[224342]

I am one of the others that disagree. While flowery language can be overdone I think it is difficult to hit the sweet spot between too much and too little. It is just as useless to see a review with so little in it that you’re left with nothing.

Also, while I’m sure feedback is appreciated by the reviewers here on headfi, calling them out for “BS” is in bad taste imho. As I have no formal reviews posted, I would never do that.

Fair point

 

[T400]

I am one of the others that disagree. While flowery language can be overdone I think it is difficult to hit the sweet spot between too much and too little. It is just as useless to see a review with so little in it that you’re left with nothing.

Also, while I’m sure feedback is appreciated by the reviewers here on headfi, calling them out for “BS” is in bad taste imho. As I have no formal reviews posted, I would never do that.

I'm fine with flowery to some degree, but not to the point where it's nonsensical. We are essentially dealing with auditory perception, which is difficult enough for those who study it (e.g., psychoacousticians) to describe. Straightforward language is important.

 

[DenverW]

So I like to look up reviewers based on gear I enjoy or don’t like. If I find a reviewer that tends to have similar taste as I do (for example, I’m not a grado fan) I’ll give more weight to their reviews. If someone is consistently loving on gear I don’t enjoy that doesn’t mean their review is wrong, it just means it’s wrong for me.

If everyone heard like I do we’d all own zmf on tube amps.

 

[iFi audio]

am one of the others that disagree. While flowery language can be overdone I think it is difficult to hit the sweet spot between too much and too little. It is just as useless to see a review with so little in it that you’re left with nothing.

Flowery content is OK if applied carefully, but it's cool if after reading a review I have some understanding how a product reviewed may actually sound like

 

[Whazzzup]

Every review the product sounds great. There’s the rub. everything I own for example is excellent.

 

[chesebert]

Everything I owned (but no longer own) are pieces of crap and gutter-fi.


/s

 

[T400]

Everything I owned (but no longer own) are pieces of crap and gutter-fi.


/s

Gutter-Fi. I like that.

 

[earmonger]

Pro Tip: In a typical Head-Fi review, the Pros are gushy. The Cons are where I look first. And if the incredibly amazing gizmo of the week also has Cons like "a little bass bloat" or "treble can be shouty on some tracks" or "slightly metallic timbre" or "mids could shine more" or "soundstage can get cluttered," then that's a FAIL.

 

[iFi audio]

Every review the product sounds great. There’s the rub. everything I own for example is excellent.

First we'd have to find some common ground what audio product actually deserves to be called less than good or plainly bad. To each of us it's going to be something different as we all have different reference points, but I think that in recent 10 years or so audio got way better pretty much all across the board. Perhaps that partially explains why we see many reviews of great sounding products. As iFi's representative and audio nut I've auditioned dozens of DAPs, IEMs, cans, amps, DACs etc. Some worked for me better than others, but I can't remember one that was plainly bad to be honest.

 

[Ficcion2]

First we'd have to find some common ground what audio product actually deserves to be called less than good or plainly bad. To each of us it's going to be something different as we all have different reference points, but I think that in recent 10 years or so audio got way better pretty much all across the board. Perhaps that partially explains why we see many reviews of great sounding products. As iFi's representative and audio nut I've auditioned dozens of DAPs, IEMs, cans, amps, DACs etc. Some worked for me better than others, but I can't remember one that was plainly bad to be honest.

I have one. Campfire Cascades. Waste of money/time.


I think one big source of confusion is the obfuscation of what music one is referencing. Most of the music I enjoy isn't necessarily "hi-res" or mastered by handsomely paid engineers.

Some of the music used in reviews emphasize choosing very well mastered recordings like found in Qobuz's partners playlists. Not everyone wants to sit down and listen to Diana Krall (Ill pass) or the latest Billie Eilish FLOTM (hard pass) or whatever.

Theres normally a sweet spot in most things like hobbies. Don't pay too much mind to the absolutists on both side (measurements vs ears only) as they both subjectly assess sound regardless of their methods.

I think the most sane advice I've been given and proven to myself is that all you need is some nice interconnects like Mogami or Canare. Thats all. No, seriously, don't pay for more (or anything less IMO).

 

[iFi audio]

I have one. Campfire Cascades. Waste of money/time.

I've enjoyed these a lot and they're built like tanks

Don't pay too much mind to the absolutists on both side (measurements vs ears only) as they both subjectly assess sound regardless of their methods.

