Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › O2 vs TOTL
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

O2 vs TOTL - Page 21

post #301 of 582

I guess I am just a bad objectivist (I am not a true objectivist anyway.)  Anyway though, the part about the K701 is completely correct.  Even worse, if that is the logic people are making when buying/amping the K701, then they should be introducing a fair bit of distortion to it by losing too much dampening factor o.O  Really though, what you say there applies to a LOT of different headphones though I guess.  It is like people buying all tube amps to power the HD800 because it takes away some detail without really compromising the music.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LizardKing1 View Post

 

Have you been talking to Steve Guttenberg? I don't know where this idea started that objectivists strive for a ruler-flat frequency response up to the headphones. The only way that would make sense would be with speakers, I guess. I'm not saying some objectivists don't want flatness all over the chain, I'm saying that's a personal preference and has nothing to do with being an objectivist.

 

The main idea, at least my interpretation of it, of objectivism is to have a ruler-flat chain up to the amp. When you reach the transducer, the last link in the chain, feel free to get what best suits your needs, and then alter it a bit if you want with an EQ, crossfeed, whatever. This seems rational, at least much more than buying amps in the hopes that their flaws will cancel out the headphones' flaws. It's also much cheaper, obviously. Very often do I see things like "the K701 just needs an amp to drive it to it's full potential" which usually means huge output impedance. People don't want to accept that it's a bright pair of headphones, they believe it just takes an inversely-flawed amp to "get it to shine".

post #302 of 582
Quote:
Originally Posted by linuxid10t View Post

I guess I am just a bad objectivist (I am not a true objectivist anyway.)  Anyway though, the part about the K701 is completely correct.  Even worse, if that is the logic people are making when buying/amping the K701, then they should be introducing a fair bit of distortion to it by losing too much dampening factor o.O  Really though, what you say there applies to a LOT of different headphones though I guess.  It is like people buying all tube amps to power the HD800 because it takes away some detail without really compromising the music.

 

Exactly the issue. I guess what people mean by "full potential" when they mention expensive amps is basically just distorted bass induced by a low damping factor. There is absolutely nothing wrong with enjoying your K701 with a high output-Z amp that creates a more appealing sound, but there is something wrong with saying that amp is better than a neutral low output-Z one, and there's something very wrong with convincing others to buy said amp otherwise they won't be able to fully enjoy their K701. What we enjoy more isn't necessarily what's better.

post #303 of 582
Quote:
Originally Posted by LizardKing1 View Post

 

Exactly the issue. I guess what people mean by "full potential" when they mention expensive amps is basically just distorted bass induced by a low damping factor. There is absolutely nothing wrong with enjoying your K701 with a high output-Z amp that creates a more appealing sound, but there is something wrong with saying that amp is better than a neutral low output-Z one, and there's something very wrong with convincing others to buy said amp otherwise they won't be able to fully enjoy their K701. What we enjoy more isn't necessarily what's better.

I really hate to ask but how do I remind you of Steve Guttenberg anyway?  Honestly, I very much dislike what he represents for the audio industry.  Very elitist.

post #304 of 582
Quote:
Originally Posted by linuxid10t View Post

I really hate to ask but how do I remind you of Steve Guttenberg anyway?  Honestly, I very much dislike what he represents for the audio industry.  Very elitist.

 

Haha sorry about that. A while ago Steve and Tyll at innerfidelity wrote an interview/article about subjectivism and objectivism in audio, and I just got the impression Steve had a very one-sided interpretation of objectivism. You can consider yourself an objectivist and use Grados or a Sony XB. He also mentioned how having a neutral transducer in a pair of headphones doesn't mean it will sound natural, but again even though that's an objective interpretation, not all objectivists go for full-on linearity.

http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/are-objective-headphone-measurements-relevant-audiophiles-subjective-experience

post #305 of 582
Quote:
Originally Posted by LizardKing1 View Post

 

Haha sorry about that. A while ago Steve and Tyll at innerfidelity wrote an interview/article about subjectivism and objectivism in audio, and I just got the impression Steve had a very one-sided interpretation of objectivism. You can consider yourself an objectivist and use Grados or a Sony XB. He also mentioned how having a neutral transducer in a pair of headphones doesn't mean it will sound natural, but again even though that's an objective interpretation, not all objectivists go for full-on linearity.

http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/are-objective-headphone-measurements-relevant-audiophiles-subjective-experience

I read InnerFidelity on occasion, but I have never actually read this article... (reads through)  Anyway, I try not to subscribe to one camp or another.

