[Chris J]

krkrkrkrkrkrkr <= accurate sound of me laughing

you don't trust us hey!! come on confess and the pain will go away!!!

One way to answer this is to say if I want to go see a movie I definitely won't go or not go based on a review from Time magazine! :rolleyes:

 

[ToddTheMetalGod]

Considering the hype that I've fallen for with nearly every portable set of headphones I've ever bought, Head-Fi is only semi-trustworthy. It pretty much requires reading opinions for hours to come to a proper conclusion because people will say things like: this $50 JVC bass boosted headphone smokes the TH600. They literally convince themselves it's true and then make a cult around mediocre headphones, most of which unlike JVC's Japanese offers are terrible value. So much money down the drain, ~$700 which could have been spent on speakers or proper non-hyped open headphones. It's depressing because I'm in high school and don't have that kind of income to waste. It would've been more enjoyable if I put it in a pile and burned it.

I didn't realize I said the exact same thing in a different post, sorry for being a complainer... but that was a painful experience.

 

[bigshot]

One way to answer this is to say if I want to go see a movie I definitely won't go or not go based on a review from Time magazine!

 
Robert Hughes was Time's art critic for many years, and I don't think anyone has ever done a better job than him.
 
Richard Corliss: http://entertainment.time.com/author/rcorliss/
 
...and of course the tradition goes back all the way to Pulitzer Prize winning film critic James Agee.

 

[Brooko]

Interesting thread - and I can see both sides.  I do think it important to realise that the OR (original reviewer - referred to by ab Initio), whilst being a member far longer than I have, has only posted his reviews (5) all in the last week or so.  All 5 stars - so that would probably raise alarm bells for me - and prompt me toward further research into his experience if I was researching a product.  YMMV.  I've been following Jason and Schiit for a long time, and I know at some stage I want to try a combo of their gear (Bifrost, Asgard 2, and Valhalla).  That will be a while away though - perfectly happy with my current set-up for the time being.
 
So Id' guess the OR may not be very experienced in reviewing - and real appreciation of what it takes to write a good review only comes with practise and time IMO. My thanks to ab initio for using one of my recent ones as an idea of what a review can be / should be - I do spend a lot of time putting them together - but I should also point out how bad I was originally when I first started.  My issues as a beginner were over enthusiasm, not knowing the scientific process, and relying purely on flawed subjective indicators - rather than trying to have a good mix of objectivity and subjectivity.
 
Don't get me wrong though - any review here relies on the subjective.  But we can make that subjectivity a lot more understandable and relatable by adopting a few simple rules with reviewing.
 

1. State what we know about ourselves as a reviewer - eg age (can relate to hearing ability + also the enthusiasm factor), genre preferences, past and present gear, what any known preferences are (I am not treble sensitive - some are).  By stating them - we allow the reader to form a baseline of the reviewers personal bias.
2. State any known bias - and why.  Those that know me will understand that I have performed abx tests many times on different music formats (lossy vs lossless), and I know exactly where my threshold to transparency is (I can't distinguish aac256 from lossless if transcoded properly from the same source).  I also don't believe in massive audible changes from burn-in of headphones (speakers are different) - so I state it.
3. When doing direct comparisons - always volume match using an SPL meter - and if you can't get the matching correct, state it.
4. Listen first - form an opinion, but also where possible try to obtain graphs etc so that you can learn, see , maybe even explain what you''re hearing and why.
5. Spend time and try to cover as many genres as possible so you can account for a lot of differing tastes.
6. And probably most important - I try to review in a manner I would personally like to read if I was researching a product for possible purchase. Limit the enthusiasm.  Point out both good points and faults.  Try to be fair.

 
To give you and idea of how bad I was - here was my review of the E7 3 years ago -  http://www.head-fi.org/products/fiio-e7-usb-dac-and-portable-headphone-amplifier/reviews/4826 (it was actually worse than this originally, I must have tidied it up a little later).
* subjective
* no real hints at what my personal bias was
* no real experience with a lot of gear to be able to form a meaningful opinion
* no volume matching
etc.
 
So I think we should give the OR a bit of a break.  Hopefully he'll see the critique, and modify his reviewing style over time.  We all have to start from somewhere.
 
Lastly - I do really like the fact that Head-Fi is regularly adding front page content, and I do like it when my reviews are chosen.  But it's not my call - nor do I email anyone to let them know I've written one.  That is the Admins here only.  Their call, and I respect that.  If this thread does serve to encourage all reviewers to lift their game though - that would also be beneficial IMO.  I am very aware that buying decisions can be made on what I've written.  It;s a responsibility no-one should take lightly.
 