Agreed, that's a very healthy advice.

I think one big source of confusion is the obfuscation of what music one is referencing. Most of the music I enjoy isn't necessarily "hi-res" or mastered by handsomely paid engineers.

Some of the music used in reviews emphasize choosing very well mastered recordings like found in Qobuz's partners playlists. Not everyone wants to sit down and listen to Diana Krall (Ill pass) or the latest Billie Eilish FLOTM (hard pass) or whatever.

Music in reviews is an interesting subject, but to me it's not essential. A reviewer with solid reference points (here I mean many auditioned products) should be able to accurately describe how a product sounds like no matter a repertoire used or its quality. If a review gets me that info, personally I don't have to know what music was used to make it. A product's sound profile won't change after going from 320kbps rock or metal to orchestral DSD. But at the same time I understand that music gives us something to relate to and that many people find it useful and entertaining to read about

 

[whitedragem]

let's change the question a bit, what do I need to look out for in terms of head-fi reviewers?

find a few who mirror your intent/direction..
eg if you are only interested in gaming positional accuracy, and don’t listen to jazz; an amp that plays a genre intimately isn’t worth squat- you seek ‘primarily’ soundstage and clinical neutral playback (needed for correct resolving of HRTFs)(surround encoded to ‘2 channel’ headphones)..

so- know thyself, and follow reviewers into similar music/ideals - they will ’speak to you’ in meaningful ways, and then just lean more weighting onto their findings when considering many opinions on ‘your next purchasing step(s)’.

the nature of the whole thing being ‘personal’ (not objective, such as “PC building”) your subjective take, like my own subjective take isn’t to be eroded.
know thyself, stay true to your guns.
sleep on any purchase decision - (if you wake up the next day and its’ still important, then it may be worth considering actually buying)-don’t be ‘impulsive’

if music is your thing listen to lots of kit/setups (and live) so you can formulate what works and doesn’t.
i knew for me, growing up, that soundstage and signal to noise were vital… later I recognised ‘dynamic range’ was were the passion really came from… (‘for me’)
if I played instruments all my life, I’d probably have different factors first (tonality as an example)
if you can cut down ‘sidegrading’ the hobby isn’t so expensive, ultimately…
but unless you know what you want and how to get there when you don’t know which side of ‘any given fence you sit’ (there are a lot of ‘divides’ in audio -eg some people believe amps are just for ‘more volume’) and you haven’t established which beliefs you align with, taking advice is hard.. eg some advice given already in this thread I’d be the polar opposite on.. hint; sound science is the dark basement of head-fi to non audiofoolz, for many of us here; it is the embarrasing family member that gives the whole place a bad rep (its very gated/policed by types very dogmatic and unflexible showing little of the skills actually needed for learning whilst ‘teaching’ everyone)

our tech devices give us equal power of representation on these forums, and as many studies show, no actual social accountability doesn’t help building fully formed personalities (its okay I’m fragile/fallible/friendly just like everyone else wink.gif)

i like getting to know the people at my local head-fi store, building a relationship with them; a good ‘head-fi’ store (mine is addicted to audio) will let you learn first hand and answer questions in legit ways. you know a good store- the team I see talk me out of more item purchases than I can count… and in hindsight, they have been right everytime.
i can actually walk in and buy impulsively cause they know their industry intimately.
every time I have followed their advice has proven a major win for me.

head-fi? its a thread specific community sometimes… (some product threads have great crowds, some are just really antagonistic)
if people act in these forums like you’d expect your friends to talk in the popcorn break at a movie night, then thats a ‘good sign’ (healthy crew)
Im not sure why so many warriors around head-fi need to make other succumb to their way of thinking.. (notice how this long post is wearing you down and letting my voice in your head?!..)
So, treat it like a trip to the casino; know your limit, wear a watch, and don’t let the house rule

if we come to an audio hobby site because audio brings us joy, then the hobby site should bring us joy.
if the hobby site is ‘on topic’ and social, we are rejuvenate, ‘topped up’, better for the experience
if in doubt, flip what the person is saying,,.. see it in the reverse, see what they are pushing for.
someone elses agenda, may/may not bring them joy, but never let it affect your own..
hence I recommend some real contact with products and people at your local store.. find out the brands they have that interest you/meet ‘your needs’, and then come back here and read the threads that give you more info on stuff that matters to you truly matter most- cause 2242432(?)- its ‘your hobby’. (and time is the most important resourse that none of us wish to waste)

cheers..

