Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Sony MH1 R&D Story ...and discussion.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Sony MH1 R&D Story ...and discussion. - Page 10

post #136 of 232
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs View Post

And again: why does Rin's article make the MH1C out to be trash when his own measurements actually make them out to be "pretty good minus the bass" as you put it?  Why does he pan the MH1C for its poor HF response in the deep insertion condition when it is obvious from his own data at the end that these were tuned for the more comfortable shallow insertion condition (and more successfully in the treble frequencies than any set Rin measured bar none as far as I can see)?  Why is this engineering feat relegated to a footnote?  Why put a designed-in bass boost in the spotlight as the sore point when it can be easily EQed out with a primitive 5-band equalizer, and when Sony has tackled the problem with high frequency peaks in the shallow insertion condition--which usually requires a level of parametric EQ not available on any mobile player to correct and even then is sensitive to small changes in fit?

He himself agreed with your latest comment on the MH1 article, better than expensive sets in midhighs/treble, minus the bass

You: Looking at your reviews, the MH1C still looks more linear with shallow insertion than either of these expensive sets..(GR07/GR10)

Rin: Indeed, except the gross bass

 

He critiques some of the tuning approach, the response looks nice after the actual IEM analysis which he likes (implied), even with deep insertion. He usually portrays the main graphs at the reference planel for consistency (even the TF10 which can't be taken there lol), it will be masking things if he didn't show how they are better shallow. Not only is the bass too boosted, it's too slow as well. 


Edited by Inks - 11/11/12 at 9:49pm
post #137 of 232
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs View Post

I think it's obvious that Rin's wording in the article would be read the other way round, that ClieOS was taken in as a member of Sony Mobile.  If you called somebody a thief when you thought the word "thief" meant "a really nice guy" that doesn't mean you don't need to retract your statement.  If Rin is suspicious of ClieOS's objectivity in light of his cooperation with Sead he needs to put it in words that correctly reflect his level of suspicion, not a word that calls ClieOS a Sony employee.

It can be read the other way around, I'll admit (though I already showed that it isn't intended that way), I'll suggest an edit but I think the other parties are taking things out of hand as well. No need to provoke conflict by making ridiculous assumptions such as saying RIn's implications involved monetary compensation by Sony to ClieOS. 


Edited by Inks - 11/11/12 at 9:57pm
post #138 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inks View Post

It can be read the other way around, I'll admit (though already showed that it isn't intended that way), I'll suggest an edit but I think the other parties are taking things out of hand as well, no need to provoke conflict. 

 

I think you two think they are overreacting only because you two are misreading the words Rin wrote himself.  Kind of like how Americans can't understand why Muslims need to go bomb a US embassy over a stupid movie (well that's an exaggeration and I'm not condoning that particular act, but you get the idea)

post #139 of 232
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs View Post

I think you two think they are overreacting only because you two are misreading the words Rin wrote himself.

It was in regards to posters who assumed Rin suggested monetary compensation or silly things of the sort. 

 

I hope these latest post clear things up a bit and lay things to rest. Don't expect a response from Rin himself as he goes through sleepless nights just to analyze IEMs and his backlog has become huge, but I know exactly what his intentions were as we have discussed the article.


Edited by Inks - 11/11/12 at 10:08pm
post #140 of 232

Well if affiliated means "partly or wholly owned by Sony" it's not a stretch to imagine the word to imply ClieOS getting paid for the daily running of the blog, never mind this particular review... so no I don't think that's overracting either.
 

post #141 of 232
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inks View Post

so much at once lol. 
Again, I think Rin just means that your association with the engineer is of suspicion after the positive review, just plain skepticism. 

Let's hope that's the case. In anyway, I think we have spent enough time on this and I don't want to drag this issue any further than it is now.

