New Jecklin Float QA !!! - Page 15

You may be right.  The old floats are not that sensitive to positioning although the panels are angled in at the front and out at the back, having a similar effect to an angled earpad without the sealing.  From what I've been able to see this looks like the same arrangement on the new QA.

 

The panels of the old floats (which I believe are the same on the new) are the largest I've seen on any electrostatic earphone

 

Quote:

Edited by complin - 10/21/12 at 5:20am

 

It's simple. Because the tonal characteristics, a Stax has nothing to do with bad.

So again: A person needs to know where she stands. If she preferred musical circus, fine headphone systems are the wrong tool.

No, they're right: Stax or other similar systems are not made for a very specific group of people.

However, such systems are made ​​for people who have a sense for these systems.

A sense of natural reproduction.

Basic requirement!

No.

That was not my intention.

But when they read comments on forums for many years, they automatically come to the following conclusion:

For many people, high-quality headphone systems are not made​​.

Because these people are on a sound that has to do with a natural play anything.

I must not go beyond Mozart with fat basses.

I must not use a bass smash the ears.

I do not have any volume until your eardrums burst.

An electric guitar does not have to scream.

If you read comments over the years, there are very often exactly these things that are criticized. Or similar.

Then I ask myself: What do a quality reproduction with such remarks?

in my opinion, is the circus. It has nothing to do with subjective or objective. It's a circus.

 

 

I'll give one more example:

I would have to seek out the appropriate words - is very troublesome.

Here things have been written about Stax (007, first version to last):

If you have read this, you had to come to the conclusion: The Stax engineers must be stupid. Correspondingly, the difference would be this: It's raining at the same time, while it is dry.

I know all the 007 versions. Not a single one is such that it is not 100% Stax.

Such it was written as an example: the sound is so dark, so much waste in the heights - it did not work. Scrap.

etc, etc, etc,

It is only an example. I would have to seek out everything in detail.

If you read something that has nothing to do with objective or subjective. It is because the wrong people have a tool in your hand.

And this view has nothing to do with arrogance.

There are people who have nothing to do with natural reproduction. It's about people who have no sensitivity. You give them something in his hand and it breaking.

And so then what are the comments..

Edited by michaelxray - 10/21/12 at 6:02am

 

 

It's not that simple.

 

Allow me to clarify.

 

When I say the reputation of this product is being negatively affected by this thread, I mean in the context of this forum specifically. Here at head-fi, there is a lot of suspicion over new product announcements. Head-fi is a place for sharing information, but it's also a place for vendors to do business and members to engage in a cycle of consumerism.

 

Without getting into the root causes of it, the fact remains that quite a bit of hype gets perpetuated on hobbyist forums. New products are being released every day on all levels of this hobby, and when you get to summit-fi, one sees a procession of new headphones demanding increasing high sums and being touted as the new best transducer. It's par for the course.

 

As is the suspicion that people have when they read statements about this or that headphone being the new pinnacle. It's just a natural defense mechanism, and a healthy one to an extent: it keeps people from blowing tons of money on stuff that may not live up to expectations. So when people come into a thread like this and see a product that is an unknown quantity (yes, it has Dr. Jecklin's name attached to it, and he was involved in its development, but most head-fiers don't know about QUAD Musik) they're going to be curious but also skeptical. Seeing someone like michaelxray come out of seemingly nowhere to post about how these headphones are better than the pre-established canon, while at the same time being very defensive and not offering much in the way of genuinely substantive commentary, seems to many people like pure hype.

 

I'm not saying he's right or wrong. Obviously, we all have differing tastes and needs, and subsequently different takes on what makes a good transducer. I'm merely stating that his efforts in this thread to promote this product have backfired. Now people have an association of his behavior with this product. Especially in a new product that is not available for auditioning to the majority of the world in advance, there is suspicion when certain people with low post counts show up to wax poetical about it. It's called shilling. People harbor a belief---perhaps naively, perhaps not---that good products will speak for themselves and don't require shilling.

 

Simply put: every post made on this forum, every public declaration and speech act, is made for a reason by the person posting it. People are going to ask, why is michaelxray acting like a shill? I don't know if he is one or not, but he is acting like one. He's either genuinely enthusiastic about these, a rabid fan who is not comporting himself well publicly, or it's because he's purposefully trying to hype this product. Either way, it's making people suspicious about the product itself. Overall his posts lack genuine perspective and are wildly unbalanced, and people are now associating the Float QA with these posts.

