[awesomenatorrad]

First utopia and she is a beauty

 

[John Buchanan]

Even Tyll Hertsens, who nobody has ever accused of being corrupt, didn't like to bag products he didn't like. IIRC, the AKG K812 (still one of my faves) was one such headphone and he resisted doing a review of it (and the Beyerdynamic T1 for the same reasons). Of course, if you won't review products you don't (or won't) like, then it appears that you are a just positive mouthpiece for companies (i.e. a shill). Personally, I wouldn't want to waste my time reviewing what was in my opinion a piece of crap.
Firstly, doing a bad review means having to buy everything from the company who manufactured that product instead of being sent stuff to review because that company will no longer send review samples to you.
Secondly, for some reason, headphone listening seems to evoke extreme and varying responses to the same headphone, far more so than with any other product type.
I guess reading reviews of equipment whose ears you trust (i.e. you agree with their descriptions of what sounds best) is one way of getting some sort of listening truth.
There seems to be a whole lot of "shill" accusations by the same people again and again here - the Austrian Audio Composer thread nearly sank because it was so full of ridiculous and unfound accusations against Nomax.

 

[jlbrach]

Only know from a friend’s personal experience that most of the times big audio publications
only do a review when they get paid to do so. Even on HeadFi( according to a European headphone designer) there’s cash involved to keep the usual suspects/influencer busy shilling the product. If this is conspiracy theory to some here or not doesn’t bother me much.
A east European Facebook reviewer wrote enthusiastically about a Hifiman headphone which I personally didn’t like and I asked him if it’s really his honest opinion, only to be told that it is not…but he can keep the product. There you go…

I find that hard to believe, a reviewer wouldnt be considered worth following if they did what you describe...there are always unscrupulous people but I believe most are on the up and up

 

[silversurfer616]

I find that hard to believe, a reviewer wouldnt be considered worth following if they did what you describe...there are always unscrupulous people but I believe most are on the up and up

Well, a few years back at Munich High End I asked this headphone designer why his headphones are not more visible on HeadFi and he replied that he’s not prepared to pay a few thousand dollars to some of the more popular guys here, just to get the stuff pushed constantly.
Another friend who sells audio gear here in NZ couldn’t get a review placed in a big Australian publication unless he paid for it…which he didn’t.
But that’s life and admittedly I am old enough to be borderline cynical about things…it is what it is.

 

[jlbrach]

maybe but once a HP begins to get some exposure those who do not review it will lose out so in the end they will review it...

 

[chesebert]

Well, a few years back at Munich High End I asked this headphone designer why his headphones are not more visible on HeadFi and he replied that he’s not prepared to pay a few thousand dollars to some of the more popular guys here, just to get the stuff pushed constantly.
Another friend who sells audio gear here in NZ couldn’t get a review placed in a big Australian publication unless he paid for it…which he didn’t.
But that’s life and admittedly I am old enough to be borderline cynical about things…it is what it is.

You know all he has to do is to run a loaner program and people can make up their own mind. I can’t speak for others but most of the gear I hear today are not all that exciting to me especially in the headphone category. The last time I raised an eyebrow was when I first hear Aperio, the time before that was T2 and 007 combo. The $100k ATH amp wasn’t all that interesting with their own cans. Ditto for Mass Kobo 465. I think most of the folks who have been in this hobby for a long time and who have heard everything are in the same boat. One way to get those folks to constantly talk about some new cans is to put some real $$$ behind it

Seriously why don’t manufacturers just run loaners instead of paying influencers to constantly talk about stuff here? Do they not trust people can make up their own mind about what sounds good to them?

 

[Tanalasta]

Publications require revenue, either through advertisements, articles or subscriptions to maintain afloat.

There is to my knowledge no “requirement” for open disclosure. And a reviewer who regularly receives “free” units may not disclose for the very real reason others may call it out or discredit the review objectivity. Influencers, be it food or wine or otherwise might also be in a similar position.

As a consumer, finding a critic or reviewer who you consistently agree with is useful. But that requires auditioning or purchasing to form an opinion in the first place. Grateful to tours and brick / mortar stores who graciously allow for this.

I enjoy forums for the range of opinions. And that I have an idea who to trust. Headphone reviews - the formal ones tend to be from the same people.

I obviously like the Utopia. I purchased both models though in the interests of disclosure, the 2022 model was on fire sale from a well publicised local distributor change.

*edit* I have actually never reviewed the utopia. So I asked chatGPT. Over a wine or whisky, is chatGPT writing a review or marketing rehash?
#edit 2: Tongue in cheek I just realised I’ve asked ChatGPT to write about the wrong Utopia. There’s no replacement for bringing in your own source gear and a proper audition with your own ears. Especially at Utopia level. My brick and mortar store was even happy for me to take a display demo unit home for a few days before deciding. People buying blind based on written reviews a good way to support the ‘classified’ section when / if it wasn’t what they were expecting. I haven’t been able to bring myself to list the OG Utopia after buying the Utopia 2022. It’s such a great headphone.

——————authored by ChatGPT

The Focal Utopia 2022 headphones present a soundstage that is incredibly wide and well-defined, creating a sense of space and dimensionality that enhances your listening experience. Instruments and vocals are placed with precision, allowing you to pinpoint individual elements within the music.

When it comes to bass response, the Focal Utopia 2022 strikes a perfect balance between impact and accuracy. The low frequencies are tight, controlled, and extend deep, providing a solid foundation to the music without overpowering or muddying the overall sound.

Moving on to the midrange, the Focal Utopia 2022 excels in reproducing vocals and instruments with lifelike clarity and warmth. The mids are transparent and detailed, bringing out the subtle nuances and textures in the music with finesse.

In the treble region, these headphones shine with a delicate and airy presentation. The high frequencies are extended and well-extended, offering sparkle and articulation without any harshness or sibilance. This contributes to a smooth and natural listening experience across the entire frequency spectrum.

From a technical standpoint, the Focal Utopia 2022 boasts cutting-edge driver technology that minimizes distortion and coloration, ensuring a transparent and accurate sound reproduction. The headphones are also highly efficient and sensitive, allowing them to be driven by a wide range of audio sources while maintaining their exceptional sound quality. Overall, the technical prowess of the Focal Utopia 2022 translates into a truly immersive and engaging listening experience for even the most discerning audiophiles.