[cel4145]

How and why do members fall in love with mid priced headphones when they could get flagships?
Are flagships really flagships if members only keep their old headphones in the end?

Note which headphones got the highest ratings in this battle of the flagships

http://www.head-fi.org/t/634201/battle-of-the-flagships-58-headphones-compared

 

[cel4145]

You should also read the conclusion of this other flagship comparison http://headfonics.com/2014/08/12-flagship-headphones-compared-the-totl-guide/16/

 

[Redcarmoose]

Note which headphones got the highest ratings in this battle of the flagships

http://www.head-fi.org/t/634201/battle-of-the-flagships-58-headphones-compared

http://www.head-fi.org/t/634201/battle-of-the-flagships-58-headphones-compared

DavidMahler's study in this thread is one of the best and most complete posts to ever grace this website. I remember reading it with amazement. Such a complete gift to the community and a true value to anyone with a question.

So you are linking it here as not all flagships won an A+ award there? We do see many headphones listed that maybe are considered 2nd there getting good marks in the battle.

 

[castleofargh]

 

I absolutely agree that there are two camps. I erroneously thought I was in the neutral camp but have come to know I definitely want certain coloration. I vividly remember the first time I put on my Sennheiser 414's when I was a kid (my parents thought I was nuts asking for these cheap looking plastic headphones for Xmas instead of what other kids asked for). Now as an 'old man' I find myself looking for a listening experience where I can suspend disbelief, close my eyes, and imagine a particular musician is performing right in front of or surrounding me. Perhaps intimacy is my ultimate goal in this hobby.

Not only are there two camps but there are levels in between. I don't see it as black and white.



So far in Sound Science we have determined that vinyl can color and tube amps can color. So our main question to ourselves and the science minded here is, how is it that the HD700 can become a glaring uninteresting sound signature with CDs and a solid-state amp? Are we really hearing the clear reality? Or are we just suffering from a case of bad equipment synergy?

I spent some time with the Sony R-10 at a meet. The Sony sound signature was very flat and almost polite. I think I was listening to a flat response anyway? For me my view was I was listening to a pure non-colored reproduction. Listening to the HD800s was close to the same but maybe a small addition of treble too. Both headphones would be condsidered flagships here at Head-fi. There was a feeling that you could listen to both a long time and find endless amount of entertainment due to their simple complete detail display and big soundstage.

Are the flat response lovers in love with these headphones? Yes. I guess there would be a couple small ways to add color to the mix (vinyl or tube amps) in an attempt to warm up the presentation. I guess it's all personal preference weather to start going into the color territory and how far?

I also don't see 2 camps, it's more like people are all over the place with taste, while many look for the ideal called "neutral". so it's used and abused all day long as some audio unicorn that everybody likes because it means nothing(for headphones at least). 
the vast majority of people obsessed with neutral sound are newbies who believe that neutral is whatever signature they had on their last sound system.
we don't have a working compensation curve for headphones. we have a few theoretical ones that really don't sound neutral to many people. and we have stuff like the harman curve that is made to please most people, not really to sound flat. from that point on, how useless is it to talk about neutral when we have nothing to tell what it is?
 
for a DAC neutral is 99% of them, so you can wish for neutral. same for amps, speakers in a particular room, or after some room measurements and some clever DSP, we can perfectly hope to call it neutral or very close to it over a certain range of frequencies.
but headphones... they don't even deliver the sound the way the sound engineer used to master the album. so what hope do we have to hear what he heard? the space will be wrong, no tactile bass, the signature will be wrong(a little of a lot). we're pretending to call a sound neutral or natural when it's a global failure from the start. and it would be even if somehow recording sessions were to all use something like binaural recording.
 
 
 
 
 
about synergy: from my perspective something that shines only with good "synergy" is the kind of headphone that sounds so bad, it needs one specific weird source to sound ok. it shouldn't be called synergy, but more like "hey don't burn it yet, maybe crap+crap will end up sounding ok."
 
 
and about top tier or whatever, I'm with a few others, how do we decide? if price was reliable I know some ultrasone that should remove a zero.
so what is it? it's how we like it? of course not else the hd800 wouldn't be on top and wouldn't need good "synergy" so much.
so maybe it's the frequency response, but is it how stable it is, or how far it extends both ways?
do we account for the level of distortion? how, the highest point? an average? the first order? second order?...
you're asking us why we make a choice that isn't one. we just pick something because luck made us try it and we thought "hey that's nice!", or because we decide upon criteria that just aren't price or fame.