I do want to point out the Rin's concern has been foreseen. Sead actually wasn't too sure about writing the article and it was me who convinces him at the end (I'll take full responsibility tongue.gif). The idea of a 'Behind-the-Scene' article is purely out of the motivation of encouraging an engineer to talk to the community in a meaningful way. I remember the good old days when we can discuss IEM theory and design with people in the industry like Don Wilson and Jerry Harvey, but now they don't come to our forum any more because the big evil label people tend to put on them. I, on the other hand, care as much about the continuation of the discussion as I do with the innovation and improvement of IEM. I'll rather get labelled than to keep the discussion out of the door, especially when the engineer is willing to take the same risk without any PR shielding in between. I know this is a long shot and could very well be a PR disaster for the involved company and a reputation destroyer on my part, but somebody has to do it - so while this chapter of discussion is pretty much ended on my part, you will continue to see more article like this on my blog (and HF if the admins don't mind) as long as there are still engineer out there willing to risk talking publicly about his audio passion. That's the hope, if it isn't too much to hope for.
Edited by ClieOS - 11/11/12 at 10:12pm
post #142 of 232
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs View Post

Well if affiliated means "partly or wholly owned by Sony" it's not a stretch to imagine the word to imply ClieOS getting paid for the daily running of the blog, never mind this particular review... so no I don't think that's overracting either.
 

I already stated the intentions are being reversed, Sony engineer is the one taken in, ClieOS latest post makes it clear that indeed it was the case. I think assumptions were made too hastily, but I do apologize may not have been clearer. 

 

 

Originally Posted by ClieOS View Post
Let's hope that's the case. In anyway, I think we have spent enough time on this and I don't want to drag this issue any further than it is now.
I do want to point out the Rin's concern has been foreseen. Sead actually isn't too sure about writing the article and it was me who convinces him at the end (I'll take full responsibility tongue.gif). The idea of a 'Behind-the-Scene' article is purely out of the motivation of encouraging an engineer to talk to the community in a meaningful way. I remember the good old days when we can discuss IEM theory and design with people in the industry like Don Wilson and Jerry Harvey, but now they don't come to our forum any more because the big evil label people tend to put on them. I, on the other hand, care as much about the continuation of the discussion as I do with the innovation and improvement of IEM. I'll rather get labelled than to keep the discussion out of the door, especially when the engineer is willing to take the same risk without any PR shielding in between. I know this is a long shot and could very well be a PR disaster for the involved company and a reputation destroyer on my part, but somebody has to do it - so while this chapter of discussion is pretty much ended on my part, you will continue to see more article like this on my blog (and HF if the admins don't mind) as long as there are still engineer out there willing to risk talking publicly about his audio passion. That's the hope, if it isn't too much to hope for.

I do applaud the cause, but there are inevitable compromises unfortunately. The article does introduce the more novice into an idea of how an IEM may be tuned, helpful indeed. 

 

Also, he critiques GE's new reference curve because the big subbass boost just isn't needed and most of the time, tuning will create an inevitable midbass. Maximize extension with a relatively flat response and/or a well done time delay and you got the 6db phenomenon covered.


Edited by Inks - 11/11/12 at 10:20pm
post #143 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClieOS View Post

The idea of a 'Behind-the-Scene' article is purely out of the motivation of encouraging an engineer to talk to the community in a meaningful way. I remember the good old days when we can discuss IEM theory and design with people in the industry like Don Wilson and Jerry Harvey, but now they don't come to our forum any more because the big evil label people tend to put on them. I, on the other hand, care as much about the continuation of the discussion as I do with the innovation and improvement of IEM. I'll rather get labelled than to keep the discussion out of the door, especially when the engineer is willing to take the same risk without any PR shielding in between. I know this is a long shot and could very well be a PR disaster for the involved company and a reputation destroyer on my part, but somebody has to do it - so while this chapter of discussion is pretty much ended on my part, you will continue to see more article like this on my blog (and HF if the admins don't mind) as long as there are still engineer out there willing to risk talking publicly about his audio passion. That's the hope, if it isn't too much to hope for.

