Latest Vega G2 and Leo GX review on Audiosciencereview.com

Vega G2 here:


Leo GX here:

well, I am not going to comment on these 2 reviews but they do get my attention though.

Ouch, not so good for the Leo GX, and 5dB off difference between Left and Right channel for the Vega G2 ?

About Leo:

…So please, please don’t waste your money on such things. And certainly not for US $8,300. For the thousands of dollars you paid for your Vega G2 DAC, you better get the best clock in the business and not need an external source.

Glad to read this. So I can, with quiet conscience, spend my money on other things. Not, that the best of all spouses would lack of ideas :woman:

Robin

I tend to treat reviews of this nature with caution, they are obviously useful at a comparative level, but even then there are so many “unknowns” with regards to test method and equipment it’s hard to say who’s right when highlighting areas of concern.

I noted a comment regarding the channel imbalance, pointing to the fact that this wasn’t the first time such an occurrence has shown up in tests and asking could the test equipment be contributing to such a result.

Takes me back to the days when we used to select Amps on specification only to discovered they actually sounded terrible, ironically it was usually the ones that tested poorest that gave the most satisfaction.

Testing has moved on since those early days but I still suspect that although “sound” is a simple context, it’s reproduction is the exact opposite, complex to a degree we probably still don’t fully appreciate.

1 Like

guys, don’t get me wrong with any opponent intention to Auralic but on the opposite instead.
I am also aware all the reviews nowadays that require self-caution while approaching/ reading them. Nevertheless, I still believe Auralic is working relentlessly, and responsibly, to their pursuit of perfection than many “big names” in today’s so-called high-end industry. At the same time, I do hope you all would agree that we, as consumers, should be responsible too to appreciate those sensible efforts (not advertisements or marketing BS) done by good companies.

Simon,
I‘m sure that you didn‘t miss that my statement as to Leo was put out cum grano salis, to say the least. Anyway, it served its purpose to appease my charming chief accountant :wink:

BTW, since I‘ve read audioscience’s review of my headphone amp, the wonderful Audeze Deckard, I haven’t taken those reviews too seriously.

„amirm“ began his remarks as follows:

This is a review and detailed measurements of Audeze Deckard DAC and headphone amplifier. It is on kind loan from a member and seems to be discontinued. Seems to be a product of year 2016 with retail price of USD $699. Owner has bought it used for much less.

Having read a number of interesting measurements I suddenly scratched my head, then I had to read the following sentences once more to believe I had understood them right:

Listening Tests
Before getting started, I wanted to check for audible noise. So I plugged in my AKG K92 into Deckard, set it to high gain and set the level to max with music paused. Buzz and hum was clearly audible. But then by chance I touched the headphone jack and this is when I realized it was loose and caused varying amount of noise depending on how you held it. I plan to open it up and see if I can fix it.
This caused me to stop the listening tests and go back back to re-measuring …

Et cetera et cetera. I can‘t imagine any serious reviewer who at this point of investigation wouldn‘t have crumpled his sheet of paper and thrown it into the dustbin. Not so our hero, he mercilessly continued his measurements on this obvious piece of scrap metal - and still had the effrontery to publish his useless scribble.
Therefore of course I‘m even extremely cautious about reviews on that site :upside_down_face:

And I do love my Audeze Deckard. It never produces the least soupçon of hum.
Enjoy the music!
Robin

Hi Robin,

Must admit I can’t quite see the point of these reviews, dishing a device (as you say) that has an obvious fault or discounting a very expensive one just because an odd measurement doesn’t meet expectations.

The only “consistent” I see is a liking for the relatively cheaper devices based mainly on measurements which just seems strange unless they are playing to a particular market.

Don’t believe Auralic will loose any sleep over the “findings” though because I can remember early Naim Amp’s suffering similar measurement “problems”, and they sounded absolutely brilliant, unfortunately they cost too much for my limited finances at the time.

I suppose there is only really one measurement instrument we can all trust, our ears, that’s how it used to be and I see no difference today.

1 Like

My guess is the unit tested had an output issue with one channel. The combination of lower output and higher distortion on that channel is not likely typical.

The best way to curb her spending and increase your’s, is the deal that you can spend as much money a year as she spends on clothing, make-up etc. in a year.

Please read this:
https://hometheaterhifi.com/reviews/dac/auralic-vega-g2-dac-leo-gx-master-clock-review/

In fact we have a deal of that kind, but since my wife won‘t spend much on bric-à-brac, our deal involves travels :smile_cat:

A big plus if your in laws live some place far far away.

We‘re both orphans

Ohw… I’m so sorry.

Agree, a 5db difference seems pretty unusual. I can’t comment on the Leo as i’ve not experienced it but my Vega G2 is a fantastic piece of audiophile goodness. Yes, pricey but sometimes you get what you pay for!

Those reviews are proving (again) that measurements alone are not at all crucial and should not lead our choices. Which i am sure we all know by now.