 

[Redcarmoose]

Not to convolute this already slightly unclear question, we need to keep in mind.


1) The genre of music
2) The synergy of equipment
3) Personal preference sound signatures

Number 3 is maybe the hardest for many to understand. I believe we see such a wide range due to how members were first introduced to headphones and music. Also heavily relying on the original good headphones the member used which helped shape his or her headphone perception.

Thus one member could just choose an open-back 2nd tier over a flagship closed-back design.

 

[Redcarmoose]

I also don't see 2 camps, it's more like people are all over the place with taste, while many look for the ideal called "neutral". so it's used and abused all day long as some audio unicorn that everybody likes because it means nothing(for headphones at least). 
the vast majority of people obsessed with neutral sound are newbies who believe that neutral is whatever signature they had on their last sound system.
we don't have a working compensation curve for headphones. we have a few theoretical ones that really don't sound neutral to many people. and we have stuff like the harman curve that is made to please most people, not really to sound flat. from that point on, how useless is it to talk about neutral when we have nothing to tell what it is?

for a DAC neutral is 99% of them, so you can wish for neutral. same for amps, speakers in a particular room, or after some room measurements and some clever DSP, we can perfectly hope to call it neutral or very close to it over a certain range of frequencies.
but headphones... they don't even deliver the sound the way the sound engineer used to master the album. so what hope do we have to hear what he heard? the space will be wrong, no tactile bass, the signature will be wrong(a little of a lot). we're pretending to call a sound neutral or natural when it's a global failure from the start. and it would be even if somehow recording sessions were to all use something like binaural recording.





about synergy: from my perspective something that shines only with good "synergy" is the kind of headphone that sounds so bad, it needs one specific weird source to sound ok. it shouldn't be called synergy, but more like "hey don't burn it yet, maybe crap+crap will end up sounding ok."


and about top tier or whatever, I'm with a few others, how do we decide? if price was reliable I know some ultrasone that should remove a zero.
so what is it? it's how we like it? of course not else the hd800 wouldn't be on top and wouldn't need good "synergy" so much.
so maybe it's the frequency response, but is it how stable it is, or how far it extends both ways?
do we account for the level of distortion? how, the highest point? an average? the first order? second order?...
you're asking us why we make a choice that isn't one. we just pick something because luck made us try it and we thought "hey that's nice!", or because we decide upon criteria that just aren't price or fame.

I agree that there are as many flavors of headphones as there are flavors of ice cream. It's a gift for some and a wallet drainer for others.

 

[cel4145]

So you are linking it here as not all flagships won an A+ award there? We do see many headphones listed that maybe are considered 2nd their getting good marks in the battle.

Apparently, he thought all of them were top tier headphones. Just the ones you would consider Tier 1 were not the winners because your idea of Tier 1 seems to be based on price and what the companies market to you as their very best

 

[Stereocilia]

I mention in a prior post that I had chance to hear the HD800, actually I've had a chance to demo the HD800 a few times, I rock the HE300 and Decware Zen Head daily, Dude the HE300 is tier 3 or 4 on technicalities so why do I like it so..
 
http://www.headfonia.com/hifiman-he-300-the-dynamic-driver/
 
"But on the other hand, the dynamic driver in the Hifiman HE-300 is so superbly tuned that it gives me a more relaxed sound, and is easier on the ears than what I hear on the planar models."
 
"Get over the technicalities, however, and I really think that the musicality aspect can go head to head with the big boys and even beat some of them (the HD800 would be a pretty easy one to beat)."
 
♫ Funeral planet, dead black asteroid, Mausoleum, this world is a tomb, Human zombies, staring blank faces ♪

 

[Gr8Desire]

 

http://www.head-fi.org/t/634201/battle-of-the-flagships-58-headphones-compared

DavidMahler's study in this thread is one of the best and most complete posts to ever grace this website...

 

You should also read the conclusion of this other flagship comparison http://headfonics.com/2014/08/12-flagship-headphones-compared-the-totl-guide/16/

 
The effort, preparation and love that went into both these reviews is nothing short of amazing.  I have read these accounts numerous times and learned a great detail about these dedicated contributors.  Thanks to both the authors for their hard work and community spirit!

