[PinkyPowers]

My remarks relate to something I've already said very openly and clearly. This was then followed by others discussing multiple facets of subsequent conversation, but not the elephant in the room, which I had pointed to, and which (unsurprisingly) some people feel very awkward about acknowledging. It's endemic on Head-Fi and other head-based Hi-Fi sites.

However, it's important to reiterate that what I said was not aimed at any single individual, or any single manufacturer, or any single thread. The fact that I happened to mention it here in the EE thread was not premeditated or by design - it was spontaneous, as an off-the-cuff response to the endless (and unwinnable, by either side) debate about burn-in - that will be apparent to anyone who wishes to retrace the beginning of the topic. It is interesting that the first reply to that original post was so reactionary, and that others subsequently danced around tangential remarks that did not address what had really been said. That combination of responses is 'interesting', in itself.

I'm not looking for a long debate - that wouldn't be fair to Jack or the thread. I'm quite easy-going, generally. I just raised a point which I feel is legitimate, but quite a few others clearly feel isn't legitimate or should be swept under the carpet, or, at the least, danced around but not acknowledged. Although few Head-Fiers are willing to stick their necks out and publicly state their concerns, I know I am not alone in feeling a growing sense of unease, in recent years, as the 'free-sample-for-an-unbiased-review' mantra has become almost the rule, rather than the exception, in the world of head-based Hi-Fi. I know this because I periodically get PMs from other members, raising their concerns.

Apologies to Jack for the intermission, and, again, this is not in any way singling-out EE.

If review samples is the "elephant in the room", I can gladly explain why I might dismiss that concern as profoundly ignorant... at least as it relates to me.

I give negative reviews of products I find fault with. Whether they were free, a demo, or bought by myself. By that simple fact, I have the power to ignore your elephants, or any other creature in your menagerie. Your concerns don't apply to me, and I can pursue the topics which truly hold interest for wise old Pinky.

By the way, if you don't like "reactionary" responses, don't tell someone how they ought to protect their integrity in your eyes. Few things are more insulting.

 

[Blitzula]

I agree that if they want to appear fully impartial reviewers should buy the product they're reviewing.

Absent that, it's certainly reasonable to take the results with a grain of salt. The size of said grain dependant on the reviewer and whether you think they've earned the benefit of the doubt or not.

Don't get me started on hi-fi magazine/website reviews, that's even worse.

 

[eldss]

I think that the problem can be that there is a thin line between being a reviewer and becoming a marketing arm for manufacturers. I personally appreciate the reviews from many of you and look forward to them. Knowing a reviewers personal preferences is important for readers and of course, a reviewer is free to have a preference or affinity towards a sound signature, attributes, or even a brand if they appreciate the quality of the product. However, the problem arises when reviewers get involved in hyping up a product whether intended or unintentionally, specially when they haven't even heard/reviewed the product themselves. That's something I've noticed here on Headfi and personally believe can be an issue, because people may question a reviewers integrity. It;s a thin line and I don't intend to point fingers at anyone specifically, but it most be noted that people cross that line and its noticed around the forums.

 

[olddude]

The only actual review (as opposed to posts) I've ever done here was of a DAP I tested while it was on a tour. I wasn't very impressed with it from a personal point of view and said so, while still stating that others might like that which I didn't based on personal preference.

Now that's a long way from getting a demo from a manufacturer (especially one I got to keep) but it is still relatively a freebie.

I don't feel guilty.

 

[Deezel177]

My remarks relate to something I've already said very openly and clearly. This was then followed by others discussing multiple facets of subsequent conversation, but not the elephant in the room, which I had pointed to, and which (unsurprisingly) some people feel very awkward about acknowledging. It's endemic on Head-Fi and other head-based Hi-Fi sites.

However, it's important to reiterate that what I said was not aimed at any single individual, or any single manufacturer, or any single thread. The fact that I happened to mention it here in the EE thread was not premeditated or by design - it was spontaneous, as an off-the-cuff response to the endless (and unwinnable, by either side) debate about burn-in - that will be apparent to anyone who wishes to retrace the beginning of the topic. It is interesting that the first reply to that original post was so reactionary, and that others subsequently danced around tangential remarks that did not address what had really been said. That combination of responses is 'interesting', in itself.

I'm not looking for a long debate - that wouldn't be fair to Jack or the thread. I'm quite easy-going, generally. I just raised a point which I feel is legitimate, but quite a few others clearly feel isn't legitimate or should be swept under the carpet, or, at the least, danced around but not acknowledged. Although few Head-Fiers are willing to stick their necks out and publicly state their concerns, I know I am not alone in feeling a growing sense of unease, in recent years, as the 'free-sample-for-an-unbiased-review' mantra has become almost the rule, rather than the exception, in the world of head-based Hi-Fi. I know this because I periodically get PMs from other members, raising their concerns.