Thanks ClieOS. Really appreciate your effort. I really enjoy reading the engineering behind a product.
As an engineer myself (non-audio), the efforts and ingenuity we put into products are often not seen by the end user. The glamour and appreciation of a product doesn't always get expressed back to the engineers either. It's good for there to be some direct interaction.
Edited by jjmai - 11/11/12 at 10:29pm
post #144 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs View Post

 

I think you two think they are overreacting only because you two are misreading the words Rin wrote himself.  Kind of like how Americans can't understand why Muslims need to go bomb a US embassy over a stupid movie (well that's an exaggeration and I'm not condoning that particular act, but you get the idea)

Man, I don't think it's a good idea to bring such a sensitive theme like terrorism to a IEM thread that is hot as it is. I am Mexican so I don't support the US nor the Muslims, but I think that killing isn't justify with anything but selfdefense. But enough of that.

post #145 of 232

Ummm.

I thought this thread was about mh1 r&d?

when did it transform into ClieOS vs Rin???

post #146 of 232

I like and have defended Rin's blog even if not in full agreement but to me the word 'blatantly' leaves little wiggle room for intent. Without that, I can see a misunderstanding but I do think Rin misspoke here whether intentional or not. Stuff happens and I'm sure we'll get over it but that wording does mean that the review he's referring to is not to be taken at face value. I don't like when motive is inferred in any review, especially beyond speculation. Blatantly removes speculation and implies a more definite nature to the deed. I think there's too much shill and deception type comments in reviews in general, even in the case that they may be correct. As long as it's speculation on intent by the writer it colors the objectivity of the reviewer as much the reviewed. I think it's difficult for many to understand how difficult it can be to tune a device, especially multi driver. It's a unique mix of science and art that often involves difficult choices. Some will agree with these choices and others won't but it doesn't mean that there was a mistake.

 

The nice thing about Rin's reviews are that the measurements are there for us to take what we will so there's always something for us even if we disagree.


Edited by goodvibes - 11/12/12 at 6:12am
post #147 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by atomikn00b View Post

Ummm.

I thought this thread was about mh1 r&d?

when did it transform into ClieOS vs Rin???

 

+1

 

Or Clieos vs Ink 

 

who cares, its a cheap iem that sounds very good, even with the bass. its not a custom nor a Heir, so .. who cares.

post #148 of 232
Inks, I think you need to reevaluate your approach to presenting your opinions and facts. Regardless of your intentions, you often come of as arrogant and insultive. You may intend to presen raw information, but your posts often end up being cancerous and highly counterproductive to the threads you post in.
post #149 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by eke2k6 View Post

Inks, I think you need to reevaluate your approach to presenting your opinions and facts. Regardless of your intentions, you often come of as arrogant and insultive. You may intend to presen raw information, but your posts often end up being cancerous and highly counterproductive to the threads you post in.
 

^^^^This

post #150 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by eke2k6 View Post

Inks, I think you need to reevaluate your approach to presenting your opinions and facts. Regardless of your intentions, you often come of as arrogant and insultive. You may intend to presen raw information, but your posts often end up being cancerous and highly counterproductive to the threads you post in.

 

I'm going to have to agree with this, sorry Inks, nothing against you.  But to you Rin's data seems to be the end-all of data, it reads like you feel that only his data is correct, no one else's holds any merit in your eyes.  If this isn't true, your tone of language and voice don't say that.  I agree with Eke2k6 100% here (and we don't always get along...  Right Ekes?). 

 

Reading through Rin's work, his take on the MH1 is as subjective as ClieOS'.  There really is no objectivity to his initial opinion.  Sure, he has frequency graphs and impedance responses...  But he's also the one that interprets what point A means and what point B means.  Listeners do this same interpretation when they listen to the headphones.  The statements he does make in the end, ClieOS does have a point, show that Rin had an agenda on this.  Whether it was conscious or unconsciously done is beyond me.  But there was an agenda to not only attack Sony, but also ClieOS.  I have used Rin's graphs for what they were in the past, agreeing with, but also disagreeing with some things he has said. 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Sony MH1 R&D Story ...and discussion.