Gripes with Reviews
- Thread starter jenkinsontherun
- Start date
paradoxper
Headphoneus Supremus
This defines this broken and corrupt industry.
the1andonly
500+ Head-Fier
Ok I will give the lite version(I deleted the original text, so no un-needed drama)
So first let me just say I don't hade the senn 6 headphones, if you think I do you probably like them too much
R E D F L A G S
Saying ANY senn 6 series is END GAME or TOTL or MONITORS -> 0 soundstage and imaging? Hello, this is kind of cringe
Saying ANY senn 6 series "scales well" -> that is sugar coating on the truth that it is "source dependent" much more than other headphone and if you have bad gear you are not getting all you paid for, it is a double edged sword NOT some crazy heirloom tier benefit
Recommending senn 6 series constantly -> BUT only to people who want headphones for gaming and really movies too... or without asking or giving a disclaimer it's mainly for music and heavily skewed for vocal music!
Not 6 series related, but fanboying the H800/s/XX and claiming it is "the best soundstage"... yes it has fantastic imaging, and yes the soundstage is artificially wide, but it CANNOT do intimate and as a ACTUAL soundstage lover reducing soundstage to "big as possible" + "imaging" is cringe... The actual staging, separation, and positioning, the variability, the shape of the stage, is the stage very "2d" with lots of empty distance and separation between close locations or is it very blurred together and full and engulfing as well as the dynamics are things kind of L/R and front/back with residual sound or very separated... IMO the LCD-3 which has almost no front/back but almost the same width as the HD800 has the best stage, I honestly cannot imagine thinking the HD800 has the best soundstage when it contains zero bass, I can understand some thinks this, but the amount of people who claim this constantly is disturbing, it genuinely cannot be this many people.
Going thru a video reviewers videos and barely any niche headphones/amps/dac reviewed
Already said above by someone else... but 'I was sent this headphone by company, but it hasn't affected my review at all' *but* (has positively reviewed 80-90% of the headphones from company which many others don't like)
Comparing headphone(usually popular headphone) to other headphones, but only popular headphones -> the more comparisons the better for viewers, adding some they don't know isn't harmful either
No disclosing if they EQ or don't at all, or until the very end of video (IMO Max and @metal571 are one of the few who are good about this...)
If they leaving me wanting more details, mainly about dynamics, and comparisons for resolution and sometimes separation.
If they review ANY THX amp and don't seem aware that the sound is very sterile....
If they think instrumental tracks with drum are sufficient to review bass and don't use hip-hop or at least EDM (this one kind of petty lol)
Start of the (really) petty ones
"Metallic/plastic timbre" -> Nobody ever explains what this means when they say it, I understand literally everything else and everything else makes sense to me the definitions I get for this term don't make sense with the names the same way warm/dark/bright do imo...
Audeze's need EQ -> #1 I am a fanboy, #2 the LCD-3 is TOTL(to me :3), #3 truthfully we must have different taste if you need EQ, every one I have had sounds amazing and fine, only thing I have ever not liked on an Audeze is the particular soundstage.
'sounds good with EQ' -> proceeds to not rate it without EQ
Saying the DT1990 has the same technical performance as the DT880 and DT990 (@crinacle (he is still dangerously based though))
Saying the Ananda has the same technical performance as the Sundara (also Crinacle)
Actually looking back this revision turned out just as petty as the first time I typed it, crazy I have this many grievances considering I actually regularly watch and read a lot of reviewers and don't avoid any, and generally enjoy and find the content useful (almost) always
phthora
Headphoneus Supremus
Ok I will give the lite version(I deleted the original text, so no un-needed drama)
So first let me just say I don't hade the senn 6 headphones, if you think I do you probably like them too much
R E D F L A G S
Saying ANY senn 6 series is END GAME or TOTL or MONITORS -> 0 soundstage and imaging? Hello, this is kind of cringe
Saying ANY senn 6 series "scales well" -> that is sugar coating on the truth that it is "source dependent" much more than other headphone and if you have bad gear you are not getting all you paid for, it is a double edged sword NOT some crazy heirloom tier benefit
Recommending senn 6 series constantly -> BUT only to people who want headphones for gaming and really movies too... or without asking or giving a disclaimer it's mainly for music and heavily skewed for vocal music!
