This and That:
Obviously, the largest (visual) difference between the original B200 and the v2 are the cables that are now replaceable, as well as the “frosty”, semi-transparent and 3D-printed shells. However unlike the B400 whose shells are 3D-printed as well, the B200 isn’t available in different colours.
Shell-wise, the v2 is only marginally larger and bulkier than the original one and equally comfortable.
When it comes to build quality though, the original B200’s injection-moulded shells are of higher finishing quality compared to the new 3D-printed shells that don’t have the cleanest appearance and suffer from some visual gaps in the housing.
Noise isolation is slightly better on the original B200.
Sound – Similarities and Differences:
Used gear: FiiO Q5 (AM1 Module), my RME ADI-2 DAC
Brainwavz previously claimed that the sound remains untouched, however the redesigned shells might probably lead to some unexpected differences (coupling volume -> if vented woofer, tubing length & diameter & angle). Obviously I only have one sample of the original B200 and one sample of the B200 v2 on hand, so I can only comment on the specific differences that those particular two units have.
The good news is that the mids and highs on both are practically identical (with the v2 having a bit more level above 10 kHz, which I can confirm doing sine sweeps) and the slight differences one can see when measuring both in-ears and subtracting the results could be from normal variance between various units.
- - -
The differences however start with the sensitivity where the new B200 v2 is somewhat less sensitive than the older one and needs a higher volume setting in order to reach the same volume, not that it would really matter though since both are rather sensitive (efficient) in-ears.
The B200 v2 has got a bit less lower fundamental range/root warmth than the original B200, although both place voices on the fuller side, and quite equally so. Where they really differ though is the just mentioned lower fundamental range and the entire bass; everything below around 200 Hz to be exact, as the B200 v2 unfortunately rolls off towards the sub-bass – actually too much for in-ear levels.
The upper bass on the B200 v2 has got a less pronounced kick compared to the original B200, although this doesn’t mean that the v2 lacks it since it is still somewhat above neutral and can kick.
Continuing with the midbass, there is noticeably less fullness and slam going on in contrast to the original B200 whose midbass is quite rich, full and offers slam and warmth.
In absolute terms, most parts of the midbass portrayed by the B200 v2 are actually what one could consider neutral, however this is a bit of a contrast to the fundamental warmth hump, and as a result the B200 v2 features more warmth with very low voices and in the fundamental range and a somewhat more pronounced upper bass punch whereas the midbass falls a bit behind, although it is still there and with appropriately neutral levels, however too little compared to what’s above it.
Not all that much surprisingly, the low midbass sub-bass and actual sub-bass are represented with too little quantity – the B200 v2’s roll-off starts just too high and is too strong.
-
So yeah, the B200 v2 lack’s the original B200’s midbass and sub-bass density and richness as well as slam in these areas, and in absolute terms its sub-bass and low midbass are even below neutral levels, which is rather disappointing.
So if you don’t need any midbass slam and don’t mind having below-neutral levels of sub-bass (still audibly but definitely too quiet), the B200 v2 is okay since it does the rest very well and offers enough warmth in the low midrange and fundamental range. Just don’t really expect bass with it.
If you do however want mid- and sub-bass, which is the likelier case, you’re probably better off with a different in-ear (and there are several dynamic driver and even some BA (various single- and few dual-BA-) models around $100).
So while I easily recommend(ed) the (now unfortunately discontinued) original Brainwavz B200, the v2 doesn’t get a recommendation from me based on timbre – Brainwavz unfortunately just effed up when it comes to bass implementation with this one and didn’t manage to get a linear extension at least into the midbass.
- - -
Treble attack appears a little more direct and metallic (not really in a negative way) on the B200 v2 in comparison, however with similar details. The reason is simply because of the v2 being a bit more pronounced right above 10 kHz.
Midrange resolution is similar to me.
Very likely due to the rolling off bass on the v2, its lows appear subjectively tighter and cleaner compared to the original B200.
- - -
Both in-ears’ soundstages are of equal expansion and quality to my ears.
Conclusion:
There are several aspects about the new Brainwavz B200 v2 that are excellent: the mids, the highs, the resolution and soundstage, removable cables despite the price, great ergonomics, good and plenty accessories.
But then there are flaws such the average build quality/visual finish and especially that one timbre issue – the bass that starts to roll off just too early and too strongly for in-ear standards. There would be absolutely no complaint if the B200 v2 were earbuds, but that is obviously not the case. In-ears in general have to fare better and extend better in the lows, and the B200 v2 unfortunately does not, in contrast to the discontinued B200 that had great extension down low.
So overall, I wouldn’t quite recommend the B200 v2 whereas the original B200 was an easy recommendation and still is a favourite of mine it its price range (hereby I’m by the way even referring to its original MSRP that was about twice as high). The B200 v2 just appears like an incomplete product due to the light bass that starts to roll off too early for in-ear standards and is below neutral in quantity.
Applicable lesson: A product refreshment doesn’t automatically equal to progress and improvements in all areas.
- - - - - - - - -
Obviously, the largest (visual) difference between the original B200 and the v2 are the cables that are now replaceable, as well as the “frosty”, semi-transparent and 3D-printed shells. However unlike the B400 whose shells are 3D-printed as well, the B200 isn’t available in different colours.
Shell-wise, the v2 is only marginally larger and bulkier than the original one and equally comfortable.
When it comes to build quality though, the original B200’s injection-moulded shells are of higher finishing quality compared to the new 3D-printed shells that don’t have the cleanest appearance and suffer from some visual gaps in the housing.
Noise isolation is slightly better on the original B200.