 

[chesebert]

Time to put up my favorite review template again - enjoy:

The [FOTM] seems to be a very well balanced [FOTM] in every aspect of its sonic presentation. By this I mean its frequency presentation seems to be equally consistent throughout the entire spectrum from the very low bass all the way throughout the upper treble. This consistency gives the [FOTM] a very smooth, even and natural tonal balance. This well balanced tonal character gives the [FOTM] a smooth, almost liquid sense, a somewhat silky feel. Never is there a hint of artificial or electronic reproduction taking place. When I say silkiness and smoothness I do not mean to infer a lack of detail or leading edge blurriness but quite the contrary, there is plenty of inner detail and resolution.

There is also an overall warmth to this [FOTM] but not too much, not overly present or in any way intrusive. This warmth does not seem to be a manifestation of any undue or excess mid bass emphasis, its just there in the presentation in a beneficial way rather than detracting and does not obscure the the [FOTM] detail or compromise definition. Personally I find this warmth pleasant, inviting and gratifying. [if you are aiming for clarity, change accordingly.]

The [FOTM] has the ability to unravel a complex sonic landscape with ease and confidence. Musical lines and rhythms are kept straight and coherent. Nothing is sonically tripping over itself or obscuring the detail of another instrument. Even in the most complex passages you can distinctly hear every instrument in detail. This is the consequence of the [FOTM]'s ability to resolve and present the smallest amounts of inner detail and micro dynamics. Instruments are clearly defined and focused and separated across the soundstage. Bass extension is deep and controlled with excellent definition, impact and tonality. Treble is extended and smooth without any sense of edginess or harshness. The slight overall warmth to the [FOTM] gives the midrange the seduction needed to draw you into the music and get you involved. Listening to the [FOTM] I never once thought I was listening to a digital file. It is not an in your face kind of [FOTM]. It seems so well balanced in so many regards that it doesn't need to have any particular overbearing characteristics to give it its overall magic. It simply does its job in every area with confidence and respect and disappears from the sonic equation in an effortless way.

 

[T400]

Time to put up my favorite review template again - enjoy:

The [FOTM] seems to be a very well balanced [FOTM] in every aspect of its sonic presentation. By this I mean its frequency presentation seems to be equally consistent throughout the entire spectrum from the very low bass all the way throughout the upper treble. This consistency gives the [FOTM] a very smooth, even and natural tonal balance. This well balanced tonal character gives the amp a smooth, almost liquid sense, a somewhat silky feel. Never is there a hint of artificial or electronic reproduction taking place. When I say silkiness and smoothness I do not mean to infer a lack of detail or leading edge blurriness but quite the contrary, there is plenty of inner detail and resolution.

There is also an overall warmth to this [FOTM] but not too much, not overly present or in any way intrusive. This warmth does not seem to be a manifestation of any undue or excess mid bass emphasis, its just there in the presentation in a beneficial way rather than detracting and does not obscure the the [FOTM] detail or compromise definition. Personally I find this warmth pleasant, inviting and gratifying. [if you are aiming for clarity, change accordingly.]

The [FOTM] has the ability to unravel a complex sonic landscape with ease and confidence. Musical lines and rhythms are kept straight and coherent. Nothing is sonically tripping over itself or obscuring the detail of another instrument. Even in the most complex passages you can distinctly hear every instrument in detail. This is the consequence of the [FOTM]'s ability to resolve and present the smallest amounts of inner detail and micro dynamics. Instruments are clearly defined and focused and separated across the soundstage. Bass extension is deep and controlled with excellent definition, impact and tonality. Treble is extended and smooth without any sense of edginess or harshness. The slight overall warmth to the [FOTM] gives the midrange the seduction needed to draw you into the music and get you involved. Listening to the [FOTM] I never once thought I was listening to a digital file. It is not an in your face kind of [FOTM]. It seems so well balanced in so many regards that it doesn't need to have any particular overbearing characteristics to give it its overall magic. It simply does its job in every area with confidence and respect and disappears from the sonic equation in an effortless way.

Brilliant!

 

[chesebert]

The above review is mlre fun

Brilliant!

The review template is more fun if you replace [FOTM] with certain body part