Cheers
 
Paul

 

[Chris J]

Considering the hype that I've fallen for with nearly every portable set of headphones I've ever bought, Head-Fi is only semi-trustworthy. It pretty much requires reading opinions for hours to come to a proper conclusion because people will say things like: this $50 JVC bass boosted headphone smokes the TH600. They literally convince themselves it's true and then make a cult around mediocre headphones, most of which unlike JVC's Japanese offers are terrible value. So much money down the drain, ~$700 which could have been spent on speakers or proper non-hyped open headphones. It's depressing because I'm in high school and don't have that kind of income to waste. It would've been more enjoyable if I put it in a pile and burned it.

I didn't realize I said the exact same thing in a different post, sorry for being a complainer... but that was a painful experience.

To be fair, I will say the same thing about any review I've read in the mainstream audio magazines:
The Absolute Sound
Hi Fi +
Hi Fi Choice
Hi Fi News and Record Review
i.e. I've been drawn in by a glowing print review to believe product X is "The Answer".
 
Head Fi Hype of the Month has got to be The Hugo.
Mind you, a few, like Purrin, are saying it really is the pants.  An alternate viewpoint is nice, which I can always find on Head Fi.

 

[ab initio]

 

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!

Interesting thread - and I can see both sides.  I do think it important to realise that the OR (original reviewer - referred to by ab Initio), whilst being a member far longer than I have, has only posted his reviews (5) all in the last week or so.  All 5 stars - so that would probably raise alarm bells for me - and prompt me toward further research into his experience if I was researching a product.  YMMV.  I've been following Jason and Schiit for a long time, and I know at some stage I want to try a combo of their gear (Bifrost, Asgard 2, and Valhalla).  That will be a while away though - perfectly happy with my current set-up for the time being.
 
So Id' guess the OR may not be very experienced in reviewing - and real appreciation of what it takes to write a good review only comes with practise and time IMO. My thanks to ab initio for using one of my recent ones as an idea of what a review can be / should be - I do spend a lot of time putting them together - but I should also point out how bad I was originally when I first started.  My issues as a beginner were over enthusiasm, not knowing the scientific process, and relying purely on flawed subjective indicators - rather than trying to have a good mix of objectivity and subjectivity.
 
Don't get me wrong though - any review here relies on the subjective.  But we can make that subjectivity a lot more understandable and relatable by adopting a few simple rules with reviewing.
 

1. State what we know about ourselves as a reviewer - eg age (can relate to hearing ability + also the enthusiasm factor), genre preferences, past and present gear, what any known preferences are (I am not treble sensitive - some are).  By stating them - we allow the reader to form a baseline of the reviewers personal bias.
2. State any known bias - and why.  Those that know me will understand that I have performed abx tests many times on different music formats (lossy vs lossless), and I know exactly where my threshold to transparency is (I can't distinguish aac256 from lossless if transcoded properly from the same source).  I also don't believe in massive audible changes from burn-in of headphones (speakers are different) - so I state it.
3. When doing direct comparisons - always volume match using an SPL meter - and if you can't get the matching correct, state it.
4. Listen first - form an opinion, but also where possible try to obtain graphs etc so that you can learn, see , maybe even explain what you''re hearing and why.
5. Spend time and try to cover as many genres as possible so you can account for a lot of differing tastes.
6. And probably most important - I try to review in a manner I would personally like to read if I was researching a product for possible purchase. Limit the enthusiasm.  Point out both good points and faults.  Try to be fair.

 
To give you and idea of how bad I was - here was my review of the E7 3 years ago -  http://www.head-fi.org/products/fiio-e7-usb-dac-and-portable-headphone-amplifier/reviews/4826 (it was actually worse than this originally, I must have tidied it up a little later).
* subjective
* no real hints at what my personal bias was
* no real experience with a lot of gear to be able to form a meaningful opinion
* no volume matching
etc.
 
So I think we should give the OR a bit of a break.  Hopefully he'll see the critique, and modify his reviewing style over time.  We all have to start from somewhere.
 
Lastly - I do really like the fact that Head-Fi is regularly adding front page content, and I do like it when my reviews are chosen.  But it's not my call - nor do I email anyone to let them know I've written one.  That is the Admins here only.  Their call, and I respect that.  If this thread does serve to encourage all reviewers to lift their game though - that would also be beneficial IMO.  I am very aware that buying decisions can be made on what I've written.  It;s a responsibility no-one should take lightly.
 
Cheers
 
Paul

 

 
This is a pretty good recipe for writing a good review that appeals to both subjectively- and objectively-minded folks. I understand that it takes a lot of effort to write a qualitiy review, and I certainly don't expect all  head-fi content to be written at a high level.
 
I don't fault the OR for writing an review of his brand new amp that drips with overexcitement and enthusiasm for his newest toy. However, I would like to see the featured content on HeadFi's front page be worthy of being featured on the front page of the biggest Headphone site on the internet.  When an article, review, or announcement is added to the front page of head-fi, it says "Hey, this is important and you should read it". Hopefully in the future, the articles selected for headlining the front page will be worthy of receiving the special attention. The rest of the forums are filled with enthusiastic owners of new HiFi gear, and they are certainly entitled to HiFive themselves for their gear all they want. For all the people who just want to talk/brag about the new amp or headphone they just got, HeadFi forums is certainly the destination for that; however, the featured content on HeadFi's front page doesn't need to add even more noise.
 
