[Kerouac]

There's not all that much one can do to prevent their opinions from being taken as objective fact other than attempt to dissuade such mentalities. I know Crin has this issue, far too many people (especially on reddit, christ) take his opinion as the literal word of god, and his judgement as the reaping blade that cuts the chaff. I agree with Crin on plenty of things (and disagree with plenty others) but nothing annoys me more than the people that drag their sycophantism into audio to worship him.

And you know what? That applies to pretty much any other given reviewer. Every writer with a reasonably sized audience will inevitably have some level of sycophantic following that takes their opinions far too seriously and with too much weight. There is nothing one can do about this, and to an extent it's due to a mixture of human nature, the need for leadership or guidance, a lack of exposure and FOMO.

Hell, this doesn't just apply to reviewers who actively post content, this applies to entire subcommunities too. How many smaller audio forums or Discords (even large public ones) turn into circlejerks over the same set of approved gear? I don't think anyone is free from this, not even the people who are aware of it or complain about it. The best way to deal with it is to accept that a true objective opinion doesn't exist, and that one's perspective is, at best, from their own skewed lens, irregardless of how correct they think they are.

As for this whole "you need to spend 10000 hours with an IEM or your opinion is moot argument", I don't get the point of it. When people (namely the average consumer, both in high end audio and what we call "consumer audio") go out demoing IEMs, they cast an initial judgement within the first 10 minutes at most of hearing something. This basic human behavior: we do the same thing to other people too. It's called, you know, a first impression. This idea that one must borderline Stockholm themselves into liking something in order to have a valid opinion on it is self-flagellatory at best, and outright corporatist worship at worst. Sure, you can argue that one's opinion might change over time, but this kind of change, I find, takes place over months, if not years. And it usually happens to people who don't know what they want yet. Someone who loves bass is not going to suddenly like the ER4 just because they spent an hour more with it. They might grow to appreciate the diffuse field curve over a period of time, thanks to external and preferential factors, but to blatantly dismiss the initial opinion simply because it's subject to change and to essentially think that they're wrong for not liking an otherwise acclaimed IEM is ridiculous.

And while I'm at it, let me ask a question. What opinion isn't subject to change? Spending 3000 hours with an IEM does not mean you might one day grow to dislike it, or find it dated in a decade's time. This notion that one's opinions must be infallible and steadfast regardless of time's march is completely naive and shallow. One should approach how they weight their own personal opinions with the full knowledge that their opinions will inevitably change, and that their opinions are inherently subjective. And that's completely fine. Self-doubt over something as trivial as this feels pointless. Just know what you like and what you don't, be able to articulate that, and you're already better off than most people.

Somehow, the above reminded me of this particular MP scene


Well, that's it for today. Going home now...

 

[mvvRAZ]

I also believe that first impressions carry certain value, as that is the only time I can evaluate something without having formed any kind of opinion on it. That is why I usually post reviews within a week at most as of receiving an IEM - once I have spent enough time playing with cables and sources I am almost guaranteed to like what I'm hearing as I would've been able to fix what I disliked about it, and further improved what I already enjoyed.

You could make the argument that just about any IEM works within a just about perfect for it setup, but that doesn't say as much about the IEM as it does about the rest of the chain

 

[Rockwell75]

I think their styles differ quite a bit to be honest, and it kinda illustrates what I was aiming at earlier. @toranku for instance (I know he reads this thread every now and then, so it's not talking behind his back) reads more like a personal head-fi journey and while his style is quite critical, I actually find that he is clearly just sharing his personal thoughts from one head-fier to another. I actually do like that, but that it's a personal journey is not always as clear.

I'd like to extend your props to Tork-- he's one of my favorite reviewers out there because, as you say, his postings across very much like a personal journey and lack entirely any subtext of objectivity. Furthermore, we have different preferences overall but even when I disagree with his overall assessment, I can still read his thoughts relate them to my own about a given IEM, even if the things he describes don't bother me as much as they do him.

In the end of the day though, everyone's responsible for their own money...It's up to you to filter the information available and if the purchase is indeed a poor one, you learn from it and try to do better next time

I think this is fundamentally true-- when I first got into TOTL portable audio about this time last year I was overwhelmed with all the information out there, from obvious shills on the one hand, to people who were very obviously biased against certain brands on the other-- and everything in between. The only real solution at this point is for a potential buyer to take in as much information as you can and, over time, identify those sources whom they find can lead them in the right direction...and ignore others. It's unwise to base your purchases on the info presented by a single reviewer, or contained in a single thread...but that's always going to happen. Ultimately the best option is to demo stuff for yourself for a few days to see if it's for you...but this often not possible.

