Separate names with a comma.
I did not know this one...
Ha! Don't tell me. I joined arm's Architecture Team and we have the responsibility of defining and maintaining an ubiquitous architecture that is in almost every phone and tablet. And no matter how carefully we define something, some partner will tell us it makes no sense.
Yup, I know them. He indeed praises the K812 a lot.
Well, there is an amplification effect in some forums. When Tyll mentions that some defects (which are there, no doubt) "ruin" the headphone, then a lot of followers just want to outdo him and find even more to criticise. There is a bit of a lack of responsibility in allowing this. So you read people stating (I forgot who) that "they are, objectively, bad cans" but "with the right EQ they are also those that I enjoyed most". This means probably that being bipolar is part of our hobby.
Tyll does his measurements right and inner fidelity is a valuable resource (for what they are worth, I have never been a measurement guy in audio). He tends to have a style that overemphasises his taste and it is not always clear that he is not trying to be objective – on the contrary sometimes the opinion is sold as an absolute truth. Scientific method is lacking and sometimes there are serious faux pas, such as when he dismissed the "sealing lip" of the K812 for something without an explanation (it should have been obvious). All of this is fine, and because of the tremendous amount of work he has done, his fame is deserved. I think he should be more aware of his influence and be more attentive to the way his opinions could be received by the community. However, I am probably the last that should criticise him, as I have had serious communication and awareness problems myself.
The result is that there are a lot of ppl that just dismiss the K812 as crap on several forums (something Tyll would not say). And potential buyers that search on the internet will stumble on hundreds of pages of threads dissing the K812 as a pair of cans worth USD 100 (yup, you can read this). I do not like the sound of the HD800 or of the Mr Speakers Ether flow, to make two examples, but I would not say that they are crap, because objectively they are not.
Isn't confusion an integral part of our hobby?
Add a stroke to that and it's more confusing! LOL. I can laugh about that now that I'm on the other side of recovery for the most part. I feel so blessed, because where the stroke was was a whisker's width away from taking my hearing.
thanks for your point of few.
I like to hear that misunderstanding and communication problems are known.
Maybe some people have so much hope of full-filling their dreams, and then they cant join because of some treble...
Myself i learn so many things from people around me.
But one thing is clear in audio: either hard or soft! Both is right because these are to sides of the same coin. The climax would be when the opposites touch each other at the edge.
Perfection in audio is a moving target.
I agree. I think Tyll sometimes uses objective measurements to give more weight to his subjective taste. You need to take what he says with a grain of salt. For example, he can praise a headphone that gives unnatural soundstage, inaccurate punch in the bass and uneven frequency response. See his love for the Audeze sound signature or Sennheiser veil. In the case of Audeze LCD2/3 you can subjectively describe the sound as glorious, soundstage as intimate and more personal, say that the treble is warm and the overall sound is yummy and say the bass hits tight and visceral, which is all true and characteristic of some planar magnetic headphones. But you can take all those qualities and say that they are objectively bad in terms of realistic presentation of the music.
After years of headphone and equippment recommendation, I'm inclined to think that only a minority of the people really want to know how the interaction of multiple variables comes into play when defining a headphone relative to other headphones. In that sense, most people vastly prefer simple "truth/facts" so they don't have much hassle figuring out what they want.
If I say K812 is great in terms of macrodynamics but behing HD800S with regards to microdetail, most people will read and forget because that leads to a complex situation in which they will have to decide for themselves considering the trade off. On the other hand, if I say HD800S is way better than K812 and it's the finest headphone available, most people will take note, because that's simple enough for them. It's in some sense what they are looking for: the solution.
Having to keep an audience up, Tyll has to deal with this all the time. If he presents a (more accurate) complex squeme in which there are less simple "truth" and more trade off analyisis, people will simply run out. People want things to move forward and towards something (real or not) and want easy good or bad with nothing in between. Check how plenty of youtube videos are titled "Here's why this is the worst..." "Here's why this is the best..." "Find the best..." "These are the worst ... ever"
Because of how people is, those are catchy...
The line of thinking is: Why would I run into analysing variables and solving the problem for myself (investing time and money) if this knowledgeable and or well presented guy is giving me the answer?
More evidence to this is that even when Tyll has said many good things about the K812, almost no one remebers them.
Those good things make the analysis more complex. Lead to "Come on! Is it good or bad?" line of thinking.
So people forget them, and go with the much simpler "Tyll says K812 is not a flagship level headphone, so I don't want it"
Although I think Tyll believes there's an horizon or target where headphones should go to please a wider range of listeners, I also think he perfectly understands how different headphones, on different ears, listening to different music at different volume levels can lead to very different impressions from the ones he might get or the absolute target. But again, make things too complex and relative to the listener and almost no one would read.
I think, man wants unity. So things must come forward. We think we must bring the things to goal - and we always think the goal is at the end of a long way towards.
In my case I would like to use only one HP, and not three or four...
This is really important for me, because I am mixing in my small home-studio. When I listen to music I must trust my headphone. So I use the HP just like wearing glasses. You are wearing only one glasses, maybe some more sunglasses in summer, but thats it.
It is uncomfortable to change the HP, and at the end when it comes to holiday which headphones are allowed to accompany me?
So I always look for the Swiss Knife. For me, the K 702 is in many ways a Swiss Knife. I have one at work, one for my wife, one at home, one at grandfather and so on ...
The K712 has some better tone, more localized bass ( not so ambient bass like the 702) but really less treble - and the treble of the headphone is most important for me because of what happens in the music.
However the K712 shows something but can not realize the whole picture, i cannot come back to 702 because good bass, better tone, closer stage are good things.
Before i put the aim out of my way - the route is the goal - i hope that next week the k812 will give me the Swiss knife back. If the k 812 is not able to convince me, i will give the hd 800 a try.
This is however really weird to me. I tend to say I prefer warm and soft sound. And then I end up choosing linear-to-bright components.
Happy New Year!
I like them. I really like them out of my Paw Gold Diana. I like all different sound signatures though, depending on my mood. You could call me a sound signature schizophrenic
He indeed speaks very highly of many of its sound aspects. He has one problem with the response in the treble, which derives from an issue that the K812 indeed have (a response peak) and the fact that he does not like bright cans, he prefers warm ones. So they do not get his wall of fame award. They are however some of the most resolving cans on the market, losing (marginally) in microdynamics and stage size to the HD800, but winning in bass (very slightly more present and tighter at the same time), soundstage precision, macrodynamics. HD800 may be better for large scale orchestra works but I prefer the K812 overall. In fact some bashers (just search here on head fi) call it crap because of measurements, but they confess at the same time that these may have been the cans they enjoyed most, after a bit of EQ. Well, usually if you oder over the internet you can return them, so why not try them?
...got the k812 for half an hour now.
First of all, musically.
The treble or upper mids a kind too soft for me, but maybe should get better after a while running.
Body is full and realistic.
The interaction of the instruments, vocals etc. is very good (musically).
Timbre: i think realistic.
The Neutrality (and i love neutrality) is very good. perfect for me for listening and mastering .)
Later some more thoughts