizes. Each system has its own unique sound signature. If you find a sound system that you like, look into its properties (frequency response) and see what it is that you like. Remember, although ‘flat’ means accurate reproduction, it does not necessarily mean that you will like how it sounds when listening to music/audio that you are familiar with.
http://www.centerpointaudio.com/HowToUnderstandFlatFrequencyResponseGraph.aspx
 

 

[vwinter]

@Gintaras

Reviews are not exactly about making everything sound it's "best" to review it (which is again preference as the technical capabilities of the drivers won't change assuming they are being fed adequate voltage and current). I have heard "synergy" and think it's a great option that we have, but what exactly are you reviewing then? You're not reviewing a product, you're reviewing a chain of products used for a preferred "optimal" result. And then you review them against other products using different "optimal" chains. Comparisons, more objectively, aren't really worth much then.

He heard what he heard on his gear and that is a very valid conclusion and contribution, especially if people plan to use the same gear. And if not, they should make the proper inferences.

Would your mind explode if he heard your setup and still did not like them at all?

 

[tinyman392]

Quote:

 
This. Exactly this. A FR graph coupled with your personal subjective impressions is a powerful tool. A FR graph on it's own is all but useless. If I hear something off in a headphone I can usually find what that was when looking at a FR graph. However it only explains what I heard. There are many things in sound that can alter sound that may or may not be reflected in your ears. 
 
The M-100s for example. I personally heard a distinct 10k spike. Looking at the graph it was there clear as day. However, I can't begin to tell you how many people I've talked to that look at that FR graph and claim they just don't hear that spike. That 10K spike in general is an anomaly to me, since, though noticeable, it doesn't sound bad to my ears.

 
With the M-100, it's the size of the V-shape that intrigues me really.  The bass doesn't sound as boosted as it actually is graphed.  I think this deals with (below) the decay of the bass being so quick.
 
Quote:

What's Your Frequency?
You now know the secret: a frequency response specification is a very weak predictor of the actual performance of a loudspeaker. A frequency response chart can be more helpful, but it's missing the important time measurement. You now know to look for overall curve smoothness and to avoid rapid swings in amplitude. Some magazines and review sites publish MLSSA graphs of reviewed speakers, and now you'll understand how to interpret them. More power to you!
No matter how adept you might be at interpreting frequency response data, it should only be one data point among many in choosing a speaker. There is so much more to a speaker's performance than just its response – like its dispersion and imaging, dynamic range and detail resolution as well as size, cosmetics and price. Looking at good frequency response data can help you eliminate speakers with obvious and obnoxious errors. Once you've eliminated the boom & tizz pseudo-fi speakers, you can settle down to careful listening and making a more informed choice.
 
look here: http://www.ecoustics.com/articles/understanding-speaker-frequency-response/
Sound systems come in all shapes and sizes. Each system has its own unique sound signature. If you find a sound system that you like, look into its properties (frequency response) and see what it is that you like. Remember, although ‘flat’ means accurate reproduction, it does not necessarily mean that you will like how it sounds when listening to music/audio that you are familiar with.
http://www.centerpointaudio.com/HowToUnderstandFlatFrequencyResponseGraph.aspx
 

 
Yes, time response makes a hell of a difference as well.  If I'm not mistaken, pink noise actually does a decent job with this variable as well. 
 
 
Quote:

I can certainly know if something has too much bass for me from a graph or if the midrange will be too recessed. Graphs are wonderful for helping me find products I haven't heard but want to know if they align with my preferences. Plenty can be gleaned from them for my usage.

 
 
You make the assumption of slower decay with more bass (this is what really does a lot of the work in making things sound bigger and more covered).  This is actually generally true, but not always.  The case of the M100 actually doesn't sound as bass heavy as it actually is measured. Graphs have a tendency to lie to you some times.  Other times, there are other things in play (like masking of certain ailments etc).  There's always more than meets the eye when it comes to these things.  I personally feel we don't know enough to really read a graph like people say they do (we objectively speaking don't know exactly what sweetness, punch, impact, etc is; we know of them, but we don't know enough to make a complete read). 

 

[kyuuketsuki]

@Gintaras

Reviews are not exactly about making everything sound it's "best" to review it (which is again preference as the technical capabilities of the drivers won't change assuming they are being fed adequate voltage and current). I have heard "synergy" and think it's a great option that we have, but what exactly are you reviewing then? You're not reviewing a product, you're reviewing a chain of products used for a preferred "optimal" result. And then you review them against other products using different "optimal" chains. Comparisons, more objectively, aren't really worth much then.

He heard what he heard on his gear and that is a very valid conclusion and contribution, especially if people plan to use the same gear. And if not, they should make the proper inferences.

Would your mind explode if he heard your setup and still did not like them at all?

Yup. No review is useless unless the person was paid off by the company to give a positive review. Regardless of whether you agree or not is inconsequential.

It isn't like eke used an unamped clip+. His gear is more than worthy for a review. And honestly, for what it's worth, if a pair of UIEMs is /that/ source dependent, it isn't worth my time or money when there are other offerings that can sound just as good if not better from a greater range of sources.

My ASG-1s sound fantastic out of my NFB-11 with its sabre DAC. However, they are my portable. They don't however sound bad coming out of my clip+. Likewise, it sounds great out of my J3 + arrow 4g combo (with treble set to 1, I'd say this is the optimal set up). Better than the clip+. Extra power helps control the large DD in the ASG-1, but it isn't a requirement for them to sound good. In fact if it sounded as bad to my ears as the RDB+ 2v1 out of any source as they sounded to eke, I'd be disappointed. Especially given that the specs for both are so favourable to portable devices (121dB@1mW with 32 ohm and 100dB/mV with 32 ohm respectively). If you are telling me that I need a $1k+ dap to make a headphone with those impedance and sensitivity specs shine I'm not going to buy them.

 

[eke2k6]

I think the most ridiculous thing about gintaras' rant is that he keeps repeating the word synergy. If my sources weren't powerful enough to drive the very sensitive RDB, then that would be plausible. However, he's trying to address the flaws of the RDB 2 by matching sound signatures with daps and amps.

The worst part is that he's never even HEARD the 2v1 that I'm talking about in my review. Yet he stands to make assumptions about how bad my gear is.

Even funnier, he tries to use one single example of a person who preferred the 1P2 to the 334 as a way to discredit me. The kicker, he's never heard the 334.

Human beings are hilarious.

 

[gnarlsagan]

I think the most ridiculous thing about gintaras' rant is that he keeps repeating the word synergy. If my sources weren't powerful enough to drive the very sensitive RDB, then that would be plausible. However, he's trying to address the flaws of the RDB 2 by matching sound signatures with daps and amps.

The worst part is that he's never even HEARD the 2v1 that I'm talking about in my review. Yet he stands to make assumptions about how bad my gear is.

Even funnier, he tries to use one single example of a person who preferred the 1P2 to the 334 as a way to discredit me. The kicker, he's never heard the 334.

Human beings are hilarious.

Agreed those are some pretty big problems lol. Let's all just pretend his rant never happened.