New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

AKG K812 Pro - Page 96

post #1426 of 2689
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonido View Post
If you want to test this, listen to Hitohira no Hanabira by Stereopony. You'll know what I'm talking about with the 'eeee's if there's a problem.


I'll give that a try when I get my replacement pair and see if there is any problem with the "eee's".

post #1427 of 2689

Objective measurements of a headphone just hint at how that headphone will actually sound to a particular listener. We shouldn’t confuse charts and graphs with a truly objective evaluation of audio equipment.

 

An objective evaluation involves listeners dispassionately hearing how the music sounds to them.

 

Especially if your ears have a history.

 

Every Audeze headphone I’ve heard has struck me as muffled and dark, inferior even to AKG 701s. The Sennheiser 800 HDs have never sounded sibilant or excessively bright to me. I found the Hifiman HE 5s to be only slightly inferior to the Beyerdynamic T1s.

 

But then, my ears have been over the road.

 

So I’m not particularly swayed by the objective measurements of the AKG K812. Sure, they’re a start, but I may very well be immune to the “confusion and harshness in the treble” Tyll writes of. You may be too.

 

So I think all of us whose ears are past their pristine state need to listen cooly, clearly, and calmly to how we hear the music.

 

But then this is obvious, I hope.

post #1428 of 2689
Quote:
Originally Posted by biggles78 View Post
 

Objective measurements of a headphone just hint at how that headphone will actually sound to a particular listener. We shouldn’t confuse charts and graphs with a truly objective evaluation of audio equipment.

 

An objective evaluation involves listeners dispassionately hearing how the music sounds to them.

 

Especially if your ears have a history.

 

Every Audeze headphone I’ve heard has struck me as muffled and dark, inferior even to AKG 701s. The Sennheiser 800 HDs have never sounded sibilant or excessively bright to me. I found the Hifiman HE 5s to be only slightly inferior to the Beyerdynamic T1s.

 

But then, my ears have been over the road.

 

So I’m not particularly swayed by the objective measurements of the AKG K812. Sure, they’re a start, but I may very well be immune to the “confusion and harshness in the treble” Tyll writes of. You may be too.

 

So I think all of us whose ears are past their pristine state need to listen cooly, clearly, and calmly to how we hear the music.

 

But then this is obvious, I hope.

I found measurements and one person's listening experience not always accurate but they can give you an idea of the sound, some people do hear certain headphones differently, maybe partly due to head shape and ear canal shape as well as hearing loss and different systems. I didn't find the K812 to have some of the problems he mentioned, the vocals didn't sound off to me, I did notice an occasional sharpness though but I get that from almost every dynamic headphone, but they never sounded confused or lacking in treble detail or refinement, it had good treble for a dynamic headphone to my ears. I have sensitive ears, I even find dark headphones with quite smooth treble fatiguing at times.

post #1429 of 2689
Quote:
Originally Posted by biggles78 View Post
 

Objective measurements of a headphone just hint at how that headphone will actually sound to a particular listener. We shouldn’t confuse charts and graphs with a truly objective evaluation of audio equipment.

 

An objective evaluation involves listeners dispassionately hearing how the music sounds to them.

 

So I’m not particularly swayed by the objective measurements of the AKG K812. Sure, they’re a start, but I may very well be immune to the “confusion and harshness in the treble” Tyll writes of. You may be too.

 

He did listen to them. It wasn't only measurements.

 

Otherwise, I agree with you (though I think you mean a subjective evaluation). Measurements can tell us only so much. Informed reviews can tell us only so much. I wouldn't judge a pair of headphones without listening to it myself.

post #1430 of 2689
Quote:
Originally Posted by biggles78 View Post
 

Objective measurements of a headphone just hint at how that headphone will actually sound to a particular listener. We shouldn’t confuse charts and graphs with a truly objective evaluation of audio equipment.

 

An objective evaluation involves listeners dispassionately hearing how the music sounds to them.

 

Especially if your ears have a history.

 

Every Audeze headphone I’ve heard has struck me as muffled and dark, inferior even to AKG 701s. The Sennheiser 800 HDs have never sounded sibilant or excessively bright to me. I found the Hifiman HE 5s to be only slightly inferior to the Beyerdynamic T1s.

 

But then, my ears have been over the road.

