Originally Posted by briskly
Aren't you being vain, Jude...
I have been reading The New York Times for as long as I can remember--it has been one of my favorite papers for much of my life. So when they post a mention of (and link to) Head-Fi in it, call me vain (which you did), but I think it's pretty cool, and see no problem saying so.
As for some of the other comments expressed:
There's a link to Head-Fi, so readers of the article could find their way here. And some people may click on the link solely to find out what $2000 headphones are about (as the article mentions that headphone prices go up that high, which is rather shocking to most). And if people with some interest in headphones end up here from that article--even just out of mild curiosity--then that's a good thing, in my opinion (even if their interest is initially in headphone models not typically Head-Fi'ish in nature).
Also, I understand some of the sentiment expressed so far (in this thread), but the article also gives HeadRoom strong mention, and mentions Audeze. Audeze. In The New York Times. I was excited to see it. Sennheiser, Etymotic, Klipsch and others are also mentioned, with specific mentions of the Sennheiser HD 25-1 II Originals (adidas), which is one of my favorite portable over-ears a Sennheiser/adidas headphone, and the Sony MDR-V6, which is the headphone that got me started down the path of better headphones many years ago.
Call me a bright-eyed Pangloss, but I was excited and optimistic to see some of these brands and models (and HeadRoom) given some mention and coverage in The New York Times.