 

Not just on this forum, but other forums where he's posted very similar things as well. In either case, it's clear he wants the Float QA to succeed (and if it sounds as good as you say, I want it to succeed too!). However he's ironically putting a bad taste in people's mouths. There are so many products out there, and people are looking for any excuse they can find to dismiss something. These types of hype threads are genuinely enough to turn people away.

 

When more people get to hear this and post their impressions, it will go a long way in easing the concerns of others. The Float QA may very well be an amazing headphone, and I'm certainly looking forward to trying it. I won't be posting my thoughts in this thread however, because it has simply gone off the rails. There's too much drama and BS here. Best to start fresh.

No, you make a mistake thinking.

Where's the hype?

I have written from the beginning: The float is more precise than any headphones. He has the natural and truer sound.

The only headphones I must exclude, the 009 Okay, I am referring not therefore continue on the 009, because he does not do for me in different characteristic, since it uses pads. Okay, is my view.

Let's forget for a moment the 009

Where is my residual hype?

Just because I testify that the float is the most accurate headphones?

I think it has nothing to do with hype or fairy tale.

The point is that many people feel hurt when they read this.

You have to be an expensive headphones at home or more, and then a person comes and writes the float makes everything better.

This then creates frustration. What do people do? What they usually do.

Write negative. You try to build some kind of protection.

A rational man would be happy first. He would be glad, because perhaps there is a possibility that there is such a good headphone.

But what is being done? It is written negative. All sorts of arguments are sought.

Why? If the float is operating in what I write - it's a loss for some people?

 

You're reading too much into people michael. For now, frankly speaking, it's what MF said: pure shilling smell. I'd love to hear this float headphone but really seeing the posts of two fans on steroids is really making me skeptical. Not so much for my existing gear (I trust my ears more than anyone else, even though I try to keep an open mind) but for exactly what MF said: there's so much junk being pushed out there it takes some serious effort to distinguish the truly special stuff. 

 

And overall, while I think I sometimes come across as obnoxious or condescending (the french in me ;) ), I have to say every thing you post beats me by a factor 100 or more ;).

Intelligence is a blessing. And there, where happiness is not at home, that intelligence is raining from the sky, you have no chance.

Text changed, sorry

 

 

 

When they see it that way, I have to live with it.

But do not worry. I'm very far from it.

No matter what they think, no matter how they view me, they also remember:

The float quality remains the same.

That's my advantage - not my disadvantage.

Whether that is important to them or not, they have to decide yourself.

You have to defend anything, I take nothing away from them.

Edited by michaelxray - 10/21/12 at 7:52am

Dear Sam73 and MichaelXray, do you own the new Jecklin Float (first batch) or did you hear it from the recent Quad-Musik meeting? Did you or they use Quad 405 amplifier as mentioned earlier? I suppose they are using their own transformer what jumper cables do they use? Can you describe more about its treble, mid, bass response? how's about the soundstage? What impress both of you the most about this headphone? Does it look really ugly when you put the new Jecklin Float on your head? any head turning?

If I had a nickel for every time I've read some new headphone sounds like real life, I'd have enough to pay for these headphones. LOL.

Edited by MuppetFace - 10/22/12 at 7:46am

Agree 100%. I  look forward to your new thread.

 

 

I would also like to know the tech details on the QA. I'm  interested in the new power supply for my vintage Floats.

Sam73

If I can interpret what you are saying is that the QA Float provides a more holistic integrated soundscape of the musicians and acoustic they are playing in.  However; the HD 800 separates out and pinpoints all the individual instruments and sections of the orchestra which is not how you would hear in the concert hall (but probably how it was recorded).

 

One thing that has been criticised of the previous Floats were the transformers.  It has bee stated that the new transformer box will provide a frequency response down to 20 HZ and it is fully compatible with the old Jecklin's.  On the face of it the transducers in the new QA look much the same as the previous version, so has anyone tried the original Float to find out how much the performance can be improved with the new transformers?

 

 

Edited by complin - 10/22/12 at 8:38am