Mimouille
Headphoneus Supremus
Man, someone got served. It is so obvious I won't mention who, but so satisfying I will perform a little dance.
Man, someone got served. It is so obvious I won't mention who, but so satisfying I will perform a little dance.
Rei, there are several fallacies in your logic. The most important is that in this and your other posts, you’re equating ‘detail’ as a measure of resolution, and technical performance in general. But that really isn’t the case. Detail is among others the combined result of transparency, resolution, background blackness, and separation. Those are all individual technical constructs. But even more than those, the amount of detail results from the treble tuning, which decisively isn’t.
You’re trying to make a case for technical performance by comparing the Dream to the 5-Way Ult. Even though I don’t recognize most of your description, you’re right that the 5-Way Ult has a darker tuning because of its attenuated treble. But ironically, the 5-Way Ult has better top-end extension, and both greater resolution and transparency than the Dream. The difference however is that the Dream is more upfront in its detail, resulting from the brightness of its 5 KHz peak. So even by objective technical standards, the Ult outperforms the Dream.
Disregarding tone, coherency, and basically the picture as a whole just in favor of detail, is a very crude way to score iems. From a logical perspective, it doesn’t make much sense because that isn’t the way people listen to music; at least for the rest of us. To stick with your leaf analogy, it doesn’t matter if someone draws the most detailed picture of a leaf; it it’s drawn in black and white, it will resemble a leaf just as much as a toddler’s drawing that’s in the exact right color. The best picture will always be the one that balances both to some degree, rather than skewing it towards either end.
I think at this point, I’ve probably written 10 A4 pages in posts emphasizing how important personal preference is. Your post again only proves that. You find detail the most important, and as a result, the Dream is your ‘perfect’ iem. It’s something I can definitely understand, because the Dream has unique qualities that I too can appreciate. But making an argument that ‘detail’ is the only thing that should be scored by, might be stretching it a bit. If that was the case, the Dunu DN-2000j would probably rank higher than most of these iems. Not because of resolution, transparency, and certainly not timbre; but because it maxes out the treble. Do you honestly think that that is a fair assessment?
Of course, this being YOUR listing, you have every right to decide
I have listed here the most repeated statement you make, followed by a claim of "poor science", and I think it quite clearly indicates your aim here: To introduce absolute subjectivity. As I indicated earlier, that is simply not possible. I will go even further in stating that what you propose, ignoring relevant information, is far worse science. It is what we can refer to as "Cargo Cult Science" something that looks like science, but isn't. I understand what you would ideally like to see, but by forcing the reviewing process into that idealistic view you are making a caricature of it. Moreover, your proposed method of excluding human experience does not hold water. It might look like it does, but doesn't. If you want, I will be happy to go through it with you step by step to clarify what I mean. It is however a lot of work and my concentration is far from optimal at the moment, so that is not something I will do unless you are genuinely interested.But, I am sure that you must have some system of measurement, that is beyond protest.
But, it is the only criteria that surpasses all personal preferences and beyond protest.
To make a comparison, is to have utilized non-subjective system of measurement, which I assume is what has been employed here.
people will still measure them based on non-subjective scales that completely removes the human experience,
Because rankings, should seek to be beyond reproach based on a non-subjective experience.
Because it fulfills the one, single standard of measure that surpasses personal preference.
Rather, its to highlight that rankings based on personal opinions is simply poor science (not 'science' literal sense) as it invalidates itself.
I simply wish to contribute towards a ranking result that has raised mild questions, into one that is unquestionable based on its standard of measure. In other words, one may disagree with the system of measure used, but neither can one disagree with the ranking that results from it.
We hear with our ears and not with machines, and thus subjective impressions still form the basis of this hobby.
You just have to post these gifs that keep me perpetually distracted. Just as I was moving on from the ping pong!Yep... I guess that is the way the cookie crumbles.
Well, did it ever cross your mind (introducing paranoia) that somebody might have hired me to do so?You just have to post these gifs that keep me perpetually distracted...
You are on the Muppets payroll now?Well, did it ever cross your mind (introducing paranoia) that somebody might have hired me to do so?
No. No it didn't cross my mind. But now you mention it...Well, did it ever cross your mind (introducing paranoia) that somebody might have hired me to do so?