Not 6 series related, but fanboying the H800/s/XX and claiming it is "the best soundstage"... yes it has fantastic imaging, and yes the soundstage is artificially wide, but it CANNOT do intimate and as a ACTUAL soundstage lover reducing soundstage to "big as possible" + "imaging" is cringe... The actual staging, separation, and positioning, the variability, the shape of the stage, is the stage very "2d" with lots of empty distance and separation between close locations or is it very blurred together and full and engulfing as well as the dynamics are things kind of L/R and front/back with residual sound or very separated... IMO the LCD-3 which has almost no front/back but almost the same width as the HD800 has the best stage, I honestly cannot imagine thinking the HD800 has the best soundstage when it contains zero bass, I can understand some thinks this, but the amount of people who claim this constantly is disturbing, it genuinely cannot be this many people.
Going thru a video reviewers videos and barely any niche headphones/amps/dac reviewed
Already said above by someone else... but 'I was sent this headphone by company, but it hasn't affected my review at all' *but* (has positively reviewed 80-90% of the headphones from company which many others don't like)
Comparing headphone(usually popular headphone) to other headphones, but only popular headphones -> the more comparisons the better for viewers, adding some they don't know isn't harmful either
No disclosing if they EQ or don't at all, or until the very end of video (IMO Max and @metal571 are one of the few who are good about this...)
If they leaving me wanting more details, mainly about dynamics, and comparisons for resolution and sometimes separation.
If they review ANY THX amp and don't seem aware that the sound is very sterile....
If they think instrumental tracks with drum are sufficient to review bass and don't use hip-hop or at least EDM (this one kind of petty lol)
Start of the (really) petty ones
"Metallic/plastic timbre" -> Nobody ever explains what this means when they say it, I understand literally everything else and everything else makes sense to me the definitions I get for this term don't make sense with the names the same way warm/dark/bright do imo...
Audeze's need EQ -> #1 I am a fanboy, #2 the LCD-3 is TOTL(to me :3), #3 truthfully we must have different taste if you need EQ, every one I have had sounds amazing and fine, only thing I have ever not liked on an Audeze is the particular soundstage.
'sounds good with EQ' -> proceeds to not rate it without EQ
Saying the DT1990 has the same technical performance as the DT880 and DT990 (@crinacle (he is still dangerously based though))
Saying the Ananda has the same technical performance as the Sundara (also Crinacle)
Actually looking back this revision turned out just as petty as the first time I typed it, crazy I have this many grievances considering I actually regularly watch and read a lot of reviewers and don't avoid any, and generally enjoy and find the content useful (almost) always
Great list. Even though I'm guilty of one of these things myself, you are spot on here.
Some of the most insufferable people I've ever met in this hobby were ones that pushed the HD600 + O2 combo as endgame level gear, obstinately sticking to the idea that anyone reputing to have heard better was lying. Ridiculous.
The metallic/plastic timbre thing also drives me crazy because it's absolutely pervasive in applying to Focal and HiFiMan headphones respectively. I have no idea what those terms are supposed to convey beyond 'me no like treble.'
Early days in the Sundara thread people were shilling that thing as being better than Ananda and basically on par with the Arya. Funny how that's not mentioned so much anymore. But, it did teach me to distrust the hypetrains, at least.