Apologies to Jack for the intermission, and, again, this is not in any way singling-out EE.

So, the elephant in the room is your opinion that the prospect of free stuff immediately strips a reviewer of his/her credibility? That the mere idea of not paying for something is so tantalising that they can't help but praise it to no end? This'll most likely be my last post on the matter - and I sincerely apologise for contributing to a discussion that has little to do with EE, but I feel this must be said - reviewers can never be 100% unbiased. Whether it's based on taste, or how much/little money they've spent on it, there will be some sort of humane influence preventing the review from being 100% objective. This is why people like me and @PinkyPowers use the word "honest" in our disclaimers. Now, that being said, I'm totally not denying the fact that there are reviews which - whether inadvertently or intentionally - market a product rather than evaluate it. I've said in my very first post that this is a real issue, and I think it has more to do with a lack of professionalism than anything.

But, it's also important to point out that reviewers who purchase review units at full price aren't immune to cost-related biases either; for example, confirmation bias. The need to justify the time and money you've spent on a product can easily sway your opinions towards blind positivity. In my experience, "Well, you only said that 'cus you got it for free!" appears just as many times as "Well, you only said that 'cus you spent three thousand dollars on it!" I've mentioned this before in another thread, but - especially when it comes to custom IEMs - beyond paying for the product's retail value, you have to spend time (sometimes weeks/months) to audition it, pay for ear impressions, pay to ship them over, and then wait - again - weeks/months for the item to be crafted before you finally get to hear yours for the very first time. The enthusiasm and relief you get from finally receiving the product after all this time-and-money will inevitably influence your first impressions. And - speaking from personal experience - you'll be surprised how much of those first impressions end up making it onto the final review.

Whether or not I "danced around" your main point, it was not at all my intention. I honestly tried to tackle it directly from my own personal view: Free review units can encourage disingenuous reviews, but that doesn't automatically make the rest of us dishonest salesmen trying to sell you a product. It'd be nice if you'd return the favour and acknowledge the fact that reviewers who purchase units at full-price can be biased as well. Surely, the sentiment you expressed that the only reviews of the Phantom and Legend X worth reading are the ones from full-fledged buyers, can't be taken without some sort of offence. The truth is, there's no winning when it comes to the "controversy" surrounding review units. Like I said in that other thread, "Bash a product and you're called too harsh, praise a product and you're being too nice, review something at full price and get called out for confirmation bias, review something for free and get accused of bribery, etc. It's a job just like anything else and you're always bound for criticism. I think all that matters is that you're true to yourself in anything you do/write, and that honesty will come through in your work and to your audience."

 

[choisan]

Dears, Can someone kindly advise what type is the CIEM EA using? Flat? Protrude? Recess? Thanks!

 

[Deezel177]

Dears, Can someone kindly advise what type is the CIEM EA using? Flat? Protrude? Recess? Thanks!

As far as I know, Empire Ears uses recessed sockets on all their IEMs (maybe not the universals, though). If by EA you mean Effect Audio, then the 2-pin plugs they use can fit in both recessed and flush sockets, so they'll work fine with any EE IEM.

 

[choisan]

May i know which one is it? Let say the most left is #1 and most right being #5

 

[Deezel177]

May i know which one is it? Let say the most left is #1 and most right being #5

Effect Audio only uses plug #3, and Empire Ears IEMs will only work with plug #3.

 

[Mimouille]

So, the elephant in the room is your opinion that the prospect of free stuff immediately strips a reviewer of his/her credibility? That the mere idea of not paying for something is so tantalising that they can't help but praise it to no end? This'll most likely be my last post on the matter - and I sincerely apologise for contributing to a discussion that has little to do with EE, but I feel this must be said - reviewers can never be 100% unbiased. Whether it's based on taste, or how much/little money they've spent on it, there will be some sort of humane influence preventing the review from being 100% objective. This is why people like me and @PinkyPowers use the word "honest" in our disclaimers. Now, that being said, I'm totally not denying the fact that there are reviews which - whether inadvertently or intentionally - market a product rather than evaluate it. I've said in my very first post that this is a real issue, and I think it has more to do with a lack of professionalism than anything.

But, it's also important to point out that reviewers who purchase review units at full price aren't immune to cost-related biases either; for example, confirmation bias. The need to justify the time and money you've spent on a product can easily sway your opinions towards blind positivity. In my experience, "Well, you only said that 'cus you got it for free!" appears just as many times as "Well, you only said that 'cus you spent three thousand dollars on it!" I've mentioned this before in another thread, but - especially when it comes to custom IEMs - beyond paying for the product's retail value, you have to spend time (sometimes weeks/months) to audition it, pay for ear impressions, pay to ship them over, and then wait - again - weeks/months for the item to be crafted before you finally get to hear yours for the very first time. The enthusiasm and relief you get from finally receiving the product after all this time-and-money will inevitably influence your first impressions. And - speaking from personal experience - you'll be surprised how much of those first impressions end up making it onto the final review.