 

So I’m not particularly swayed by the objective measurements of the AKG K812. Sure, they’re a start, but I may very well be immune to the “confusion and harshness in the treble” Tyll writes of. You may be too.

 

So I think all of us whose ears are past their pristine state need to listen cooly, clearly, and calmly to how we hear the music.

 

But then this is obvious, I hope.

 

Evaluating by how the music sounds to them is a subjective evaluation since differing person looks for different things. A measurement, is an objective evaluation since its basically a concrete data IMO.

post #1431 of 2689

There is a thin wire which hangs outside the cup? It's kind of disappointing. Is it really possible  to touch it and tear by accident? Anyone can make another picture of it?

post #1432 of 2689
Quote:
Originally Posted by biggles78 View Post
 

Objective measurements of a headphone just hint at how that headphone will actually sound to a particular listener. We shouldn’t confuse charts and graphs with a truly objective evaluation of audio equipment.

 

An objective evaluation involves listeners dispassionately hearing how the music sounds to them.

 

Especially if your ears have a history.

 

Every Audeze headphone I’ve heard has struck me as muffled and dark, inferior even to AKG 701s. The Sennheiser 800 HDs have never sounded sibilant or excessively bright to me. I found the Hifiman HE 5s to be only slightly inferior to the Beyerdynamic T1s.

 

But then, my ears have been over the road.

 

So I’m not particularly swayed by the objective measurements of the AKG K812. Sure, they’re a start, but I may very well be immune to the “confusion and harshness in the treble” Tyll writes of. You may be too.

 

So I think all of us whose ears are past their pristine state need to listen cooly, clearly, and calmly to how we hear the music.

 

But then this is obvious, I hope.

The 'sound quality' section of Tyll's reviews always have two parts; his by-ear impressions, and measurement plots / analyses (where he draws any parallels or discrepancies between his listening notes and what's present on the plots).

 

Basically your argument is null with regards to the supposed lack of comprehensiveness.

post #1433 of 2689
Quote:
Originally Posted by jerg View Post

The 'sound quality' section of Tyll's reviews always have two parts; his by-ear impressions, and measurement plots / analyses (where he draws any parallels or discrepancies between his listening notes and what's present on the plots).

Basically your argument is null with regards to the supposed lack of comprehensiveness.

Agreed. One thing you can never really criticize with Tyll's reviews and impressions is the expansive and sweeping scope. They are always quite thorough.
post #1434 of 2689
Having reviewed the K 812 myself, I must admit I agree with Tyll on most points, even though my conclusion is another.

Nevertheless I rank the K 812 at least as on par with the HD 800. The thing even Tyll called PRAT is great with that ALG can. But it still stays true that there is no single can to rule them all.
post #1435 of 2689
To understand a review, it helps to be familiar also with the reviewer's sound preferences. In his case, the warm side of neutral and maybe rolled off treble.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cucera View Post

But it still stays true that there is no single can to rule them all.

 

     I'm 90% sure there never will be, because want to hear different things. (And also because they listen to different genres).

post #1436 of 2689

I would say the review doesn't make me any less interested in wanting to hear the K812 as I want my own ears to do the judging, but I am now far less interested in owning them. If, for all intents and purposes, the treble is broken, then it's kind of just unforgivable at that price point.

post #1437 of 2689
I can say to EVERBODY about the K812 that is an interesting Good sounding headphone!

SO TRUST YOUR EAR'S and not the Measurements!

REGARDS NOMAX
post #1438 of 2689

but Tyll listened to the k812s....not just measurements. Did anyone even bothered reading the review?

 

that being said, I have the k812 on order so I can't judge for myself yet.


Edited by LifeAspect - 2/26/14 at 4:01am
post #1439 of 2689
Always love Tyll's reviews and i praise him for his honest opinions. While i hold his methods and opinions in very high regard, i wonder though if something is amiss. As i said earlier, surely akg have all sorts of scopes and other mesaurement rigs. Impulse response is just something that could not have gone unmeasured/unchecked, surely?
post #1440 of 2689
Quote:
Originally Posted by x838nwy View Post

As i said earlier, surely akg have all sorts of scopes and other mesaurement rigs. Impulse response is just something that could not have gone unmeasured/unchecked, surely?

When V-Moda worked on M100, they preferred the sound they went with to others that measured better. Maybe AKG did too.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: High-end Audio Forum