Ok I will give the lite version(I deleted the original text, so no un-needed drama)
So first let me just say I don't hade the senn 6 headphones, if you think I do you probably like them too much
R E D F L A G S
Saying ANY senn 6 series is END GAME or TOTL or MONITORS -> 0 soundstage and imaging? Hello, this is kind of cringe
Saying ANY senn 6 series "scales well" -> that is sugar coating on the truth that it is "source dependent" much more than other headphone and if you have bad gear you are not getting all you paid for, it is a double edged sword NOT some crazy heirloom tier benefit
Recommending senn 6 series constantly -> BUT only to people who want headphones for gaming and really movies too... or without asking or giving a disclaimer it's mainly for music and heavily skewed for vocal music!
Not 6 series related, but fanboying the H800/s/XX and claiming it is "the best soundstage"... yes it has fantastic imaging, and yes the soundstage is artificially wide, but it CANNOT do intimate and as a ACTUAL soundstage lover reducing soundstage to "big as possible" + "imaging" is cringe... The actual staging, separation, and positioning, the variability, the shape of the stage, is the stage very "2d" with lots of empty distance and separation between close locations or is it very blurred together and full and engulfing as well as the dynamics are things kind of L/R and front/back with residual sound or very separated... IMO the LCD-3 which has almost no front/back but almost the same width as the HD800 has the best stage, I honestly cannot imagine thinking the HD800 has the best soundstage when it contains zero bass, I can understand some thinks this, but the amount of people who claim this constantly is disturbing, it genuinely cannot be this many people.
Going thru a video reviewers videos and barely any niche headphones/amps/dac reviewed
Already said above by someone else... but 'I was sent this headphone by company, but it hasn't affected my review at all' *but* (has positively reviewed 80-90% of the headphones from company which many others don't like)
Comparing headphone(usually popular headphone) to other headphones, but only popular headphones -> the more comparisons the better for viewers, adding some they don't know isn't harmful either
No disclosing if they EQ or don't at all, or until the very end of video (IMO Max and @metal571 are one of the few who are good about this...)
If they leaving me wanting more details, mainly about dynamics, and comparisons for resolution and sometimes separation.
If they review ANY THX amp and don't seem aware that the sound is very sterile....
If they think instrumental tracks with drum are sufficient to review bass and don't use hip-hop or at least EDM (this one kind of petty lol)
Start of the (really) petty ones
"Metallic/plastic timbre" -> Nobody ever explains what this means when they say it, I understand literally everything else and everything else makes sense to me the definitions I get for this term don't make sense with the names the same way warm/dark/bright do imo...
Audeze's need EQ -> #1 I am a fanboy, #2 the LCD-3 is TOTL(to me :3), #3 truthfully we must have different taste if you need EQ, every one I have had sounds amazing and fine, only thing I have ever not liked on an Audeze is the particular soundstage.
'sounds good with EQ' -> proceeds to not rate it without EQ
Saying the DT1990 has the same technical performance as the DT880 and DT990 (@crinacle (he is still dangerously based though))
Saying the Ananda has the same technical performance as the Sundara (also Crinacle)
Actually looking back this revision turned out just as petty as the first time I typed it, crazy I have this many grievances considering I actually regularly watch and read a lot of reviewers and don't avoid any, and generally enjoy and find the content useful (almost) always
If I understand you correctly, most of your comments are directed towards Youtube tech reviewers reviewing headphones, which is fair. Do take into account tho that they are not meant to be taken seriously, at least not as seriously as audio blog/magazine reviewers. But going from text to video does seem to be the trend these days...
There's one channel on Youtube (whose name I forgot) that makes awfully long videos for every review, including for bluetooth dongles. The guy just mumbles for 30mins~1hr on every product. My god those were awful...