What I have seen happen in this hobby is that, potential buyers have the tendency to dismiss warnings, when it is just from 1 or 2 reviewers.

On the flipside I have been scared off of a product based on the warnings of 1 or 2 people only to find later that (to my ears) the issue had been overblown. The best option (for me), failing actually being able to demo stuff, is to find some people whose impressions consistently line up with my own and try and rely on them.

 

[Wyville]

There's not all that much one can do to prevent their opinions from being taken as objective fact other than attempt to dissuade such mentalities. I know Crin has this issue, far too many people (especially on reddit, christ) take his opinion as the literal word of god, and his judgement as the reaping blade that cuts the chaff. I agree with Crin on plenty of things (and disagree with plenty others) but nothing annoys me more than the people that drag their sycophantism into audio to worship him.

And you know what? That applies to pretty much any other given reviewer. Every writer with a reasonably sized audience will inevitably have some level of sycophantic following that takes their opinions far too seriously and with too much weight. There is nothing one can do about this, and to an extent it's due to a mixture of human nature, the need for leadership or guidance, a lack of exposure and FOMO.

Hell, this doesn't just apply to reviewers who actively post content, this applies to entire subcommunities too. How many smaller audio forums or Discords (even large public ones) turn into circlejerks over the same set of approved gear? I don't think anyone is free from this, not even the people who are aware of it or complain about it. The best way to deal with it is to accept that a true objective opinion doesn't exist, and that one's perspective is, at best, from their own skewed lens, irregardless of how correct they think they are.

As for this whole "you need to spend 10000 hours with an IEM or your opinion is moot argument", I don't get the point of it. When people (namely the average consumer, both in high end audio and what we call "consumer audio") go out demoing IEMs, they cast an initial judgement within the first 10 minutes at most of hearing something. This basic human behavior: we do the same thing to other people too. It's called, you know, a first impression. This idea that one must borderline Stockholm themselves into liking something in order to have a valid opinion on it is self-flagellatory at best, and outright corporatist worship at worst. Sure, you can argue that one's opinion might change over time, but this kind of change, I find, takes place over months, if not years. And it usually happens to people who don't know what they want yet. Someone who loves bass is not going to suddenly like the ER4 just because they spent an hour more with it. They might grow to appreciate the diffuse field curve over a period of time, thanks to external and preferential factors, but to blatantly dismiss the initial opinion simply because it's subject to change and to essentially think that they're wrong for not liking an otherwise acclaimed IEM is ridiculous.

And while I'm at it, let me ask a question. What opinion isn't subject to change? Spending 3000 hours with an IEM does not mean you might one day grow to dislike it, or find it dated in a decade's time. This notion that one's opinions must be infallible and steadfast regardless of time's march is completely naive and shallow. One should approach how they weight their own personal opinions with the full knowledge that their opinions will inevitably change, and that their opinions are inherently subjective. And that's completely fine. Self-doubt over something as trivial as this feels pointless. Just know what you like and what you don't, be able to articulate that, and you're already better off than most people.

No, that is not quite how I mean it. The average consumer might make up their mind in 10 minutes, I know I did when I bought my first CIEMs, but a reviewer or anyone else who sets out to share their opinion is not, in my opinion, an average consumer. They are people who share information and as such have a responsibility towards the quality of that information.

In my experience, when listening to gear there is a process that starts with an initial impression (those 10 or 30 minutes consumers use) followed by period of acclimatisation (some might call it 'brain burn in') followed by a period where the listener can form a more informed opinion. This takes several days with me and I have had a few times where after acclimatisation, I slowly started to form a different opinion because I was using a wider range of music or things simply started to fall into place. That can go in any direction. The DITA Fealty for instance took me several days before the signature suddenly started to make sense and I absolutely loved it. The U12t I was very impressed by initially, but after a few weeks I found them missing the emotion I like in my music. Getting to know gear takes time and that is not yet taking into account physiology and psychology, which both affect the impression you get. Reducing the influence of those factors can only be done by listening over a longer period of time. So the length of time is functional. It does not have to be extremely long, but if you were to look at an opinion over time, you see the strongest fluctuations early on and it stabilises after a while (after which there can still be change, but likely in a much more gradual way).

