The diary entries of a little girl who is now 30! ~ Part 2 - Page 176

The HD800's are the only Senns I've seen anyone say vary from model to model and it seems more intentional on Sennheiser's part as every couple thousand seem to get better, which is to say that Senn's QC is pretty darn good, even if I've seen 2 HD650's develop a concave right driver after a few years (with no detriment to the sound, somehow).

AFAIK, Sennheiser has extremely good QA. Any variations between samples of the same models seem to be quite small. I get the impression that they are very consistent overall. I can't speak for AKG or AT, though.

I should probably clarify that the Hifiman >>>> Audez'e sentiment I see here sometimes (not just Magick), while not entirely unreasonable (I'd agree the Hifimans are a better value), seems odd to me when Hifiman didn't match drivers for their earlier HE-500's (like mine) and shipped out a ton of HE-400's with broken drivers.  Weren't their IEM cables also known for falling apart at one point? 

 

For all we know JPS Labs could be the first up and coming ortho manufacturer not to have terrible quality control issues.

Edited by driver 8 - 11/16/12 at 7:24pm

We'll have to wait and see how their new spiderman headphone pans out. I'm starting to think that maybe it's a good idea to always wait a few months when a new model is released into the market. In Audeze and Hifimans defense the LCD 3 quality control issues from what I've read seem to have been resolved since they started manufacturing their headphones in house and Hifiman seems to slowly be getting its act together. I think Fang screwed up with the HE-400 release and should have sat on the release date and waited until he was absolutely sure the new HE-400 was ready for the shelves. I think it was just a case of getting out product as fast as possible after the release date was announced when they should have taken their time. As for the HE-500, can't really comment on that although nowadays everyone seems pretty happy with their HE-500.

This is quite rude.


1. I did not start on arguing which headphones are better. Maybe you should read the discussion from the beginning . I was just explained some parts from the things i wrote about the headphones and the so called voyeuristic part of the thread I started.

2. I am not an apostle of Audeze. I listened to other headphones and systems which i like. It so happens I like Audeze very much and I happen to be a very enthusiastic person when it comes to my hobbies.

I just did not like some of the logic and arguments brought into the discussion: The comparison with the Beats headphones, the MCDonalds restaurant, etc which eventually in the context I have brought , made no sense. It was like you did not even read any of my posts.

Maybe you should look a little bit into statistics and probability and what they are about, and what i have stated again and again in my posts.
Edited by dan.gheorghe - 11/18/12 at 9:26am

I think it was ardgedee (or how ever you spell it; sorry ) that said how good the Earpods are. Now that I got the chance to borrow my friend's, I can agree. They are hellishly good.

I assume you mean "statistics" not "statics" - as I doubt the forces exerted by the headphones on the wearer are the focus of the discussion...

As I stated earlier, internet reviews are FAR from valid statistical sampling. Picking headphones based on "statistics & probability" is why the analogies to McDonald's and Beats were raised. Using an argument like this:

That leads directly to the comparison that 1 million people like Beats or 1 million people like McDonalds.

I also think the number of relatively low post count, yet very vocal Audeze fans that seem to have appeared on head-fi recently seems a bit odd. But, this is the internet, so who knows.

You assume I was talking about you, I wasn't. I believe you have been influenced by them, not that you're a part of them. Be careful not to jump to conclusions.
Edited by Magick Man - 11/18/12 at 9:39am

This man is brilliant, he gets a big gold star!

Precisely. To quote Bill, "something IS rotten in the state of Denmark".
Edited by Magick Man - 11/18/12 at 9:40am

Thank you. I have corrected my post. I hadn't notice it.
If you would have read all I have said during the beginning of discussions you would have noticed I have said many times that the target upon the statistics are made is very important. This is how I made some of my picks. I read a lot of opinions, reviews and in the end I test for myself what i think deserves testing. However I am reading the sources I consider are worth it, not playboy or some other magazine that seldom writes about audio gear . This saved me a lot of time with many things.

So what is your explanation? I am very curios ...

Consider the fact that Audeze was founded in 2009 and it took some time for the company to get noticed and people reaching their headphones . The fist Audeze dealer from Romania made a contract with Audeze just now, in the beginning of the november.

You guys are hilarious ) Do you work in politics? Is either of you a lawyer or something?
Edited by dan.gheorghe - 11/18/12 at 9:45am

Quote:

 

Interesting. A new Apple Store just happened to open up in my local mall yesterday, so maybe I'll pick them up today when I check the store out, so long as I am able to get inside the place

I'd like to compare them to my old Sony earbuds (Sony MDR-E434/Sony MDR-E575) too. I'd be happy if they were an upgrade on the old early 90's Sony earbuds, as the old Apple iBuds were no such thing.

You have owned the LCD-2 for ~1 week. You fall into category #1:

 

So if someone REALLY likes 'x' product and you don't, you automatically believe that people opinions have influenced that someone?!?

 

WTF!?!?

 

So if I truly like, I don't know, an Nvidia video card, but you think ATI/AMD makes the same product cheaper with similar performance and you like it more, then I'm automatically a sheep/shill/etc.?!? (even though Nvidia is already 'proven' and hundreds of thousands, millions if you count home consoles, seem Ok with it?).

 

Who the hell are you to believe people can't think on their own and LIKE WHAT THEY like without having an agenda, just simply liken a specific product! I liked the SRH1840s! The "pirates" hated it due to distortion, etc. There are others that also liked the product. Are we wrong because in OUR opinion the headphones were good sounding to OUR ears? So, if more people like the 1840s, then we are "wrong", because whatever the reasons the "pirates" state? Pleaaaasee...

 

If you don't like the headphones, then good for you, just don't assume, and attack either Dan nor anyone. If you think they are "sheep", keep it to yourself... it just makes you sound like an ass (_*_)!

 

 

 

(with the exception of Apple lovers!! :-p)

Edited by gelocks - 11/18/12 at 10:21am

I have tested LCD2 for one week one year ago due to the kindness of a friend of mine one. He also gave me HD800 for a week afterwards. I have tested them both on Burson HA-160DS. I liked hd800 very much too, but I found LCD2 to be more suitable for me. I have planning to get LCD2 for one year until the beginning of November this year.

I knew very well what I will be purchasing. I do not have to justify myself ) .

I have recently tried both cans with the new Conductor from Burson. I found out that the LCD2s were not giving their max with my 160-ds, because of the amplification ( the ds gives 1w per channel, and the conductor gives 4 w). So be carefull with what you have tested the lcd2.
I also loved ht hd800 with conductor. It gave it musicality, better bass impact and took out the brightness. I started liking listening to rock on hd800 which i hated with the 160ds.

Thanks gelock. I don't understand either from where those assumptions come )
Edited by dan.gheorghe - 11/18/12 at 10:38am

There's a point at which discussing the basis on which one forms their opinions becomes judgement on the character of the person, and that's a whole other -- and very personal -- area that:

 

1. Head-fi gets into frequently

2. Rarely goes well

3. Tends to drive away the people who hadn't paid for an argument.