Comparisons

HiBy R2 vs HiBy R3 Pro

The R2 has greater sub-bass quantity than the R3 Pro and the sub-bass reproduction is able to provide a more impactful rumble. There is a fuller expression on the R2. The bass decay on the R3 Pro is quicker which results in a more nimble presentation. The bass texture on the R2 is rendered in a smoother manner. The mid-bass on the R2 has a touch more body and the slam is delivered with extra punch. Each bass note on the R2 is articulated with a robust hit. The midrange on the R2 is more organic than the R3 Pro and vocals are belted out with a smoother display. There is a natural presentation on the R2. The lower midrange on the R2 has more body than the R3 Pro and male vocals are presented in a thicker manner. The upper midrange on the R3 Pro has a little more forwardness and there is a more present female vocals showing. There is a lush vocals expression on the R2. For the treble, the R3 Pro has greater extension and there is a brighter presentation. The R2 has more body with a smoother expression. There is an airier feeling on the R3 Pro. The crisp on the R3 Pro is slightly more defined. The treble expression on the R2 is fatigue-free and controlled. Lastly, in terms of soundstage, the R3 Pro has a more natural expansion. There is greater width magnitude on the R3 Pro and the depth on the R2 is less closed in.

HiBy R2 vs Shanling Q1

The R2 has more sub-bass quantity than the Q1 and there is a fuller low end. The sub-bass reproduction on the R2 provides a more impactful rumble. The bass decay on the Q1 is quicker than the R2 and there is a higher level of agility. The bass texture on the R2 is rendered in a smoother manner. The mid-bass on the R2 has more body and the slam is delivered with greater weight. Each bass note on the R2 is articulated with punch. The midrange on the R2 is more musical than the Q1 albeit with slightly lower transparency level. The vocals on the R2 are richer sounding and there is a soothing display. The lower midrange on the R2 has slightly more body than the Q1 and male vocals are presented well with lushness. The upper midrange on the Q1 has a touch more emphasis and there is a livelier female vocals expression. There is an intimate and organic showing on the R2. For the treble, the Q1 has slightly greater extension. There is a brighter presentation on the Q1 which contributes to a more energetic top end. The R2 has more body and it delivers a smooth display. There is greater amount of air rendered on the Q1. The extra sparkle on the Q1 contributes to a livelier treble expression. The R2 provides a fatigue-free listen. Lastly, in terms of soundstage, the expansion on the Q1 is a touch natural. The width magnitude on the Q1 is slightly greater and there is more depth rendered on the R2.

Page 5: Conclusion