 

[Wyville]

I'd like to extend your props to Tork-- he's one of my favorite reviewers out there because, as you say, his postings across very much like a personal journey and lack entirely any subtext of objectivity. Furthermore, we have different preferences overall but even when I disagree with his overall assessment, I can still read his thoughts relate them to my own about a given IEM, even if the things he describes don't bother me as much as they do him.

Good point! I do quite like to browse the thread myself every once in a while, even though I am still not sure how his preferences compare to mine. It has evolved into quite an accessible thread for everyone.

 

[mvvRAZ]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...ecious-metal-quicktake-k5n00l9z?sref=kPIaWmpY

Demand for the Leonidas II has led to significant supply shortages in the palladium market

 

[aminus]

No, that is not quite how I mean it. The average consumer might make up their mind in 10 minutes, I know I did when I bought my first CIEMs, but a reviewer or anyone else who sets out to share their opinion is not, in my opinion, an average consumer. They are people who share information and as such have a responsibility towards the quality of that information.

In my experience, when listening to gear there is a process that starts with an initial impression (those 10 or 30 minutes consumers use) followed by period of acclimatisation (some might call it 'brain burn in') followed by a period where the listener can form a more informed opinion. This takes several days with me and I have had a few times where after acclimatisation, I slowly started to form a different opinion because I was using a wider range of music or things simply started to fall into place. That can go in any direction. The DITA Fealty for instance took me several days before the signature suddenly started to make sense and I absolutely loved it. The U12t I was very impressed by initially, but after a few weeks I found them missing the emotion I like in my music. Getting to know gear takes time and that is not yet taking into account physiology and psychology, which both affect the impression you get. Reducing the influence of those factors can only be done by listening over a longer period of time. So the length of time is functional. It does not have to be extremely long, but if you were to look at an opinion over time, you see the strongest fluctuations early on and it stabilises after a while (after which there can still be change, but likely in a much more gradual way).

I feel like you're adding far too much pretense to this role of what's essentially an audio journalist. A review functions as one's way to talk about what they think of an IEM. I don't think there needs to be any treatment of the function like it's some sort of sacred mantle and special power. Anyone could choose to write reviews if they wanted to. The quality of said reviews is another matter entirely.

Regarding brain burn in, isn't that quite literally the definition of Stockholm syndrome? I find the idea that one has to get used to a sound signature to evaluate it a bit silly - it defeats the purpose of attempting to judge tonal accuracy or tonal balance. It essentially amounts to, consciously or unconsciously, forcing yourself to like an IEM. And I don't agree with that at all. The idea that the user has to bend to the product rather than the other way around is ridiculous. There is nothing wrong with admitting that you don't like a sound signature. And trying to explain this away with the "reviewer's duty" shtick just reeks of being afraid to openly admit one's own opinions in fear of offending others. An almost twisted attempt at objectivity that ends up becoming more misleading and misinforming than anything else. You don't know if the reader or potential buyer will or won't take an issue to a tonal phenomena on an IEM, so why pretend that you are in any position to handwave or excuse it?

I don't know, maybe it's just me, but every time I entertain this idea it never fails to feel like desperate straw-grasping attempts at forcing oneself to like something they don't. I don't agree with this idea of an IEM magically having the right synergy with the right mood on the right day. To me, there is a set of things that an IEM can or cannot do. I don't know about other people, but I can usually have a pretty good idea of how an IEM handles these things in a short period of time. I know whether or not an IEM has good dynamics with a single test track. I know if an IEM can do bass slam just by having it play something with adequate kick drum impact. It's not hard for me to judge if an IEM can do transients quickly or slowly, or if it has a good tonality or good timbre, etc. etc. I probably sound like I'm tooting on my own horn at this point, but I'm trying to get at something: I don't think it's hard to judge an IEM for what it is without needing days and days of exposure to "acclimate" to it. If anything, the "acclimation" clouds one's own personal preferences of things. But hey, that's just my take on it.

Note: The usage of “you” here is not towards Wyville specifically, but to whomever it may concern. Sorry if it comes off as a personal attack

 

[Wes S]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...ecious-metal-quicktake-k5n00l9z?sref=kPIaWmpY

Demand for the Leonidas II has led to significant supply shortages in the palladium market

I read that article yesterday, and immediately starting thinking of purchasing a Satin Athena 4 wire for my Savant II, before the prices start rising. . .

 

[thesheik137]

Regarding brain burn in, isn't that quite literally the definition of Stockholm syndrome? I find the idea that one has to get used to a sound signature to evaluate it a bit silly - it defeats the purpose of attempting to judge tonal accuracy or tonal balance. It essentially amounts to, consciously or unconsciously, forcing yourself to like an IEM. And I don't agree with that at all.

