[Philimon]

By small I meant a range of a few million to 10 million per year in sales, since their sales aren’t public knowledge. I’m not sure why the comments don’t apply regardless of their size, but thanks for proving my point.

I think he was referring to Sony now owning Audeze, which isnt fair to say anyway because it was recent and as far as we know Sony has not interfered with Audeze’s relatively small operations.

Integrity was called into question because I could not get an answer from @Audeze until @Mad Lust Envy answered my query.

 

[JeffB1961]

I'm retired so $400 is very significant to me . And ..... I'll complain about what I want when I want . Yes every body/company makes mistakes .... however , ignoring them and not speaking out about them only encourages them to not take their fails seriously .

 

[Kevintj604]

I think he was referring to Sony now owning Audeze, which isnt fair to say anyway because it was recent and as far as we know Sony has not interfered with Audeze’s relatively small operations.

Integrity was called into question because I could not get an answer from @Audeze until @Mad Lust Envy answered my query.

I don't mean to pile on more negativity but all of the manufacturer's in the headphone space are small so using that as an excuse for problem after problem is not valid in my opinion.

- Pre-Orders for a headphone is ridiculous. Especially months of waiting/delays and especially with a company like Audeze. They're not a start-up, they're owned by Sony. Inexcusable.
- Pad gluing problems should be easy to rectify. I understand that this is an engineering decision but the pads on the Maxwell are replaceable and the MM-100 is built on a similar chassis design.
- Wiring/Cable issues is a quality control concern that should be addressed at the factory. Inexcusable.
- Channel imbalance and left/right driver swaps is also a quality control issue that should be flagged at the factory. Again inexcusable.

I agree with you @Philimon if their own brand reps can't be honest with the customer base thats a big red flag for me.

Name any other manufacturer and you're not going to see this list of problems. Especially when Audeze themselves are known for reliability and quality control. They haven't fumbled any of their previous headphones so why are people on this thread trying to give them a pass on this one.

 

[HipHopScribe]

- Pad gluing problems should be easy to rectify. I understand that this is an engineering decision but the pads on the Maxwell are replaceable and the MM-100 is built on a similar chassis design.

To be fair on this one, the Maxwell is an active headphone so Audeze can use DSP to tune it. The MM-100 is passive, so the physical design is much more important to the tuning than the Maxwell. That isn’t to say that it would be impossible for Audeze to implement a different pad attachment mechanism and still preserve the acoustic seal they’re trying to achieve, but it is a totally different problem to solve than the Maxwell

 

[Kevintj604]

To be fair on this one, the Maxwell is an active headphone so Audeze can use DSP to tune it. The MM-100 is passive, so the physical design is much more important to the tuning than the Maxwell. That isn’t to say that it would be impossible for Audeze to implement a different pad attachment mechanism and still preserve the acoustic seal they’re trying to achieve, but it is a totally different problem to solve than the Maxwell

Fair enough but wiring issues and channel imbalanced units leaving the factory is not acceptable. Especially with Audeze. They’ve never had this issue.

Some buyers have been waiting for their units for months after pre-ordering and spending that money ahead of time. For Audeze to release a half baked, problem riddled product after months of delays is not excusable. They should have a higher standard especially after taking customers money months ago.

 

[HipHopScribe]

Fair enough but wiring issues and channel imbalanced units leaving the factory is not acceptable. Especially with Audeze. They’ve never had this issue.

Some buyers have been waiting for their units for months after pre-ordering and spending that money ahead of time. For Audeze to release a half baked, problem riddled product after months of delays is not excusable. They should have a higher standard especially after taking customers money months ago.

Agreed that there is definitely a QC problem that seems hard to explain with the seemingly mis-wired units

 

[Philimon]

The tone towards Audeze and their representative in many of these posts concerning preorder delays, pads being glued, and the wiring/cable issue has sadly become extremely negative and toxic.