Cheers
 
Cheers
 
 

 

[KLJTech]

But who shall be the Grand Selector of said worthy opinions to be posted on the main page? What if the Grand Selector isn't objective enough or has their own bias that clouds the selection process? I always thought that the reviews posted on the main page were simply the latest reviews to be posted to the forum...NOT that they were more important than any other review or opinion given. 

Has it truly come to the point that we must be protected from other members "opinions" by having them filtered first?
 
There is a point of diminishing returns in audio gear and budgets can vary greatly so who will say what that point is for every member? 
 
Why not simply gather as much information as possible from several sources and make the wisest decision possible for you and your budget? 
 
We're not here selecting the best surgeon to save our child's life, we discussing audio components and opinions will vary. 
 

 

[TrollDragon]

One of my reviews was featured on the front page as well, I'm an inexperienced reviewer, should it not have been there either?

Could you have made an informed purchasing decision from this review?

http://www.head-fi.org/products/miu-audio-mra-diy-headphone-amplifier/reviews/10724

 

[Brooko]

Loved that review TD.  I don't need a portable amp - and it even had me thinking about getting the kit just for the fun of building it.
 
I think the big difference is that yours was very informative, had clear instructions of what to expect, and objectively looked at a comparison with the Fiio E11.  Rather than talking absolutes, you gave some good opinions, but also reasoning to back it up.  It was a great review and very worthy of front page IMHO.

 

[KLJTech]

One of my reviews was featured on the front page as well, I'm an inexperienced reviewer, should it not have been there either?

Could you have made an informed purchasing decision from this review?

http://www.head-fi.org/products/miu-audio-mra-diy-headphone-amplifier/reviews/10724

 
Looks like you did a damn fine job (in my opinion) 

 

[TrollDragon]

Always a pleasure @Brooko & @KLJTech much appreciated.

 

[R Giskard]

   
Today is your lucky day, because I can think of many examples of that... high end cables vs monoprice, high end DACs and CD players vs a $120 Sony blu-ray player, any high end digital audio player vs an iPod, high end amps vs midrange ones with the same power rating, etc. I hope this info opens your mind up to new possibilities and makes your day a great one!
 
Put that overpriced amp on ebay and get a midrange receiver like the ones by Yamaha or Dennon. You'll get more features for a much lower price!
 
Cheers!

Right! Then it has to go aufwiedersehen!! Today IS my lucky day!!

 

[Chris J]

This is a pretty good recipe for writing a good review that appeals to both subjectively- and objectively-minded folks. I understand that it takes a lot of effort to write a qualitiy review, and I certainly don't expect all  head-fi content to be written at a high level.

I don't fault the OR for writing an review of his brand new amp that drips with overexcitement and enthusiasm for his newest toy. However, I would like to see the featured content on HeadFi's front page be worthy of being featured on the front page of the biggest Headphone site on the internet.  When an article, review, or announcement is added to the front page of head-fi, it says "Hey, this is important and you should read it". Hopefully in the future, the articles selected for headlining the front page will be worthy of receiving the special attention. The rest of the forums are filled with enthusiastic owners of new HiFi gear, and they are certainly entitled to HiFive themselves for their gear all they want. For all the people who just want to talk/brag about the new amp or headphone they just got, HeadFi forums is certainly the destination for that; however, the featured content on HeadFi's front page doesn't need to add even more noise.

Cheers

Cheers

I guess you don't like the Hugo thread either.
Maybe I missed it, but are there any measurements proving that the Hugo sounds as good as the Hugo fans think it is?

 

[ab initio]

I guess you don't like the Hugo thread either.
Maybe I missed it, but are there any measurements proving that the Hugo sounds as good as the Hugo fans think it is?

 
I'll be honest, I didn't read the Hugo thread. I'm not interested in portable HiFi. I have no idea what the Hugo claims or specs are, nor have I looked to see if anybody has measured it. According to the chord website, the headphone output has a crossfeed circuit, so it would be very difficult to do a valid comparison directly using headphones.
 
I don't think the link is on the front page anymore, was it a thread or a review?
 
Cheers

 

[Chris J]

I'll be honest, I didn't read the Hugo thread. I'm not interested in portable HiFi. I have no idea what the Hugo claims or specs are, nor have I looked to see if anybody has measured it. According to the chord website, the headphone output has a crossfeed circuit, so it would be very difficult to do a valid comparison directly using headphones.

I don't think the link is on the front page anymore, was it a thread or a review?

Cheers

A very long thread.
The Hugo owners love the Hugo.
The secret of it's superior sound is a digital filter with in excessive of 20,000 taps.