Brain burn is a fact of psychoacoustics, whether you agree with it or not.

 

[aminus]

Brain burn is a fact of psychoacoustics, whether you agree with it or not.

Oh no, I’m not denying the existence of brain burn in. I’m saying that it’s very real, and it’s detrimental to proper evaluation of a transducer’s tonal balance and tonal accuracy.

 

[davidmolliere]

Regarding brain burn in, isn't that quite literally the definition of Stockholm syndrome? I find the idea that one has to get used to a sound signature to evaluate it a bit silly - it defeats the purpose of attempting to judge tonal accuracy or tonal balance. It essentially amounts to, consciously or unconsciously, forcing yourself to like an IEM. And I don't agree with that at all. The idea that the user has to bend to the product rather than the other way around is ridiculous. There is nothing wrong with admitting that you don't like a sound signature. And trying to explain this away with the "reviewer's duty" shtick just reeks of being afraid to openly admit one's own opinions in fear of offending others. An almost twisted attempt at objectivity that ends up becoming more misleading and misinforming than anything else. You don't know if the reader or potential buyer will or won't take an issue to a tonal phenomena on an IEM, so why pretend that you are in any position to handwave or excuse it?

You raise very good points and questions... An unbiased review is not possible, if anything because the reviewer himself is part of the chain : we have different ears, canals, sensitivity... basically it's psycho acoustics. I'll never trust a review claiming to own any kind of absolute truth. One thing a reviewer should always know is his personal preferences and how they can bias his opinion not to be able to provide unbiased review but one that express his frame of reference.

This being said I try to look at it when I review is what was the original tuning intent, how is the coherence and what are the key aspects that define the signature so that people can identify wether or not it can fit their preferences which is as important as how well it's executed and the technical aspects of the IEM in my opinion. I can do this even if it's not my personal preference. It's not forcing yourself to like something you don't like, but trying to graps what it is about and was the intent (or lack thereof, in worst case) executed well or not. Of course if something that has its limits, as I wrote before if the intent is lacking and no coherence is emerging and/or if it's poorly executed and technically lacking then it's hard to write anything meaningless.

 

[thesheik137]

Oh no, I’m not denying the existence of brain burn in. I’m saying that it’s very real, and it’s detrimental to proper evaluation of a transducer’s tonal balance and tonal accuracy.

Okay, fair enough. I was worried there for a second, haha.

 

[aminus]

You raise very good points and questions... An unbiased review is not possible, if anything because the reviewer himself is part of the chain : we have different ears, canals, sensitivity... basically it's psycho acoustics. I'll never trust a review claiming to own any kind of absolute truth. One thing a reviewer should always know is his personal preferences and how they can bias his opinion not to be able to provide unbiased review but one that express his frame of reference.

This being said I try to look at it when I review is what was the original tuning intent, how is the coherence and what are the key aspects that define the signature so that people can identify wether or not it can fit their preferences which is as important as how well it's executed and the technical aspects of the IEM in my opinion. I can do this even if it's not my personal preference. It's not forcing yourself to like something you don't like, but trying to graps what it is about and was the intent (or lack thereof, in worst case) executed well or not. Of course if something that has its limits, as I wrote before if the intent is lacking and no coherence is emerging and/or if it's poorly executed and technically lacking then it's hard to write anything meaningless.

I actually find it pretty interesting to try an examine the tuning process and intended sound signature of an IEM. I’ve described it as almost art-like, and it kind of is. It’s an interesting insight to the preferences, techniques and ideas of the engineer behind it. Analyzing a specific engineer’s body of work allows you to look at what kinds of consistencies pop up, and point you towards their thought process. And there’s something fascinating about that to me. I may dislike a lot of IEMs, but I can’t take away the artistic process and vision behind a lot of the more interesting ones.

 

[MrLocoLuciano]

Oh no, I’m not denying the existence of brain burn in. I’m saying that it’s very real, and it’s detrimental to proper evaluation of a transducer’s tonal balance and tonal accuracy.

can you explain that ? How and why as the reference you have is based on this brain burn in thing ?

 

[mvvRAZ]

can you explain that ? How and why as the reference you have is based on this brain burn in thing ?

It’s up to him to explain how he sees that, but it’s also what I mentioned

Even if I genuinely dislike an IEM, if I spend enough time with it my brain will adjust itself to make it at least okay or tolerable - when I am reviewing something I try to comment on what it actually sounds like to me and how i feel about it as opposed to how I’ve managed to make it sound