[EDN80]

I might add that in his video for the HE1000, where again, he doesn't shy away from hyperbole - "exceptionally pleasing", "spectacular", and the "best listening experience he's ever had"... only to state again @ 7:05 that he EQs them.
 
Sigh.
 
You're telling me no amount of EQing could rectify whatever problem you perceived with the K812, yet EQing did the trick with the HE1000 and HD800? Made them sound "better"?
 
Something's rotten in Denmark. You either EQ them all or don't EQ them at all.
 
 

 

[CrocCap]

  Tyll probably can't wait to destroy these all over again.

professional and unbiased opinion

 

[EDN80]

 
professional and unbiased opinion

 
I'm not Tyll. That's not my job. I don't claim any of the above. 

 

[ubs28]

Whether you like or don't like Tyll his review, the fact remains that the AKG K812 is simply a bad headphone for the money. It's technical performance is even worse than mid-fi headphones like the HD 650 (in terms of THD and ringing). 
 
If Tyll found a way to mod the ringing and THD away, I'm pretty sure he would have mentioned it in his review. 

 

[EDN80]

  Whether you like or don't like Tyll his review, the fact remains that the AKG K812 is simply a bad headphone for the money. It's technical performance is even worse than mid-fi headphones like the HD 650 (in terms of THD and ringing). 
 

 
Nonsense. 

 

[ubs28]

   
Nonsense. 

Look at the measurements of the HD 650 and the AKG K812 and you'll see it.

 

[EDN80]

 
Look at the measurements of the HD 650 and the AKG K812 and you'll see it.

 
Hearing test says different.

 

[MortenB]

   
Hearing test says different.

Some people only trust reviwers and measurements, they will never listen to the product, and they will never listen to your arguments. So just forget it, there is no point... (And I say this as an owner of the K812 - some of the best sounding cans on the market)
 
Actually, I say this as a K812 owner from Denmark - and there is nothing rotten around here 

  There seems to be something rotten in the reviewer industry though.

 

[ubs28]

 
Some people only trust reviwers and measurements, they will never listen to the product, and they will never listen to your arguments. So just forget it, there is no point... (And I say this as an owner of the K812 - some of the best sounding cans on the market)
 
Actually, I say this as a K812 owner from Denmark - and there is nothing rotten around here 

  There seems to be something rotten in the reviewer industry though.

 
I'm glad you don't work for Boeing or Airbus who will ignore measurements when inspecting an aircraft. 

 

[MortenB]

   
I'm glad you don't work for Boeing or Airbus who will ignore measurements when inspecting an aircraft. 

Man... you are rude..!
 
Since you know so much, please post the scientifically based model, that documents the correlation between measurement and sound quality? I exect full documentation.

 

[willowbrook]

I'm glad you don't work for Boeing or Airbus who will ignore measurements when inspecting an aircraft. 

What did I stumble on...

 

[kman1211]

 
Some people only trust reviwers and measurements, they will never listen to the product, and they will never listen to your arguments. So just forget it, there is no point... (And I say this as an owner of the K812 - some of the best sounding cans on the market)
 
Actually, I say this as a K812 owner from Denmark - and there is nothing rotten around here 

  There seems to be something rotten in the reviewer industry though.

That is true, I have found measurements doesn't always correlate with how good I find a headphone sounds. They've always been a rough guideline for me though. True, and not just with headphones. The biggest problem I find is how much confusion there is in this hobby. I'm starting to get sick of people saying what is and what isn't in regards to audio, just leads to arguments that have no end(i.e. cable debate). Even though I don't always fully trust my ears(due to mood, thought process, sickness, etc.), I do trust them more than measurements overall. But I personally give both some stock, just what my hearing tells me moreso.
 
 

   
I'm glad you don't work for Boeing or Airbus who will ignore measurements when inspecting an aircraft. 

Not really a good analogy as they are very different technologies with vastly different applications, precision measurements and tight tolerances are far more important for something such as aircraft as human lives hang in the balance on having the aircraft functioning properly. But with everything one has to have a proper understanding of things and even then there is some debate. Audio reproduction is very fickle due to the heavily subjective nature of hearing and varying opinions even among those with great knowledge behind the inner workings of the products. I've often wondered if we are focusing on all the right measurements, measurement curves, etc. overall to determine overall sound quality and if some of the aspects of sound quality can't be measured currently and/or correctly. It is also noteworthy that something better on paper isn't always better in practice. The real question is why the AKG engineers chose to make their flagship headphone sound the way it does. I'm most curious to hear the reasoning and insight of those who designed the product.

 

[Beagle]

 
Man... you are rude..!
 
Since you know so much, please post the scientifically based model, that documents the correlation between measurement and sound quality? I exect full documentation.

Speaking of rude......
 
 

 
Look at the measurements of the HD 650 and the AKG K812 and you'll see it.

 
I don't 'watch" music.
 
 

  Whether you like or don't like Tyll his review, the fact remains that the AKG K812 is simply a bad headphone for the money. It's technical performance is even worse than mid-fi headphones like the HD 650 (in terms of THD and ringing). 
 
If Tyll found a way to mod the ringing and THD away, I'm pretty sure he would have mentioned it in his review. 

 
Nonsense

 

[Beagle]

  I might add that in his video for the HE1000, where again, he doesn't shy away from hyperbole - "exceptionally pleasing", "spectacular", and the "best listening experience he's ever had"... only to state again @ 7:05 that he EQs them.
 
Sigh.
 
You're telling me no amount of EQing could rectify whatever problem you perceived with the K812, yet EQing did the trick with the HE1000 and HD800? Made them sound "better"?
 
Something's rotten in Denmark. You either EQ them all or don't EQ them at all.
 
 

 
Also factor in that the McIntosh MHP1000, one of the best sounding headphones on the planet, was never reviewed or even commented on.

 

[MortenB]

  That is true, I have found measurements doesn't always correlate with how good I find a headphone sounds. They've always been a rough guideline for me though. True, and not just with headphones. The biggest problem I find is how much confusion there is in this hobby. I'm starting to get sick of people saying what is and what isn't in regards to audio, just leads to arguments that have no end(i.e. cable debate). Even though I don't always fully trust my ears(due to mood, thought process, sickness, etc.), I do trust them more than measurements overall. But I personally give both some stock, just what my hearing tells me moreso.
 
The real question is why the AKG engineers chose to make their flagship headphone sound the way it does. I'm most curious to hear the reasoning and insight of those who designed the product.

So true and well put...