New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Klipsch Custom 3 Review - Page 3

post #31 of 63
Thread Starter 
I do appreciate the criticism and critique of the review - and it points to something that is real important - not all reviews are written for every user.

One of the things I do (that actually helps pay the bills) in addition to the writing is that I teach college courses in writing - specifically technical writing.

One key point we study in class is that whatever writing we do - it has to be geared towards the "target demographic." The difficulty is that we never know who every reader it - but we don know who most are.

So, for gadgetnutz and cdrinfo - I write the identical review because demographics are similar. The typical reader is well educated, has disposable income, liked gadgets and "new" toys and appreciates quality.

The typical reader uses an iPod or Zune or other non-amped setup for their listening and they have money to get a "nice sounding" pair of new earphones.

They typically are not concerned with "microphonics, sibilance, armatures" or other things that are top priority to a head-fi reader.

I appreciate that you guys want more detail, more direct comparison and more real pictures - but you guys (now sit down for this) are not exactly "typical." You are enthusiasts and enthusiast blogging and reviewing is completely different for typical consumer reviews.

My guess is that most of you are dissatisfied with a review from CNET or ENGADGET or any other site that tends to write a more brief review geared for the consumer.

Now, I also write for Crackberry.com which is a BlackBerry enthusiast web site - those reviews are very different - they require real pictures and some comparisons to other devices or products - it is an enthusiast website.

I think that it is important to realize that there is a whole world out there that is quite different and has different wants and desires than this community. I would venture am educated guess that the vast majority of people who purchase these high end earphones fit more into the CNET or Gadgetnutz demographic than the head-fi demographic.

I just with that rather than trying to force either a "conversion" to what pleases you or "trashing" what may be on another site that you take into consideration that not every product review is geared towards the critical audiophile - but without those non-headfi approved reviews (like mine) many, many people would never be exposed to the fantastic headphones you guys are so passionate about.
post #32 of 63
^Gary, thanks for sharing this background with us. The criticism that you have received here shows an interesting bias that demonstrates that our forum is clearly not "CNET or ENGADGET".
post #33 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by GaryM63 View Post
I do appreciate the criticism and critique of the review - and it points to something that is real important - not all reviews are written for every user.

One of the things I do (that actually helps pay the bills) in addition to the writing is that I teach college courses in writing - specifically technical writing.

One key point we study in class is that whatever writing we do - it has to be geared towards the "target demographic." The difficulty is that we never know who every reader it - but we don know who most are.

So, for gadgetnutz and cdrinfo - I write the identical review because demographics are similar. The typical reader is well educated, has disposable income, liked gadgets and "new" toys and appreciates quality.

The typical reader uses an iPod or Zune or other non-amped setup for their listening and they have money to get a "nice sounding" pair of new earphones.

They typically are not concerned with "microphonics, sibilance, armatures" or other things that are top priority to a head-fi reader.

I appreciate that you guys want more detail, more direct comparison and more real pictures - but you guys (now sit down for this) are not exactly "typical." You are enthusiasts and enthusiast blogging and reviewing is completely different for typical consumer reviews.

My guess is that most of you are dissatisfied with a review from CNET or ENGADGET or any other site that tends to write a more brief review geared for the consumer.

Now, I also write for Crackberry.com which is a BlackBerry enthusiast web site - those reviews are very different - they require real pictures and some comparisons to other devices or products - it is an enthusiast website.

I think that it is important to realize that there is a whole world out there that is quite different and has different wants and desires than this community. I would venture am educated guess that the vast majority of people who purchase these high end earphones fit more into the CNET or Gadgetnutz demographic than the head-fi demographic.