UNFORTUNATELY, both these reviews are also misleading, biased and anecdotal. They all rely on the tester's personal preferences and memory.  As people who believe in scientific method, sadly it is up to us to remind others that relying on experiences and recollections makes great theatre but does not provide much in the way of conclusive proof.  
 
Here are some examples:
 

1. Asking me to reliably compare my current phones with the Beyer T1's I auditioned 3 months ago is ludicrous.  I can use words like musical or forward, but I can't describe better with any level of confidence.
2. Personal preferences don't necessarily help. We all share some preferences with other people, but everyone is different.  The attributes that distinguish each of us, must be known.
3. Preference can't even be articulated - much less applied to products like headphones. I might be more price conscious, less treble sensitive or I might just like tubes (fair disclosure: I don't). You can't know for sure. Yet each impacts how I personally perceive a product.
4. Using the same golf clubs as Tiger Woods, riding the same bicycle as Greg Lemond or wearing the same shoes as Michael Jordan might be relevant for me, but the odds are against it. In sports there are driving factors like skill and coordination. With audio, differences in source material, processing chain, listening environment and output devices mean that few people can reliably share conclusions.

 
If we are going to claim to be scientists, it is time that we start acting like them. Sharing experiences is great but they don't provide much proof. Double blind testing is a pain in the backside - yet we have nothing better. It also requires a team of testers and not just one dedicated enthusiast.  We need decent test methodologies if we ever expect to get past widespread affinities of faith.

Why do so many Head-Fi'ers stop at Tier-2?  There is no compelling evidence to go higher.

 

[Redcarmoose]

[COLOR=800080]The effort, preparation and love that went into both these reviews is nothing short of amazing.  I have read these accounts numerous times and learned a great detail about these dedicated contributors.  Thanks to both the authors for their hard work and community spirit![/COLOR]


UNFORTUNATELY, both these reviews are also misleading, biased and anecdotal. [COLOR=B22222]They all rely on the tester's personal preferences and memory.[/COLOR]  As people who believe in scientific method, sadly it is up to us to remind others that relying on experiences and recollections makes great theatre but does not provide much in the way of conclusive proof.  

 
Here are some examples:

• Asking me to reliably compare my current phones with the Beyer T1's I auditioned 3 months ago is ludicrous.  I can use words like musical or forward, but I can't describe better with any level of confidence.
• Personal preferences don't necessarily help. We all share some preferences with other people, but everyone is different.  The attributes that distinguish each of us, must be known.
• Preference can't even be articulated - much less applied to products like headphones. I might be more price conscious, less treble sensitive or I might just like tubes (fair disclosure: I don't). You can't know for sure. Yet each impacts how I personally perceive a product.
• Using the same golf clubs as Tiger Woods, riding the same bicycle as Greg Lemond or wearing the same shoes as Michael Jordan might be relevant for me, but the odds are against it. In sports there are driving factors like skill and coordination. With audio, differences in source material, processing chain, listening environment and output devices mean that few people can reliably share conclusions.

If we are going to claim to be scientists, it is time that we start acting like them. Sharing experiences is great but they don't provide much proof. Double blind testing is a pain in the backside - yet we have nothing better. It also requires a team of testers and not just one dedicated enthusiast.  We need decent test methodologies if we ever expect to get past widespread affinities of faith.

Why do so many Head-Fi'ers stop at Tier-2?  [COLOR=2F4F4F]There is no compelling evidence to go higher.[/COLOR]

They are just personal preferences and only partially scientific but it is the best we have at this point. What proof is there otherwise for people to use and make purchasing judgement?

DavidMahler's responses parralel my understandings on the same headphones and they are worded better to boot. I end up taking his word on the rest of the stuff out of respect and commen sense. DavidMahler did things as controlled as he could, but yes, he was just listening and the whole test was passed upon his own personal perspective and lack of perspective, if any.

What else is there? There may be a day when we can quantify aspects of the sound of headphones and use them to find our way. Graphs today only do so much to help us understand what we may buy and enjoy. Things are at the level of the new car window sticker for headphones. We all know our mileage may vary.


I myself am amazed at so many things pertaining how different headphones are from one another. Surprises often are the most fun in this hobby. Finding a $100 IEM that scales up and scales up with different amps and sources. Some of that information just has to be learned from experience.

