Come on, Home Headphones are not fashion accessories. These are not HPs you use for mobile use. These are for stationary use. They may be ugly. But if they do the job: details almost as good Stax 009, imaging as good as HD800 and LCD-3's bass and fun listening, who gives a damn if it is UGLY.
This is Head-Fi, it's all about the sound. Do your ears like what they hear?
By the way, there is 1-2 month wait on these "ugly" HPs.
It's not only about the way they look to other people, but the way the feel in the hands of the beholder too.
When I buy expensive things I don't only look after their functions, form has its importance too.
You wouldn't buy an ugly expensive car, would you ? Why then ? It might get you from A to B just as fine as a good looking one (it might even drive better...) .
The same goes for a house, it's only a shelter after all, who cares about the way it looks ?
More specifically, my problem comes from the fact that the Abyss' performances (whether you like it or not, that's not the matter) wouldn't suffer from subjectively "better" (or should I say, conventional) looks.
Those aesthetic details don't seem to participate in a quest of ultimate technical perfection, like they might, to some extent, on a HD800 or a Qualia.
My ears don't like them, neither do my eyes and hands, but that's another matter entirely.
I don't understand your last point, the fact that many people buy them doesn't make them more desirable. It just makes them "succesful" as a commercial product.
Edited by customcoco - 6/28/14 at 2:42pm