2 Likes

I have seen a previous review reports with many signal testing graphs shown the 44.1 kHz or lower rate sampling with no different SQ from VG2 when connected with LEO GX. There is only SQ different when higher sampling rate than 44.1 kHz. I hesitated a little to buy the Leo GX since most of my favorite music is 44.1 kHz rating. After I’ve got the Leo GX loaner from Oregon Auralic office for a week testing, I can tell a right away the sound different with Leo GX connecting to my VG2 - the bass is more solid clean, background is darker, wider backstage and clearer other instruments… I am not disagreed with the reports, especially the VG2 and Leo GX reports from Audio Science Review, but in reality, there is SQ different with Leo GX connecting to VG2 to my ears, a noticeable different! Still enjoy my Auralic Tri-stack everyday.

First:

My name is Alex Brinkman and I work for AURALiC.

You should all know who I am before you read my obviously biased post. I am in the industry and I care about the people in it. I have a tremendous amount of respect for Xuanqian, who founded AURALiC and works hard to develop and bring to you products that are real, damned good, and made for what you love: listening to music, lots and lots of music, most of it pretty good too ;-).

Thanks MWANGOPD,

There’s nothing wrong with posting these reviews. Thank you for doing it. I noticed in one of your comments in the thread that you had to defend the fact that you posted it. Not necessary. We are not afraid of bad press. The knowledge that bad press exists only feeds our desire and need to develop solid, high-performing products for a community that cares about the last detail when it comes to performance, the passion we have for sound and music, and the care we take with each decision when developing a product.

There’s also nothing wrong with the fact that this review was published. It’s why we work with many reviewers; so that a sort of conversation can take place, in the words of the reviewers, from one review to the next, and in the words of our thriving community. You guys all know what a good product is, and you know what a good review is. We trust you the way you trust us. Thank you for this. We consider the partnership between AURALiC and the HiFi Community at large to be the most valuable partnership we have and would never insult you by attempting to develop a product that did nothing, or misled you in any way. We’re here and we’re not going anywhere. We’re not a moving target so we have to be honest with every product we make. No shortcuts, no cheating. Anyone who would make that assumption about us doesn’t know us, has never engaged with us, and is welcome to get to know us better.

As for the AURALiC community specifically, thank you for your interest and enthusiasm, quite a few of you even help us with beta testing of products. We’re a small company compared to SONOS, so without your help, our jobs would be much harder and take far longer, thank you.

Next, one of the beautiful things about the fact that we all have and express many points of view in the world is that we all get to decide on what makes sense to us, what rings true, and what may not necessarily be in line with what we call a “shared reality.”

The author of these reviews, whose motivation I won’t question, may have the best of intentions when it comes to the work they do. They may be trying to rid the world of “snake oil” products, an effort we applaud and for which we would gladly pitch in. We can only tell you that our products have been measured before in other reviews, and by us in our development process. We are not afraid of measurements. And if there is an issue with a specific product, we always recommend contacting us for support.

We did not consult with the reviewer before they published, and we don’t know them personally. As far as we know, we have never sold them a product and we don’t know much about their background. We at AURALiC only ask that you (and we know you will because you’re all pretty intelligent, and that’s not flattery, it’s just something we know about you guys) do your research, listen to the products, read as many reviews as you can, watch all of the videos, and then come to your own conclusions. Also, please research the people writing these reviews. Learn who they are, and what their point of view might be. Learn about how they measure, whether it’s accurate, or if the measurements inform on how the product sounds and functions. Then share what you learn with the community. We’re all here to learn.

Happy Listening to you all, and thanks for enjoying our products,

-Alex

5 Likes

Hi Alex,
appreciate your openness, as to all Auralic people and ecosystem. I believe together we can redefine the audiophile and High-end audio than sky-rocket price tags but lack of rocket science (for audio engineering) :slight_smile:

all the best!

I’m afraid it doesn’t matter where you look, prices can be very emotive as indicated by these discussions regarding the recent Naim announcement.

https://community.naimaudio.com/t/naim-february-price-rise/6086

https://www.pinkfishmedia.net/forum/threads/naim-5-increase.236244/

I purchased my 202/200/StageLine/Napsc back in 2008 for a grand total of £3300, today they are now priced at £5562, that’s a 1.7x increase over 12 years (interestingly the Bank of England inflation calculator states they should be £4600!).

That increase, although gradual, has now pushed them beyond my budget if I was in the market today for such items, it’s one reason why I didn’t purchase a Naim streamer.

Unfortunately, luxury commodity prices have seen increases that far outstrips wages and general inflation over the last 10 years and the only option you seem to have is to “vote with your feet”, thankfully there are other manufacturers that can still offer excellent performance at reason cost though.

I won’t even go into the subject of Apple and iPhone prices, which I admit I still purchase, but try explaining to some that a “phone” justifies a price of £1250.