 

[vid]

As we already talked about, we are referring to tier as price. LCD-2, LCD-3, LCD-X all top tier, with the new Audeze EL-8 being a second tier headphone.

But, yes it is a gray generalization if the LCD-2 could be 2nd tier due to age and price. Still the question ends up being pertaining to "Why". Why are these headphones the ones of choice and not the flagships?

 
So why don't people buy the most expensive headphones, is the question here? I'd say it's because they cost too much.
 
You equate sound quality with price at the beginning of the thread, but I don't see any data to support this, and even if there were, the fact that you can buy headphones for $20 and put them up for sale for $2000 breaks the tiering. I've seen data for sound quality = frequency response, though, which would be one alternate way to tier - and I might say that what underlies that tiering is the probability density function of the hrtf variation of the target population, making the question even less to do with headphone models per se.

 

[Redcarmoose]

I mention in a prior post that I had chance to hear the HD800, actually I've had a chance to demo the HD800 a few times, I rock the HE300 and Decware Zen Head daily, Dude the HE300 is tier 3 or 4 on technicalities so why do I like it so..

http://www.headfonia.com/hifiman-he-300-the-dynamic-driver/

"But on the other hand, the dynamic driver in the Hifiman HE-300 is so superbly tuned that it gives me a more relaxed sound, and is easier on the ears than what I hear on the planar models."

"Get over the technicalities, however, and I really think that the musicality aspect can go head to head with the big boys and even beat some of them (the HD800 would be a pretty easy one to beat)."

♫ Funeral planet, dead black asteroid, Mausoleum, this world is a tomb, Human zombies, staring blank faces ♪

This is very much part of what I was getting at when I started this thread. Also member Kramer5150 posted similar findings on the second page.

Kramer5150 states he likes having headphones which don't show the errors in the recording process.


Your looking for an easer more relaxed and enjoyable experience.
I guess all would be well and dandy as long as you were into the signature long term.

There is always that headphone that just sounds wrong at times no matter what. The wrong sounding headphone we fiqure is not showing us a true flat responce and is messing up our music. lol





Still your answer and Kramer5150's answer are getting us on the right track. We need to admit that at times maybe we don't want to hear the ultimate clear headphone and want some level of distortion weather it is darker or just missing part of the frequency responce.


In this instance and for these members here, less is more.

 

[cel4145]

UNFORTUNATELY, both these reviews are also misleading, biased and anecdotal. [COLOR=B22222]They all rely on the tester's personal preferences and memory.[/COLOR]  As people who believe in scientific method, sadly it is up to us to remind others that relying on experiences and recollections makes great theatre but does not provide much in the way of conclusive proof.  

+1

And that's how all headphone comparisons are made, isn't it? Does anyone NOT use subjective experience to decide that headphone A is better than headphone B? And, I would bet, 99% of the time people make their decisions based on sighted comparisons.

 

[cel4145]

They are just personal preferences and only partially scientific but it is the best we have at this point. What proof is there otherwise for people to use and make purchasing judgement?

DavidMahler's responses parralel my understandings on the same headphones and they are worded better to boot. I end up taking his word on the rest of the stuff out of respect and commen sense. DavidMahler did things as controlled as he could, but yes, he was just listening and the whole test was passed upon his own personal perspective and lack of perspective, if any.

So if you agree with him, how do you justify this whole thread where you have indicated that someone should prefer and recognize what you have defined to be as Tier 1 as better than what you have defined as Tier 2?

 

[Redcarmoose]

So why don't people buy the most expensive headphones, is the question here? I'd say it's because they cost too much.

You equate sound quality with price at the beginning of the thread, but I don't see any data to support this, and even if there were, the fact that you can buy headphones for $20 and put them up for sale for $2000 breaks the tiering. I've seen data for sound quality = frequency response, though, which would be one alternate way to tier - and I might say that what underlies that tiering is the probability density function of the hrtf variation of the target population, making the question even less to do with headphone models per se.

To summerize, I am thinking that there are some pretty cool sounding headphones which also cost a lot. And yes, you can get great heaphones with out buying the most expensive flagship. And yes, it is all a matter of taste and personal preference here.


Still the thread is also informing us that 2nd tier fun headphones can be loved for good reasons.