Sound – Similarities and Differences:
Used gear: FiiO Q5 (AM1 Module), my RME ADI-2 DAC
Brainwavz previously claimed that the sound remains untouched, however the redesigned shells might probably lead to some unexpected differences (coupling volume -> if vented woofer, tubing length & diameter & angle). Obviously I only have one sample of the original B200 and one sample of the B200 v2 on hand, so I can only comment on the specific differences that those particular two units have.
The good news is that the mids and highs on both are practically identical (with the v2 having a bit more level above 10 kHz, which I can confirm doing sine sweeps) and the slight differences one can see when measuring both in-ears and subtracting the results could be from normal variance between various units.
- - -
The differences however start with the sensitivity where the new B200 v2 is somewhat less sensitive than the older one and needs a higher volume setting in order to reach the same volume, not that it would really matter though since both are rather sensitive (efficient) in-ears.
The B200 v2 has got a bit less lower fundamental range/root warmth than the original B200, although both place voices on the fuller side, and quite equally so. Where they really differ though is the just mentioned lower fundamental range and the entire bass; everything below around 200 Hz to be exact, as the B200 v2 unfortunately rolls off towards the sub-bass – actually too much for in-ear levels.
The upper bass on the B200 v2 has got a less pronounced kick compared to the original B200, although this doesn’t mean that the v2 lacks it since it is still somewhat above neutral and can kick.
Continuing with the midbass, there is noticeably less fullness and slam going on in contrast to the original B200 whose midbass is quite rich, full and offers slam and warmth.
In absolute terms, most parts of the midbass portrayed by the B200 v2 are actually what one could consider neutral, however this is a bit of a contrast to the fundamental warmth hump, and as a result the B200 v2 features more warmth with very low voices and in the fundamental range and a somewhat more pronounced upper bass punch whereas the midbass falls a bit behind, although it is still there and with appropriately neutral levels, however too little compared to what’s above it.
Not all that much surprisingly, the low midbass sub-bass and actual sub-bass are represented with too little quantity – the B200 v2’s roll-off starts just too high and is too strong.
-
So yeah, the B200 v2 lack’s the original B200’s midbass and sub-bass density and richness as well as slam in these areas, and in absolute terms its sub-bass and low midbass are even below neutral levels, which is rather disappointing.
So if you don’t need any midbass slam and don’t mind having below-neutral levels of sub-bass (still audibly but definitely too quiet), the B200 v2 is okay since it does the rest very well and offers enough warmth in the low midrange and fundamental range. Just don’t really expect bass with it.
If you do however want mid- and sub-bass, which is the likelier case, you’re probably better off with a different in-ear (and there are several dynamic driver and even some BA (various single- and few dual-BA-) models around $100).
So while I easily recommend(ed) the (now unfortunately discontinued) original Brainwavz B200, the v2 doesn’t get a recommendation from me based on timbre – Brainwavz unfortunately just effed up when it comes to bass implementation with this one and didn’t manage to get a linear extension at least into the midbass.
- - -
Treble attack appears a little more direct and metallic (not really in a negative way) on the B200 v2 in comparison, however with similar details. The reason is simply because of the v2 being a bit more pronounced right above 10 kHz.
Midrange resolution is similar to me.
Very likely due to the rolling off bass on the v2, its lows appear subjectively tighter and cleaner compared to the original B200.
- - -
Both in-ears’ soundstages are of equal expansion and quality to my ears.
Conclusion:
There are several aspects about the new Brainwavz B200 v2 that are excellent: the mids, the highs, the resolution and soundstage, removable cables despite the price, great ergonomics, good and plenty accessories.
But then there are flaws such the average build quality/visual finish and especially that one timbre issue – the bass that starts to roll off just too early and too strongly for in-ear standards. There would be absolutely no complaint if the B200 v2 were earbuds, but that is obviously not the case. In-ears in general have to fare better and extend better in the lows, and the B200 v2 unfortunately does not, in contrast to the discontinued B200 that had great extension down low.
So overall, I wouldn’t quite recommend the B200 v2 whereas the original B200 was an easy recommendation and still is a favourite of mine it its price range (hereby I’m by the way even referring to its original MSRP that was about twice as high). The B200 v2 just appears like an incomplete product due to the light bass that starts to roll off too early for in-ear standards and is below neutral in quantity.
Applicable lesson: A product refreshment doesn’t automatically equal to progress and improvements in all areas.
- - - - - - - - -
Just a quick update since there is already a full review of the B200
v2 published by me literally just above.
Meanwhile, the B200 v2 has undergone some slight changes, at least when it comes to the quality of the 3D-printed shells (finish, texture, evenness) which has improved since earlier batches, which is nice to see as the newer batches now feature build quality and finish that are worthy of the price.
When it comes to sound/tuning though, the current batch of the B200 v2 still suffers from the same issues as the earlier B200 v2, and it’s unfortunately got even slightly less bass and a bit more treble than the older B200 v2, which certainly doesn’t help with the impression of bass extension.
It would be nice if Brainwavz could return to the fullness, slam and extension of the original and unfortunately discontinued B200, or at least improve the linearity of the bass extension if they are going for a rather neutral tuning.
Meanwhile, the B200 v2 has undergone some slight changes, at least when it comes to the quality of the 3D-printed shells (finish, texture, evenness) which has improved since earlier batches, which is nice to see as the newer batches now feature build quality and finish that are worthy of the price.
When it comes to sound/tuning though, the current batch of the B200 v2 still suffers from the same issues as the earlier B200 v2, and it’s unfortunately got even slightly less bass and a bit more treble than the older B200 v2, which certainly doesn’t help with the impression of bass extension.
It would be nice if Brainwavz could return to the fullness, slam and extension of the original and unfortunately discontinued B200, or at least improve the linearity of the bass extension if they are going for a rather neutral tuning.