[G-man]

Ultrasone HFI-580 Headphone reviews - CNET Reviews

Main points:

closed=block sound
Bassy
looks.

That's about it. You know that they have nothing to say when they point out that the earcups have L and R written clearly. This may be

but seriously, for a respected site like cnet, audio reviews are just crappy. It makes me wonder how good their other reviews are, in fields i have little or no knowledge about.

Even the Audiophiliac articles, written by someone who is said to be well versed about audio equipment, reads like it is written for a 3 year old. My guess is that they are dumming it down on purpose to attract more people. While i can always hope that the reason for that is to attract more people to the world of "hi end" audio, i have a nagging suspicion there are ulterior motives.

Oh and I am not trying to be controversial or anything, these are just my views, that are shared with some more people. Lets not convert this into another bashing thread (be it me or cnet), and lets try and have some intelligent thoughts (which i know many of you are capable of).

Thanks

G-man

 

[espire]

While I do agree that the review is a terrible one for an audiophile, remember that Cnet is reviewing for the average web-browser, and he doesn't care that much about things like detail, neutrality and soundstage. Most people would much prefer this review to what you'd find in an audiophile magazine.

 

[clal92]

Just pointing out that, contrary to the thread title, it's a review of the HFI-580, not the 780. Otherwise, I'd tend to agree with G-man that the review does seem less technical and comprehensive than what we'd expect on this site. However, CNET is aimed at a much wider audience than Head-Fi, so it is perfectly understandable that their reviews will be written to be comprehensible to most of the general public, rather than just audiophiles.

EDIT: May as well ignore most of that, since espire seems to have stolen my thunder somewhat.

 

[Cleardynamik]

I also agree with clal92 about the form of the review. BUT

I have these phones and they sounded too bassy and muddy at first but after burning in, this too bassy muddy sound disappeared, so I think these cans where reviewed out of the box without any burning in.

 

[G-man]

I understand that, my only point is that they tend not to focus on the details, and so do not really "review". they just tend to say what its like, and their comparisons are not exactly very good, generally only to the last headphone they "reviewed". So it just makes me wonder whether or not the other "reviews" are to be trusted.

 

[Planar_head]

There is also a chance that the editor of the article edited out some audiophile commentary so the average person could understand it better. When you see headphones tested on a movie, you know there is nothing to be seen or heard by the average audiophile in that article.

It seems like your average Cnet review, nothing specific, just says what the headphones can do, what kind of technology they use (might as well be a copy>paste from the website) and a superficial test to finish it off.

 

[changwang54]

how are the comfort on these headphones? also would an ipod touch 3rd gen unamped effectively drive these?

 

[Mdraluck23]

Ever read reviews on amazon? Hurts bad man.

 

[Graphicism]

I don't see anything wrong with the cnet review, the 580s are bass canons at best and like the reviewer says will be made even worse when underpowered from an ipod. The same guy reviewed the HFI-2200 which he said sound great from an ipod and because of the open design aren't as bass dominent.

 

[derycksan]

I always disliked cnet an Consumer reports reviews.  They're way too dumbed down and I have no doubts they are baised to brand loyalties.  From digital cameras, AV receivers and of course, headphones, they tend to always pick a brand and they're the best throughout all price points.  Oh yea, and they tend to not have accurate listings of current models and their pricing (cnet is better with live web pricing though).