Last edited:
the1andonly
500+ Head-Fier
That treble part made me chuckle. No worries mate, I will be the first to admit I complain to much ,and that is the most benign of my audio sins, I was serial DAC denier, a budget AMP's are end-game evangelist, any many other things... Lol, this hobby is about redemption and forgiveness as much as it is about revelation and progress. You have to remind yourself there is a legit adult male who has a youtube with dozens of videos centered on the belief the DT880 is the pinnacle of audio achievements, some think that the iPhone dongle is as good as gear that costs as much as the average car; 'there are no upgrades only side-grades'... We really are on a journey with no end(for most), and that wouldn't be fun without mistakes, drama to spice it up, and absolute wackos to make us laugh....
That said, for sure lots of hype-trains and subtle cash grabs, unfortunately, I could type paragraphs of what I think the perfect reviewer schema would be, and I don't think it's too hard to improve the meta, but I really do have empathy for the reviewers. cont.
***P.S to clarify going off topic here, none of this is aimed at quote or anyone ITT, just felt like a good rant lol***
There just doesn't seen to be enough views for the youtube crowd to eat and sleep well and not have to worry about $$$ while having enough to spend on anything they want to review. I think Zeos kind of has it figured it a bit in that building a community = more viewer gear coming his way to review, but also the community and scene still needs to grow to support the reviewers scene.... I mean think how crazy it is of the biggest current "audiophile" reviewers, I don't think any of them have been around more than like 5 years except Zeos, (Tyll who sadly stopped, and not counting normie reviewers like MKBHD) despite youtube being so big for quite a while.... and more importantly I think they need to look at the success of someone like Dankpods, who has been getting into some serious stuff(still think a lot of audiophiles wouldn't want to watch as he isn't very technical at all)...
But here is the kicker, IMO for serious growth, serious "audiophile" reviewers need to review non audiophile and consumer budget grade, in a way with the technical terms toned down, not all the time but they need to expand into it.... Serious reviewers review serious stuff only, and budget is huge expenditure, and growth is slow, but non serious reviewers grow faster with less involved work (not being mean but it's true) and much smaller budgets on the consumer gear, that they can get dirt cheap used, and sell at virtually no loss, and as well they encroach onto serious audio gear space, getting a boost there too. I think if an audiophile reviewer made something informative enough, toned down the elitist mindset we all know exists, and just did consumer grade stuff a couple times a week and admitted there are some $100 and under headphones that don't beat the K361/371 but are still good and nice to listen to, they could double their youtube income...
As it stands now I am pretty sure all the audiophile reviewers would call 98% of the stuff under $100 garbage and it would be cringe... For a typical audiophile 98% of the stuff under $100 is garbage, but for normal people who want to spend $20-80 on headphones, as crazy as it seems, yes they do want good audio, but comfort, size, looks, hell even color, or name brand matter. The fact is audiophiles are the minority and most people want not bad to good enough audio quality, lol, seems counter productive but if a serious reviewer could acknowledge a sort of consumer grade scale and keep recommendations and comparisons within that space, they would not only probably double or more their userbase AND earnings with next to no extra budget (which would help immensely their "serious reviews" budget) but also in a real way over time introduce consumer grade customers to proper good audio. The scene has a real problem of not acknowledging the merits of consumer grade audio, let alone "budget" audiophile gear, that even sonically may have good combo of enough technicalities and enough tuning to actually be decent, that is reliable and stands up to abuse of a normal persons life, convenience, style, options, and good warranties... The scene has a problem entering the consumer space and being respectful, while the normie consumer scene has no problem dabbling in serious expensive audiophile stuff, and simply being very happy with having 1 expensive thing, that to them, is the best sounding thing in existence, never needing to buy an expensive headphone for the rest of their lives... Even among audiophiles there is a crazy divide, where people are calling like Ananda, LCD-X tier mid-fi.... I mean IMO even when it gets to DT1990/Sundara tier = "mid-fi" it's just so elitist, to normal people hearing that makes them think it's a cringe toxic moneypit. When you a normal person a top 10% sound quality $100 headphone is crap, and if they pay $500 for headphones and another $500+ on 2 special metal boxes that they would have research for hours to realize the benefits of, then and only then, they can ascend up to barely halfway up to the summit, no wonder they don't want to opt in. Yes I acknowledge and we all should, your $15k setup is superior, or even $3-5k setup is better but to then feel the need to put down others using literal headphones and setups that some of the best actual music professionals in the world use, like the DT1990 and call it mid-fi is delusional....
That said my best friends is actually a youtuber, different space, but in 1 year one of his channels has grown to half the size of most big audiophile reviewers, again different space but he does really well, so some of those guys might actually be making a surprising amount for how little they seem to reinvest in buying, or the seemingly lack of asking people to send them stuff. (I sadly don't assume from what I see they pay for back/forth shipping, could be wrong...)
Anyway I have my own way to go about things, I hope one day I can do something great for anyone who likes sound of any kind, so far I have found a way to make all my hobbies beneficial to me, until then working to fund my dream audio goal; a better way to do things and bring the community together.
rant over
Last edited:
the1andonly
500+ Head-Fier
No Theme Reviews also know as NTR, the videos of his I can sit thru are pretty good but yes he goes on and on and on like me when I get past a paragraph, I imagine reading my rants are like sitting thru one of his videos, which are clearly superior because he puts timestamps. I usually just goto the conclusion of the video, I feel like he is pretty based and spot on more than other reviewers however, although that may be because he goes in depth on simple things that aren't "important" for audiophiles (like his Audeze Mobius stuff) where Audiophile reviewers basically TL: DR it and say it's decent but not amazing,
JazzVinyl
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2010
- Posts
- 4,712
- Likes
- 2,630
Has "great technicals"
Is that opposed to sloppy technicals? Or is it opposed to "loose technicals"? Or is that opposed to "poor technicals"?
What's a confounded "technical" ?
Is that opposed to sloppy technicals? Or is it opposed to "loose technicals"? Or is that opposed to "poor technicals"?
What's a confounded "technical" ?
Redcarmoose
Headphoneus Supremus
So you have frequency response. That is three things. The way the individual hears the IEM/headphone, the way the IEM/headphone truly is. And you can have an actual measured FR. Then you have everything else which are the Technicalities.
And yes,
Those things which are...pace, soundstage, imaging, etc etc...can be sloppy!
Last edited:
Redcarmoose
Headphoneus Supremus
The reviewer is not supposed to be loved or liked by everyone. It’s just like meeting people and having a conversation. You can be attracted to the info......or put-off by words, but don’t know why? And be just OK with a reviewers talk, just OK.
So there are times when you and the reviewer are on the same wavelength......they are using lingo that you understand. Then there are the reviews that maybe are not polished or someone using vocabulary you simply don’t get.
So there are times when you and the reviewer are on the same wavelength......they are using lingo that you understand. Then there are the reviews that maybe are not polished or someone using vocabulary you simply don’t get.
Last edited:
Redcarmoose
Headphoneus Supremus
So there can be off FR. Meaning the frequency range is not even or correct. With in that still are variables, variations. Like maybe someone likes more bass. That can still be found with an IEM/headphone that has a bass lift. So it is still an even and correct frequency response. It just has bass. When things go out of kilter is when something is wrong. It can be wrong to the individual or wrong to every listener. Maybe there is stridency in the treble. That obviously is not an even or correct frequency response.
Technicalities:
There can be a multitude of variations here. The soundstage can be big or small or just wide not forward or backward. Transients can be off where some part of the response is wrong, maybe not everywhere, but instruments don’t sound like real-life. Timbre is another technicality, texture another. Imaging can be correct or off. Pace, if blurred or correct is another. It’s everything other than FR. Technicalities can also be subjective at times! But....a good portion of them can’t be measured.......petty much none of them! You can get measurements of an aspect of the transient response which also partially determines imaging.