I just with that rather than trying to force either a "conversion" to what pleases you or "trashing" what may be on another site that you take into consideration that not every product review is geared towards the critical audiophile - but without those non-headfi approved reviews (like mine) many, many people would never be exposed to the fantastic headphones you guys are so passionate about.
Thanks for pointing this out.
I still have a couple of questions though.
First: you invited us (Head-Fi) to read this review. Does this not mean you consider us as part of your "target demografig"?
Second: what do you consider to be the difference between a review and an add?
Thirdly (tied to number two I guess): what is the goal of the piece you wrote?

I think the goal of your communication is even more important than the target demografic, because you can alway know what you want to achieve, but you can't always know everything you want to know about your audience...
post #34 of 63
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kees View Post
Thanks for pointing this out.
I still have a couple of questions though.
First: you invited us (Head-Fi) to read this review. Does this not mean you consider us as part of your "target demografig"?
Second: what do you consider to be the difference between a review and an add?
Thirdly (tied to number two I guess): what is the goal of the piece you wrote?

I think the goal of your communication is even more important than the target demografic, because you can alway know what you want to achieve, but you can't always know everything you want to know about your audience...
Is Headfi part of the "Target Demographic?"
I think some members are - I had noticed there was much discussion about the Custom 3's but not many reviews yet on the web - so I thought it might be interesing.

What is the difference between a review and an ad?
A review offers opinions, reactions and responses to products. I always give things I review a "letter grade" and pros and cons. Not all reviews are as positive as this one was - not by a long shot.

The goal of the piece I wrote:
The goal was to introduce our readers to a new product and offer my opinion and review. Many of our readers don't know about Klipsch - so that's why there was an introduction - some like to "shop specs" - so that's why they are included. I try to provide the information that "our" readers want and offer my experience and opinion - that's all.
post #35 of 63
Thread Starter 
Kees,

One more thing - you are absolutely right that you can't know everything about the target demographic - especially when things are broadcast on the web. All we can do is try our best.
post #36 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by GaryM63 View Post
Is Headfi part of the "Target Demographic?"
I think some members are - I had noticed there was much discussion about the Custom 3's but not many reviews yet on the web - so I thought it might be interesing.

What is the difference between a review and an ad?
A review offers opinions, reactions and responses to products. I always give things I review a "letter grade" and pros and cons. Not all reviews are as positive as this one was - not by a long shot.
A lot of ads use the same form. The difference must be in some other aspect, don't you think?

Quote:
Originally Posted by GaryM63 View Post
The goal of the piece I wrote:
The goal was to introduce our readers to a new product and offer my opinion and review. Many of our readers don't know about Klipsch - so that's why there was an introduction - some like to "shop specs" - so that's why they are included. I try to provide the information that "our" readers want and offer my experience and opinion - that's all.
That is not a goal, that is an action/activity.
The goal in this setting is someting like: do you want your audience to be informed after they read your article (know that Klipsch made an IEM)? Or do you want them to believe something after they read it (believe that it is a super top of the line product they can't do without)? Or do you want them to be able to do someting (discern between the different offerings and pick out the ones they will most likely prefer)?

Your piece reads like your goal was to make your audience believe this is someting really worth having.

I don't say this is your intention (I can't read your mind), but it is how it comes across to me.
post #37 of 63
As stated earlier, I am happy to say that Head Fi doesn't follow Engadget and Cnet blindly.
post #38 of 63
who cares - he sparked discussion - any forum goer should be pleased.

Plus how can us fellow head-fiers make fun of engadet and cnet and less involved reviews without reading them and understanding their flaws?