But let’s not ignore significant issues. In fact, the piling on by more vocal critics has led to @Audeze finally addressing the padrolling directly though they explain not completely and until then Audeze advises to do at your own risk, AND has led to @Mad Lust Envy changing his signature to be more specific of his official status with Audeze.

While $400 is a signficant investment for many, in the world of high end headphones they are a bargain regardless of what the pads are made of or how they are attached.

lol. I put earpads on anything and its a bargain for you at $400 just because its little cost compared to LCD-5? Or are you saying LCD-5 is poor value?

Audeze has made it clear why they glue their earpads, make your buying decision based upon that If it’s an issue for you.

They havent been exactly clear which is the problem. I began in 04/23 to seek answer from Audeze regarding padrolling and warranty.

Calling their integrity into question because of that practice is not necessary

Ignored questions related to warranty is questionable. Padrolling is no small practice in the world of high end headphones which is why its worrying. Even pad installation of stock pads is a danger but is seemingly not common knowledge amongst owners. Perhaps negligence by owners, or Audeze’s fault for not making such risk more apparent?

 

[Smirk 24]

I'm seeing on Reddit that some folks have received their MM-100s (finally).

Anyone here receive theirs and have a few minutes to share their impressions? Many thanks.

 

[ThEvil0nE]

Too many in this hobby are too compliant without questioning. They take to their beloved brand (regardless of which brand) as if they are gospel. When a simple question arise they feel it's an attack and will readily throw logic out the window to defend by all means necessary. It doesn't work that way when you want to change something for the better. As @Philimon stated above, if non have been vocal enough to raise some question (pads), transparency would have never happened and this transparency will save you down the road. A simple peel and stick now can be a potential proceed at your own risk of voiding warranty. All that would not stop anyone from supporting/buying Audeze. Nobody will stop anyone from replacing their pads if need. All will still continue to replace pads by themselves but now with better transparency, we are getting better guidelines and caution and that is more of a win for consumers and Audeze.

Anyway, let's see what October would bring us. I may be a future MM-100 user.

 

[pk4425]

The tone towards Audeze and their representative in many of these posts concerning preorder delays, pads being glued, and the wiring/cable issue has sadly become extremely negative and toxic. As a former small business owner it makes me cringe reading many of these comments. While $400 is a signficant investment for many, in the world of high end headphones they are a bargain regardless of what the pads are made of or how they are attached. Audeze has made it clear why they glue their earpads, make your buying decision based upon that If it’s an issue for you. Calling their integrity into question because of that practice is not necessary. Regarding the wiring/cable issue, Audeze gave a possible solution that apparently did not work for some. Let’s wait to hear what the issue turns out to be before condemning them. Businesses are made up of human beings and they are all imperfect, just like us. The folks at Audeze are wonderful people who run a great business, and seem to truly care about their customers and advancing the state of the headphone art. Rather than nit picking every action, word, and comment perhaps we could apply a dose of grace, compassion, and humility and treat Audeze the way we would want to be treated.

Sincerely appreciate the dose of perspective. But the launch of the MM-100 has been riddled with mistakes and communication miscues that are the stock and trade of a startup company, not a leading audiophile headphone manufacturer.

But to be fair, this has been the exception, not the rule with Audeze products. I'm an Audeze stan, as a past owner of the LCD-2C and current owner of the LCD-X 2021. Loved/love both, and they brought/bring me many hours of audio bliss.

Pure conjecture, but as one poster in this thread said, mergers and acquisitions are disruptive as hell. The production of the MM-100 probably took place during the Sony-Audeze merger, which could have affected QC, supply chain oversight, etc. Emphasis on could.

I'm also shying away from the MM-100. At least the first production run. But I still think Audeze is one of the best audiophile headphone companies out there.

 

[bonnei100]

I have followed the Audeze company for some time now through interviews, trade show video presentations, factory tours etc. I have also noted that some audio pros I respect hold Audeze headphones in high esteem. Being a Sennheiser user myself for many years I was not overly enthused when I first tried Audeze legacy cans. Too bambastic, too much bass, too shouty, too harsh in the upper mid/treble region and uncomfortable on the head for me. The MM-100 was announced to be lighter weight, with a more comfortable fit and a sound more like the MM-500. I was looking forward to hearing more when production and launch approached earlier this year.

Sankar, Chris, Peter and other Audeze folks seem to be straight up and honest people. When Chris told us at the NAMM show that the MM-100 would have leather pads I was looking forward to a long lasting usefull addition to my toolkit. My oldest HD600 is from 1997, I have replaced pads on it several times and it still sounds GREAT to this day. When I heard the MM-100 had glued on fake leather pads I was dissapointed - even as it turned out pads were taped on. Taped on leather pads would have been better.

I have contacted Audeze about the wiring problems, and asked about replaceable leather pads at a later point. The answer I got was identical to the one we got here earlier: any problem with left can cable connection and channel balance is down to users being unable to connect it the right way. Well, users seem to be able to connect to the right can the right way - don't they? No reply on my leather replacement pad inquiry.

The answer from Audeze had this footnote: "This e-mail is the property of Audeze LLC. Distribution of this e-mail, or the information contained in it, is prohibited."

My question to Audeze is this: Do you want to have an open dialogue with/among users and potential customers about issues with your new product - or don't you? A European company trying to 'gag' consumers like this on product issues would get into hot water. We are free to communicate over here.

 

[marekm]

European company trying to 'gag' consumers like this on product issues would get into hot water. We are free to communicate here.

Spot on

One more: Please don't send your fanboys to tell us what we can and what we can't write in this thread (or any other for that matter). Extremely irritating and counter productive

 

[Philimon]

The answer from Audeze had this footnote: "This e-mail is the property of Audeze LLC. Distribution of this e-mail, or the information contained in it, is prohibited."

Unreal.

 

[renji1337]

Unreal.

From someone who works in InfoSec - This is a pretty standard thing at most companies within there ToS. What isn't standard is informing you about it, but it is there choice to have it as a disclaimer. I've seen a former employee fired & prosecuted at my current employer for saving/leaking company emails in multiple group chats, & on the app "Blind". Completely different scenario - but it's why these exist.

I was one of the first MM-100 receivers. My left and right can connections work fine. I am using the stock cable that came with them. The people on reddit whom recently received them also did not have this issue so do we even have an idea of how widespread the issues are, or are we assuming?

Audeze recently the following quote below on the 5th - and I can confirm if my cable is not seated in all the way that the channels do swap sides, but they do not swap sides when seated in full.

In terms of having cable issues with the MM-100:

Due to the unique nature of the wiring of the MM-100, it is very important that the cable is seated all the way in the headphones. When properly inserted, you will hear a click and the left and right channels will play appropriately.

If the cable is not seated all the way in the headphones, the left and right channel may swap sides. This is due to the way the headphones are wired (to accept either a cable input on the right OR left side).

Our techs individually test each side of each headphone, so if there was a phase, channel, or balance inconsistency, it would be noticed and reworked during our production process.

If you're still experiencing a problem, you can contact us at support@audeze.com

 

[HipHopScribe]

From someone who works in InfoSec - This is a pretty standard thing at most companies within there ToS. What isn't standard is informing you about it, but it is there choice to have it as a disclaimer. I've seen a former employee fired & prosecuted at my current employer for saving/leaking company emails in multiple group chats, & on the app "Blind". Completely different scenario - but it's why these exist.

Yeah, while it's a bit weird on a customer service email (and pointless since it's likely completely unenforceable with external emails to customers), an email disclaimer like that is very common in many companies for communications internally and with contractors or clients. I wouldn't read anything nefarious into it, it's just boilerplate language. I don't think they're trying to "gag" customers, it's probably mostly for internal purposes and communications with vendors or clients who have contractual obligations for confidentiality. Probably best to just leave it out of customer facing emails though.