[seanwee]

For the most part, i only heard/see review with different reviewers taste/preference.

But recently it came to my attention, things like facebook reviewers which by the things i read its more of hypeman post or paid review-like ads

There are many factors that may affect the objectivity of a reviewer. And unless the reviewer always keep these in mind, they will end up with an unobjective review.

Before i get started, keep away from the big commercial reviewing sites like What Hi-Fi if you aren't already. Those reviews are just a waste of time since they gloss over any bad and just review everything as "good" or "not bad". Why? Because a good review gets them clicks and commission from affiliate link purchases. Nobody is going to buy or waste time reading a review if they know the iem/headphone/dap/amp is bad.

The most common and hardest to avoid one is the lack of a reference point. People who have not tried the best of the best wouldn't know what they are missing, what could have been better and so on.

Brain burn in or what people tend to say as subjective preference also plays a huge part as some people may be used to hearing their music with a muddy dark tonality or are used to a sibilant sound that their brains have already tuned out. And when they get introduced an actual natural sounding iem, they won't like it initially. But after some "recalibration" by listening to said natural sounding iem, only then will they realise how skewed their preferences were. Think of it like tuning stockholm syndrome.

Another annoying bias I've seen is that expensive iems are often given special treatment and different wording to describe the same sound. Like how the same overly dark tuning is described as "smooth and relaxed" in expensive iems but "muddy and lacks extension" in cheap iems. Similarly, an excellent tuning is often downplayed or labelled as hype in cheaper iems while given high praise in expensive iems.

I've long since abandoned reviews as a trustable iem buying guide. Even the most trusted reviewers fall into one of the aformentioned traps occasionally. Nowadays good reviews simply tell me what iems i should consider demoing.

Edit: Right, I forgot about boot licking. Long story short, reviewers give biased good reviews because they don't want to burn bridges with a company and stop recieving review units from said company.

It used to be problem with tech reviews as well until they basically unionised and got together collectively boycott a company when said company blacklists a reviewer because they gave a bad review. We've yet to see such a move in the audiophile space yet though.

 

[InvisibleInk]

There are many factors that may affect the objectivity of a reviewer. And unless the reviewer always keep these in mind, they will end up with an unobjective review.

Before i get started, keep away from the big commercial reviewing sites like What Hi-Fi if you aren't already. Those reviews are just a waste of time since they gloss over any bad and just review everything as "good" or "not bad". Why? Because a good review gets them clicks and commission from affiliate link purchases. Nobody is going to buy or waste time reading a review if they know the iem/headphone/dap/amp is bad.

The most common and hardest to avoid one is the lack of a reference point. People who have not tried the best of the best wouldn't know what they are missing, what could have been better and so on.

Brain burn in or what people tend to say as subjective preference also plays a huge part as some people may be used to hearing their music with a muddy dark tonality or are used to a sibilant sound that their brains have already tuned out. And when they get introduced an actual natural sounding iem, they won't like it initially. But after some "recalibration" by listening to said natural sounding iem, only then will they realise how skewed their preferences were. Think of it like tuning stockholm syndrome.

Another annoying bias I've seen is that expensive iems are often given special treatment and different wording to describe the same sound. Like how the same overly dark tuning is described as "smooth and relaxed" in expensive iems but "muddy and lacks extension" in cheap iems. Similarly, an excellent tuning is often downplayed or labelled as hype in cheaper iems while given high praise in expensive iems.

I've long since abandoned reviews as a trustable iem buying guide. Even the most trusted reviewers fall into one of the aformentioned traps occasionally. Nowadays good reviews simply tell me what iems i should consider demoing.

Edit: Right, I forgot about boot licking. Long story short, reviewers give biased good reviews because they don't want to burn bridges with a company and stop recieving review units from said company.

It used to be problem with tech reviews as well until they basically unionised and got together collectively boycott a company when said company blacklists a reviewer because they gave a bad review. We've yet to see such a move in the audiophile space yet though.

Pretty much why I'll never buy a Campfire Audio product.