Knowledge of all levels of discussion and opinion is required if you're really passionate about what you listen to so you can engage with everyone regardless of their depth in head-fi.
post #39 of 63
This is all so true. I had opposite reactions to both the Sleek and Custom 3 to Gary, which leads me to believe that ear canal shape is completely dictating how differently we hear things. I would categorize the CNET review of the SA6 in the same camp as Gary's impressions of it, and feel safe in saying that the CNET reviewer doesn't have the right shaped ear to achieve the best seal with them, and therefore hear all they have to offer. I bet the same thing is going on with everyone who hears the C3 poorly, including me. I find it very interesting that people have a certain 'compatibility' with brands of earphones, thus sparking some heated discussion / debate!
post #40 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by cn11 View Post
This is all so true. I had opposite reactions to both the Sleek and Custom 3 to Gary, which leads me to believe that ear canal shape is completely dictating how differently we hear things. I would categorize the CNET review of the SA6 in the same camp as Gary's impressions of it, and feel safe in saying that the CNET reviewer doesn't have the right shaped ear to achieve the best seal with them, and therefore hear all they have to offer. I bet the same thing is going on with everyone who hears the C3 poorly, including me. I find it very interesting that people have a certain 'compatibility' with brands of earphones, thus sparking some heated discussion / debate!

Share the same experience as you. The Custom3 did not click with me in any regard. The SA6 is running on all cylinders. I even was able to get a good seal most of the time with the Custom3, but I found it to sound very thin and uninspired.
post #41 of 63
Hey Gary,
I hope you don't mind, I figured it would be better to centralize all in one thread, here are a few pics I took for a comparative review of the custom2 and custom 3 (here, but it's in french) :




























post #42 of 63
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cn11 View Post
This is all so true. I had opposite reactions to both the Sleek and Custom 3 to Gary, which leads me to believe that ear canal shape is completely dictating how differently we hear things. I would categorize the CNET review of the SA6 in the same camp as Gary's impressions of it, and feel safe in saying that the CNET reviewer doesn't have the right shaped ear to achieve the best seal with them, and therefore hear all they have to offer. I bet the same thing is going on with everyone who hears the C3 poorly, including me. I find it very interesting that people have a certain 'compatibility' with brands of earphones, thus sparking some heated discussion / debate!
I think this is a huge point in this discussion. One of the things I love - absolutely love about the Sleeks is the ability to make one ear different than the other.

Many years ago my right ear drum burst on a long over seas plane ride. I had to have surgery to ultimately fix it which left me with limited high end frequency loss in my right ear - not terrible - but noticeable.

I have been using the ++ treble tube in my right ear and the + in my left ear - for the first time in my life I feel a sense of "balance" in the high frequencies.

I am just having trouble getting a good seal - I have tried the Shure Olives, the stock tips on the Sleeks and the Klipsch gels to try to get a better seal.

The surgery also left me with a much smaller ear canal on the right hand side. I am sure that part of my positive experience with the Klipsch design is their ear gel- it just works in my ears.

This is why it is so hard to recommend an earphone - especially an IEM or canal phone - all of our ears are different - great point.
post #43 of 63
If you want a snug, but comfy fit with the Sleeks, try the Shure yellow foamies. I had used them with the Atrios, and when the Sleeks arrived, thought I would give them a try. For my ear canals, at least, they are the perfect match as they just fill up perfectly, and since they are short, they do not muffle or stifle any of the Sleeks fantastic sound. I didn't mind the Sleek flanges, but to me, the yellow foamies are perfection. Give them a try. PM me and I will mail you a pair.

Again, I didn't mean to bash your review. But it does sort of push the reader into a corner, as in these are the best thing out there. It makes more sense to compare them to a range of phones in the same price range.

As for reviews, the Computer Shopper reviewer in the UK felt the Shure SE-210s were a better phone than the SA6s. Doh!
post #44 of 63
He must work for Klipsch. If not they should hire him.
post #45 of 63
Gary, my question got lost in all of this discussion. Just putting it out there again because I'm really curious.

"BTW Gary, have you been able to listen to the Ultimate Ears Triple.fi 10 Pro or Shure E500/SE530? Those two have always been highly regarded by many at Head-Fi (being that they are the top of the line universal IEMs for both of those companies).

I assume you have, but I just wanted to make sure those were taking into account based on your "I have listened to just about every earphone released in the past few years" statement. Looking at your profile, I see your inventory includes the lower end Shure and Ultimate Ears models but neither of their flagship models.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav: