Quote:
This thread has become the hot-spot for what we call the leeches of society. One person makes an argument and then everyone else continues to make the same argument by rephrasing it over and over and over again. Dumb. DFKT has already made the argument on the first page better than anyone else in these 23 pages have, yet people who are completely unexposed to this topic continue to rehash the argument to death as if they were the ones in possession of a hifiman and assert: oh yeah.... see! at least an ipod with a muddled line/headphone out fares better than this piece of junk!
Funny you should say this, because your argument here:
Quote:
It is already extremely obvious that these digital tests are not going to be an accurate test for these players - why dont we rip some music from a stax amp so that we dont have to buy one and then we can evaluate it's SQ for ourselves - obviously we would be able to judge any piece of equipment just by translating it onto a digital file - yeah right. And as many other users have agreed upon - these audio files are what they are... digital recordings that lack in capturing the full sound reproduction.
has already been made
here. And it has already been refuted
here.
Lacking as they are, you'd think they'd be able to at least differentiate between a $50 and $800 player.
Quote:
People who own a hifiman are clearly happy with what they have either by placebo or actual improvement of SQ - the source obviously matters in music.. in fact headfi revolves around these components. If people find enjoyment in their upgraded sources - so be it. It's as if a superior product has just exposed a weakness and all the owners of inferior products jump on the attack which is feeding a frenzy of inexperienced people getting trigger happy and is now blown out of proportion.
People who own a Hifiman and now because of graphs do not like it are clearly unhappy with what they have either by peer pressure or disillusionment. Regardless, they aren't happy. The people who don't own one are obviously happy because now they don't feel the need to spend $800 on something without trying it first. Win win. If someone doesn't want to believe the graph, they don't have to. Is it wrong that a product is being criticized, and certainly for some good reason?
Quote:
If these graphs and playback tracks were really able to recapture the full story: then many of the respected viewers of this forum would be considered a fraud and under a placebo effect.
What's wrong with that? No one's immune to placebo. Just because they're golden-eared gods (by self-proclamation or seniority and respect) doesn't mean they can't hear something that isn't there. It's a flaw in our brains, not in our character. No one is any more inferior for succumbing to illusion.
Quote:
The hifiman is built of components very similar to those we use in home DACs - are we to say that an Ipod or measly 40 dollar clip+ sounds better than a home end DAC because of a few graphs? My opinion on this - HELL NO - a 300-400$ home dac that uses inferior parts to the hifiman would beat the living crap out of an Ipod anyday in sound reproduction, weight, clarity, warmth, separation, whatever.
My opinion on this - and I mostly agree with you - is that a statement like this is meaningless without at least a little data to support it. There may not necessarily be a correlation between cost and quality.
Quote:
An argument only works if the premises are true - there is obviously something lacking here and though when people try to bring that up... the ignorant continue to pour on the same arguments over and over again based on faulty premises
What is lacking here? I'll listen, I promise. I have neither heard nor seen an HM-801 or anything by Hifiman, so I'm open to enlightenment. At the moment everything I believe about this discussion and the player is what I know already: placebo is very real, audiophiles in particular are very keen on believing more cost == more sound in 95% of all cases, peer pressure and a good review by one of the Head-Fi Gods is extremely influential, and that those graphs are not reassuring.
Anyone else see some wacky formating in this post? My font decided it wanted to change up on me partway through, then back again.
It is already extremely obvious that these digital tests are not going to be an accurate test for these players - why dont we rip some music from a stax amp so that we dont have to buy one and then we can evaluate it's SQ for ourselves - obviously we would be able to judge any piece of equipment just by translating it onto a digital file - yeah right. And as many other users have agreed upon - these audio files are what they are... digital recordings that lack in capturing the full sound reproduction.
I find it useless how people are going to troll on this thread because they want to justify their own need to not hear the hifiman - believe the argument if you want - don't repeat it. The argument from the digital point is already clear and there's no need to step on people who own a hifiman just because you are not planning to get one. This is a debate and not a "let me tell you that your DAP is a waste of money" thread.
People who own a hifiman are clearly happy with what they have either by placebo or actual improvement of SQ - the source obviously matters in music.. in fact headfi revolves around these components. If people find enjoyment in their upgraded sources - so be it. It's as if a superior product has just exposed a weakness and all the owners of inferior products jump on the attack which is feeding a frenzy of inexperienced people getting trigger happy and is now blown out of proportion.
If these graphs and playback tracks were really able to recapture the full story: then many of the respected viewers of this forum would be considered a fraud and under a placebo effect. The hifiman is built of components very similar to those we use in home DACs - are we to say that an Ipod or measly 40 dollar clip+ sounds better than a home end DAC because of a few graphs? My opinion on this - HELL NO - a 300-400$ home dac that uses inferior parts to the hifiman would beat the living crap out of an Ipod anyday in sound reproduction, weight, clarity, warmth, separation, whatever.
An argument only works if the premises are true - there is obviously something lacking here and though when people try to bring that up... the ignorant continue to pour on the same arguments over and over again based on faulty premises which means that we'll never see the end to this argument. Lovely, I'll let this thread now continue to fight on because I felt I wanted to at least post something about how hypocritical it is to believe that specs are the only thing that matters - this is like arguing with my friend over the fact that only megapixels of cameras matter... ugh....
It is already extremely obvious that these digital tests are not going to be an accurate test for these players - why dont we rip some music from a stax amp so that we dont have to buy one and then we can evaluate it's SQ for ourselves - obviously we would be able to judge any piece of equipment just by translating it onto a digital file - yeah right. And as many other users have agreed upon - these audio files are what they are... digital recordings that lack in capturing the full sound reproduction.
I find it useless how people are going to troll on this thread because they want to justify their own need to not hear the hifiman - believe the argument if you want - don't repeat it. The argument from the digital point is already clear and there's no need to step on people who own a hifiman just because you are not planning to get one. This is a debate and not a "let me tell you that your DAP is a waste of money" thread.
People who own a hifiman are clearly happy with what they have either by placebo or actual improvement of SQ - the source obviously matters in music.. in fact headfi revolves around these components. If people find enjoyment in their upgraded sources - so be it. It's as if a superior product has just exposed a weakness and all the owners of inferior products jump on the attack which is feeding a frenzy of inexperienced people getting trigger happy and is now blown out of proportion.
If these graphs and playback tracks were really able to recapture the full story: then many of the respected viewers of this forum would be considered a fraud and under a placebo effect. The hifiman is built of components very similar to those we use in home DACs - are we to say that an Ipod or measly 40 dollar clip+ sounds better than a home end DAC because of a few graphs? My opinion on this - HELL NO - a 300-400$ home dac that uses inferior parts to the hifiman would beat the living crap out of an Ipod anyday in sound reproduction, weight, clarity, warmth, separation, whatever.
An argument only works if the premises are true - there is obviously something lacking here and though when people try to bring that up... the ignorant continue to pour on the same arguments over and over again based on faulty premises which means that we'll never see the end to this argument. Lovely, I'll let this thread now continue to fight on because I felt I wanted to at least post something about how hypocritical it is to believe that specs are the only thing that matters - this is like arguing with my friend over the fact that only megapixels of cameras matter... ugh....