 

[seanwee]

Pretty much why I'll never buy a Campfire Audio product.

You and me both. They are no better than chi-fi iems from an objective standpoint. Tuning is all over the place.

 

[InvisibleInk]

I liked the Andromeda when I had it for three weeks on loan, but I don't like the anDRAMAduh that headphones.com had to deal with recently. If CFA are in the business of censoring reviewers, they simply can't be trusted, period.

 

[Huefoe]

Been trying Tripowin Lea. Stock cable is meh, stock tips also meh. Changed it to Hzsound Cable (or just any cable holy god the stock is real bad) and e tips, and boom. The beast unleashed. It sounds similar to aria/kato, but without any shouty or sibilance. Male vocal got bodies, 3d imaging is great at this price. Tho well, at that price bracket the technicalities can't lie. But man, it's no brainer for that kind of price.

 

[seanwee]

Been trying Tripowin Lea. Stock cable is meh, stock tips also meh. Changed it to Hzsound Cable (or just any cable holy god the stock is real bad) and e tips, and boom. The beast unleashed. It sounds similar to aria/kato, but without any shouty or sibilance. Male vocal got bodies, 3d imaging is great at this price. Tho well, at that price bracket the technicalities can't lie. But man, it's no brainer for that kind of price.

If you want a technical iem on a budget look no further than the CCA CRA. Though in regards to sibilance you'll want to do a nozzle mod.

 

[Huefoe]

If you want a technical iem on a budget look no further than the CCA CRA. Though in regards to sibilance you'll want to do a nozzle mod.

Already got Hzsound Mirror for that but thanks for recommendation. I'm planning to get Olina or Ola tho, waiting for other review first.

 

[r31ya]

Been trying Tripowin Lea. Stock cable is meh, stock tips also meh. Changed it to Hzsound Cable (or just any cable holy god the stock is real bad) and e tips, and boom. The beast unleashed. It sounds similar to aria/kato, but without any shouty or sibilance. Male vocal got bodies, 3d imaging is great at this price. Tho well, at that price bracket the technicalities can't lie. But man, it's no brainer for that kind of price.

How is LEA vs CRA? i just gave away my CRA to co worker for belated birthday present.
Need replacement.

LEA seems to be in the budget, but OLA is in visible distance... or just save a bit more for OLINA.

Superthin DD vs LCP DD vs DMT DD vs (supposedly) Oxygen DD.

 

[Tzennn]

How is LEA vs CRA? i just gave away my CRA to co worker for belated birthday present.
Need replacement.

LEA seems to be in the budget, but OLA is in visible distance... or just save a bit more for OLINA.

Superthin DD vs LCP DD vs DMT DD vs (supposedly) Oxygen DD.

Or vs duo titanium DD + PET (plastic) DD

 

[4ceratops]

Or vs duo titanium DD + PET (plastic) DD

Hi, what are those headphones in the photo?

 

[NymPHONOmaniac]

KZ/CCA have produce things like CA16, CKX, ZEXPro, DQ6(s), and CRA.
But still somehow manage to produce harsh iem like CCA CA10, C10 pro

While i love that they still experiment, i sincerely hope they didn't go TRN route which have more misses than hits

yeah me too, the collab with reviewers-tuner did help to make them more aware of overall balance and timbral accuracy a bit more....but CA10 feel like a beginner chifi tuning, even ol'ZS6 is better imo TRN lost me since awhile, but we never know, so better keep an eye open and the mind open too.

KZ ZES is suppose to be more than decent.

But im more intrigue by the Lea and Olina, which im waiting for.