 

Edit: Just read the article and did Steve just say open Sennheiser headphones don't have a "Sennheiser sound signature?" -_____________-


Edited by linuxid10t - 6/15/12 at 5:30pm
post #306 of 582
Quote:
Originally Posted by LizardKing1 View Post

 

Have you been talking to Steve Guttenberg? I don't know where this idea started that objectivists strive for a ruler-flat frequency response up to the headphones. 

 

 

Yet another of the absurd straw-men that are attributed to the so-called "objectivists".  You should see it as a not very cleverly articulated and veiled and ultimately failed way of undermining the "objectivists" claims.  You will recall that Guttenberg is one and the same with the person who asserted publicly that lossless codecs flatten the soundstage.


Edited by Mauricio - 6/15/12 at 7:51pm
post #307 of 582
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mauricio View Post
 You will recall that Guttenberg is one and the same with the person who asserted publicly that lossless codecs flatten the soundstage.

Are you serious?! blink.gif

post #308 of 582
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13645_3-20029913-47.html

Every journalist knows never to let facts stand in the way of a good story.
post #309 of 582
Quote:
Originally Posted by anetode View Post

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13645_3-20029913-47.html
Every journalist knows never to let facts stand in the way of a good story.


Wow....and people listen to this guy!? What a stupid, confused moron! rolleyes.gif

 

I mean that in the best way possible - especially considering he is a "journalist" or "writer". It sounds like he is confusing "compression" terms. The compression added in the studio by a compressor vs the compression done by FLAC. Not the same.....

post #310 of 582
Quote:
Originally Posted by LFF View Post


Wow....and people listen to this guy!? What a stupid, confused moron! rolleyes.gif

 

I mean that in the best way possible - especially considering he is a "journalist" or "writer". It sounds like he is confusing "compression" terms. The compression added in the studio by a compressor vs the compression done by FLAC. Not the same.....

 

No... that can't be. I had my doubts about that guy... but now... Then again, he did erroneously tweet that Joe Grado had died last month.

post #311 of 582
Quote:
Originally Posted by LFF View Post


Wow....and people listen to this guy!? What a stupid, confused moron! rolleyes.gif

Note that you are speaking about one of the most widely published and highly respected headphone reviewers on the web triportsad.gif
post #312 of 582
Quote:
Originally Posted by anetode View Post


Note that you are speaking about one of the most widely published and highly respected headphone reviewers on the web triportsad.gif


OMG...I know....eek.gif

 

I'm gonna go get a drink....jeez....he must think the Earth is a few thousand years old too. :MAJOR FACEPALM:

post #313 of 582

We all make mistakes, but he really does needs to get his facts straight... Here is another instance: http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/harbeth-p3esr#comment-483252

post #314 of 582
Quote:
Originally Posted by ultrabike View Post

We all make mistakes, but he really does needs to get his facts straight... Here is another instance: http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/harbeth-p3esr#comment-483252

Yes...I understand...but he is supposed to be a journalist. Aren't they supposed to check their facts BEFORE the publish anything. Isn't someone else supposed to check it after he checks it?! WTF?

 

I also don't see any corrections/retractions after his FAIL articles. What is the world coming too? Perhaps he is looking for a job on FOX news....or Yahoo.

post #315 of 582

Quote:
Originally Posted by LFF View Post

Yes...I understand...but he is supposed to be a journalist. Aren't they supposed to check their facts BEFORE the publish anything. Isn't someone else supposed to check it after he checks it?! 

 

 

Agreed. He is a professional, and should definitively be held to high standards. CNET may do good in reviewing their process guidelines, so that these issues get minimized...


Edited by ultrabike - 6/16/12 at 12:07am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › O2 vs TOTL