Last edited:
The fundamental debate here IMO is between two positions in the philosophy of measurement in science: operationalism and realism. Is FR determined by the set of operations used for the measurement of the sound, or is it an empirical estimation of an objective property of the sound? For example, if one was to describe the quality of a TV, one can measure a number of attributes about the TV: brightness, uniformity, color accuracy, etc. But does a set of such attributes uniquely defines a TV? Does two TV with an identical set of attributes actually look identical? How orthogonal are these attributes? (e.g. if good color accuracy implies good uniformity, why bother to measure uniformity at all.) Is the ultimate goal to find all attributes that are all orthogonal? Is that possible to do? Even if we managed to find all orthogonal attributes that uniquely describe every TV in the world, how do we know if they actually are objective properties that captured the electrical and optical property of the TV, as opposed to a set of properties that just happened to do the classification job well? The two philosophical positions give opposite answers to these questions.
Back to sound/FR/reviews/"technicalities:" Can an FR and a degree of "technicalities" uniquely define a sound? Since "technicality" is a composite attribute, how orthogonal are, say, transient and timbre? You consider soundstage as part of technicality, but we know one can boost treble to boost soundstage; so if soundstage is orthogonal to neither FR or technicality, what is it? If I find the hi-hats too glaring, is it because of the FR, or timbre, or imaging? If it is due to multiple attributes, how much and in what capacity does each attribute contribute to the perceived treble glare?
Compound, then, with the fact that attributes in sound mostly aren't "measured" by a set of operations, things get complicated quickly. My treble glare can be another man's dynamic. My position is that it is up to the reader of the review to pick a side between operationalism and realism, but attempt to separate FR from "technicality" and treat them as orthogonal is clearly logically wrong.
Edit: the structuralism vs post-structuralism debates also apply here.
Last edited:
Redcarmoose
Headphoneus Supremus
I love that post. And it’s true that FR “tone” is in fact an arbitrary tone. The truth being that for years the exact measurements of it escape an attempt to quantify it into a single statement.
So.....still what is FR? It is a generalization of many correct graphic realizations. In fact there are three frequency responses. The measurement which the machine does. The actual frequency response the person hearing hears. And finally the the actual frequency response that is emitted.
Ok, so you understand that there is not studio standard for recoding right? That means that the music that was recorded is/was lost in time. We can hear a close rendition of it, close or far from perfect, it’s not the actual music being played. That is lost in time, never to be found again. Gone!
You have not found nor have I posted my glossary of description terms. But I also place FR into a portion of technicalities. So it’s mainly separate from our study in technicality but also inside. The tiny part that is inside is due to the actual FR of the IEM/Headphone. So FR IS a slight technicality. Technically a good FR is even and complete. You can argue what even and complete are, but if real life instruments are replayed with a certain amount of correctness than that is good FR.
And of course the treble seems to at times boost soundstage. But remember we are choosing to separate the two for ease of use. So it is understood across the review landscape that we are “generally” speaking of two separate.......but also related concepts!
So correct, even and complete. That’s not so hard? Well, it may be easer to get to an agreement on what is that concept. Is the Harman Curve that? Some agree some don’t. Why is that? Because everyone has their own physical, psychological way of hearing. Remember three FRs. Also take note that this crazy phenomena stays consistent in a way per individual. Thus every reviewer has their very own pet curve. Thus what response represents natural to them.
Technicalities:
It probably is true that the response of technicalities also is three. Measurable, if we could in fact measure them someday. 2) what they are truly. 3) what each individual actually hears.
Last edited:
BrownBear
500+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2012
- Posts
- 865
- Likes
- 133
Maybe I'm a bit paranoid (yes) but my biggest thing with reviewers and reviews is deciding if I believe them or not. Like, I've read reviews in the past, for anything really, where two different people say two different things, indicating subjectiveness, if you will. I'll read all about something and it's specs and performance, but I generally stay away from the parts of the reviews where people start making claims or when they use funny words to describe something. To me the only way to judge something is to experience it.
Users who are viewing this thread