OLINA first review is intriguing, thats an honnest take as i like and they underline it doesnt use exactly same driver configuration.
''What we know is that the more expensive set in question, the Tanchjim Oxygen, also claims to use a CNT diaphragm paired with a dual-chamber cavity as opposed to the single cavity-based tuning used on the Olina. ''

Highlight of review:
plus=
''Faster music especially is where I noted the somewhat remarkable manner the Olina handled things easily compared to other value-oriented IEMs, which proved handy for when a random playlist brought up Lemmy again with Motörhead.''
cons=
''At the same time, acoustic instruments feel somewhat lacking by comparison, and percussions and snare drums felt muddled along with background vocals. This is where detail and resolution comments enter the picture, and where more technically competent IEMs do better. The mids thus go from a strong point to one that's an area of improvement, which ultimately makes imaging so-so dependent on the genre of music. ''
''Instead, the Olina is brighter than warm, and the default tuning in the treble region can unfortunately be fatiguing as well. ''
scary con=
''I can't tell whether this tuning was influenced by the current rage of getting treble extension out of any IEM, but it's executed so poorly that I can't recommend the Olina for most things instrumental with fundamentals in the high frequencies—piano keys, strings, bells, cymbals, and even some flutes.''
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/tripowin-x-hbb-olina-in-ear-monitors/4.html

 

[NymPHONOmaniac]

There are many factors that may affect the objectivity of a reviewer. And unless the reviewer always keep these in mind, they will end up with an unobjective review.

Before i get started, keep away from the big commercial reviewing sites like What Hi-Fi if you aren't already. Those reviews are just a waste of time since they gloss over any bad and just review everything as "good" or "not bad". Why? Because a good review gets them clicks and commission from affiliate link purchases. Nobody is going to buy or waste time reading a review if they know the iem/headphone/dap/amp is bad.

The most common and hardest to avoid one is the lack of a reference point. People who have not tried the best of the best wouldn't know what they are missing, what could have been better and so on.

Brain burn in or what people tend to say as subjective preference also plays a huge part as some people may be used to hearing their music with a muddy dark tonality or are used to a sibilant sound that their brains have already tuned out. And when they get introduced an actual natural sounding iem, they won't like it initially. But after some "recalibration" by listening to said natural sounding iem, only then will they realise how skewed their preferences were. Think of it like tuning stockholm syndrome.

Another annoying bias I've seen is that expensive iems are often given special treatment and different wording to describe the same sound. Like how the same overly dark tuning is described as "smooth and relaxed" in expensive iems but "muddy and lacks extension" in cheap iems. Similarly, an excellent tuning is often downplayed or labelled as hype in cheaper iems while given high praise in expensive iems.

I've long since abandoned reviews as a trustable iem buying guide. Even the most trusted reviewers fall into one of the aformentioned traps occasionally. Nowadays good reviews simply tell me what iems i should consider demoing.

Edit: Right, I forgot about boot licking. Long story short, reviewers give biased good reviews because they don't want to burn bridges with a company and stop recieving review units from said company.

It used to be problem with tech reviews as well until they basically unionised and got together collectively boycott a company when said company blacklists a reviewer because they gave a bad review. We've yet to see such a move in the audiophile space yet though.

Well, everything is say there: RESPECT.

I've seen it all, being an black sheep among reviewers.

I can say that reviewers connected to audio distributor are at higher risk to bias their impressions since they don't want to be punish and keep receiving freebies. Collaborating directly with audio companies is less problematic (Campfire being an exception). More serious reviewers will make their own audio quest and search to test audio products that they really care about, other that just receive random stuffs are less serious. Reviewers that care about LOAN tour too is a good sign imo. Some audio companies know they can ''buy'' the fidelity of a reviewer if the give him for free something very expensive. Opportunism spoil ALOT of reviewers...

Anyway, i dont want to open this pandora box tbh since this make me very cynical at they end and ruin my reviewing fun.

But yes, as a reviewer I have to reject at least 10 demand to enter ''affiliated links'' programs, something i find that can bias integrity since the goal is to sell as much as you can to get $$$$. Aff links should sound an alarm about objectivity.

 

[lushmelody]

Imagine a list comparing all those sub $50 (or $100) IEMs like a guy from here did with DAC dongles...

 

[Tzennn]

Imagine a list comparing all those sub $50 (or $100) IEMs like a guy from here did with DAC dongles...

It's going to be a list full of this

 

[lushmelody]

It's going to be a list full of this

Lol. Is budget condemned to never progress?