Whether or not I "danced around" your main point, it was not at all my intention. I honestly tried to tackle it directly from my own personal view: Free review units can encourage disingenuous reviews, but that doesn't automatically make the rest of us dishonest salesmen trying to sell you a product. It'd be nice if you'd return the favour and acknowledge the fact that reviewers who purchase units at full-price can be biased as well. Surely, the sentiment you expressed that the only reviews of the Phantom and Legend X worth reading are the ones from full-fledged buyers, can't be taken without some sort of offence. The truth is, there's no winning when it comes to the "controversy" surrounding review units. Like I said in that other thread, "Bash a product and you're called too harsh, praise a product and you're being too nice, review something at full price and get called out for confirmation bias, review something for free and get accused of bribery, etc. It's a job just like anything else and you're always bound for criticism. I think all that matters is that you're true to yourself in anything you do/write, and that honesty will come through in your work and to your audience."

If we look at facts, it is interesting to see that there are very few truly negative reviews. I am not a regular reviewer, but in my specific case, when a brand lends me something I dislike, I usually do not review it. It is not I do not want to publish the review, it is that I do not want to spend time listening to it. Life is too short.

Now if we look at basic factors, the natural reaction should be :

• Ownership: positive bias towards anything you own has been tested and proved : people form attachments to objects they own
• Price paid : Having paid or not may influence in difference, sometimes opposites ways. There is a share of confirmation bias when you put a lot of money into something, but conversely, some people will be more critical of something they dislike if it cost them a lot : see how people complain on FW issues on expensive DAP. Confirmation bias and entitlement can be in conflict
• Relationship to brand: of course one can be influenced by their relationship to a brand. But this can go both ways. Either you can tone down criticism, or be especially picky because you want your buddy's brand to get better (like I was on the Zeus XIV hiss)
• Price positioning : this is in my opinion the worst infuencer. When a cheap product sounds great, reviewers always say FOR THE PRICE. Nobody EVER says that a 100$ iem sounds better than a 1k$ IEM, when, let's face it, it is bound to happen. The worst case is cables. Obviously a 2000$ copper cable is pure theft, but reviewer will in 90% of cases always here it adds "refinement" to the sound. Mega lol.
• Livelihood: when a reviewer is living off his blog, I fail to see how he could possibly give a purely objective review on the flagship product of the main sponsor of his blog, who is literally putting food on his table. But many people seem to disagree with me on this

In my particular case, I am the most objective when I get a free review loaner that I have to return afterward. I even have a bit of a negative bias in general.

 

[Deezel177]

If we look at facts, it is interesting to see that there are very few truly negative reviews. I am not a regular reviewer, but in my specific case, when a brand lends me something I dislike, I usually do not review it. It is not I do not want to publish the review, it is that I do not want to spend time listening to it. Life is too short.

Now if we look at basic factors, the natural reaction should be :

• Ownership: positive bias towards anything you own has been tested and proved : people form attachments to objects they own
• Price paid : Having paid or not may influence in difference, sometimes opposites ways. There is a share of confirmation bias when you put a lot of money into something, but conversely, some people will be more critical of something they dislike if it cost them a lot : see how people complain on FW issues on expensive DAP. Confirmation bias and entitlement can be in conflict
• Relationship to brand: of course one can be influenced by their relationship to a brand. But this can go both ways. Either you can tone down criticism, or be especially picky because you want your buddy's brand to get better (like I was on the Zeus XIV hiss)
• Price positioning : this is in my opinion the worst infuencer. When a cheap product sounds great, reviewers always say FOR THE PRICE. Nobody EVER says that a 100$ iem sounds better than a 1k$ IEM, when, let's face it, it is bound to happen. The worst case is cables. Obviously a 2000$ copper cable is pure theft, but reviewer will in 90% of cases always here it adds "refinement" to the sound. Mega lol.
• Livelihood: when a reviewer is living off his blog, I fail to see how he could possibly give a purely objective review on the flagship product of the main sponsor of his blog, who is literally putting food on his table. But many people seem to disagree with me on this

In my particular case, I am the most objective when I get a free review loaner that I have to return afterward. I even have a bit of a negative bias in general.

I appreciate the honest communication, and - truthfully - I fully agree with the points you've raised above.

 

[choisan]

Is this similar to #3?

 

[Deezel177]

Is this similar to #3?

Yes, that is the standard variant of the 2-pin plug used in the large majority of IEM cables made with 2-pin plugs.

 

[choisan]

Actually, #1 to #3 are the same type, jsut the color, this is why i asked.
The reason behind is that i want to send back to the manufacturer to change the CM socket of my cable to fit my EA that the original is with MMCX.

 

[boomtube]

What's the timeline for Legend X being available to order?