[SciOC]

Who knows. I know what I'm hearing. Like I've said before, not everyone likes olives. I do in this case. Measuring IEMs is very difficult to do with consistency and accuracy. Also, the measurements represent a case study, which is not a large enough sample. You'd really need to measure many more pairs, and the difference in equipment means YMMV.

This is the problem with a lot of reviews in general and why sites like metacritic are so useful. Too much variation in opinions and equipment...

Opinions on the CL2 seem to be all over the map. It's an olive, versus something like the it04, which is an apple. I don't know too many people who don't like Apples, but I also don't know many people who would describe apples as amazing. This olive is amazing to me. Others think it's no good at all....

Oh and if you ever want to see what happens when the graph people go way to far, head over to rtings.com and look at their headphone reviews.... They're mind boggling.

 

[Kitechaser]

Who knows. I know what I'm hearing. Like I've said before, not everyone likes olives. I do in this case. Measuring IEMs is very difficult to do with consistency and accuracy. Also, the measurements represent a case study, which is not a large enough sample. You'd really need to measure many more pairs, and the difference in equipment means YMMV.

This is the problem with a lot of reviews in general and why sites like metacritic are so useful. Too much variation in opinions and equipment...

Opinions on the CL2 seem to be all over the map. It's an olive, versus something like the it04, which is an apple. I don't know too many people who don't like Apples, but I also don't know many people who would describe apples as amazing. This olive is amazing to me. Others think it's no good at all....

Oh and if you ever want to see what happens when the graph people go way to far, head over to rtings.com and look at their headphone reviews.... They're mind boggling.

Very reasonable, agree completely.
But why is that these reviewers who come in with the least amount of actual hands on experience with the CL2, who all use graphs as the end all be all by the way, accuse people on this thread of being on RHA's payroll, and make fun of their personal opinions, by equating their experiences with tip rolling and copper cables, with that of praying in the direction of mecca.
Acceptance of diverging opinions goes both ways.

 

[SciOC]

Yeah, those posts are ridiculous. Burn in matters very very much with this pair... They're not even worth arguing with.

In my opinion, as I know yours is too, RHA made some mistakes in terms of the included cabling and tip options. Also, they need to do some burn in like audeze does. Mine literally sounded like garbage for a while. That's basically unacceptable for the price... Fortunately I'm a patient person.

 

[Kitechaser]

And also the signal these pompous #*#*#*#*# 's are sending to all these audio companies is,
DON'T take any chances with your tuning, or dare to be creative in an way shape or fashion, or the reviewer community will trash your product before even giving it a proper listen.
If left to these people, every iem will sound exactly the same, no exceptions allowed.

 

[SciOC]

And also the signal these pompous #*#*#*#*# 's are sending to all these audio companies is,
DON'T take any chances with your tuning, or dare to be creative in an way shape or fashion, or the reviewer community will trash your product before even giving it a proper listen.
If left to these people, every iem will sound exactly the same, no exceptions allowed.

Yeah.... LOL. Are you new here...

You're allowed to do V shaped or neutral (you're gonna **** that up somehow though, because we all hear differently since A or B weighting is all based off dubious science that's an average of what people reported hearing).

There are pairs you can put it your ears and immediately like. The it01 is a good example of this. The CL2, probably isn't for most, it wasn't for me. Some people say it's brain burn in, but it's a lot more complicated than that, it's also tip and cable and possibly source rolling, and EQing.

One thing I really hate about most reviews is their lack of use of EQ, as if the sources/cables/tips people are using for reviews are magically completely benign in the equation of how something sounds. There's no good way to do consistently do reviews in my opinion, which is one reason I don't. You have to be able to put reviews in the correct context to be able to judge them appropriately. Some people do a much better job than others to really put something through its paces, but still might have different preferences or equipment. If I did reviews, I'd need to spend an absurd amount of time on them to feel good about it, and I'd rather just enjoy myself and do SOME work at work. Even then, my equipment, being single devices, are just case studies, and I'm not comfortable with that, personally, from s scientific rigor standpoint....

For instance, I've learned to NEVER trust Rtings.com or the wire cutter. I have very different preferences from the people at the Wirecutter, and the rtings reviews are primarily measurement based, which have a lot of problems as should be apparent from their rankings.

 

[Kitechaser]

Yeah.... LOL. Are you new here...

You're allowed to do V shaped or neutral (you're gonna **** that up somehow though, because we all hear differently since A or B weighting is all based off dubious science that's an average of what people reported hearing).

There are pairs you can put it your ears and immediately like. The it01 is a good example of this. The CL2, probably isn't for most, it wasn't for me. Some people say it's brain burn in, but it's a lot more complicated than that, it's also tip and cable and possibly source rolling, and EQing.

One thing I really hate about most reviews is their lack of use of EQ, as if the sources/cables/tips people are using for reviews are magically completely benign in the equation of how something sounds. There's no good way to do consistently do reviews in my opinion, which is one reason I don't. You have to be able to put reviews in the correct context to be able to judge them appropriately. Some people do a much better job than others to really put something through its paces, but still might have different preferences or equipment. If I did reviews, I'd need to spend an absurd amount of time on them to feel good about it, and I'd rather just enjoy myself and do SOME work at work. Even then, my equipment, being single devices, are just case studies, and I'm not comfortable with that, personally, from s scientific rigor standpoint....

For instance, I've learned to NEVER trust Rtings.com or the wire cutter. I have very different preferences from the people at the Wirecutter, and the rtings reviews are primarily measurement based, which have a lot of problems as should be apparent from their rankings.

I am new here. I see a lot of things that these reviewers are doing that defy common sense.
And the worst offense in my estimation, is the rigidity in their way of thinking.
They truly think they are above the rest of the community, and act as gatekeepers of acceptable thought.
Entire reviews about graphs and coma inducing mumbo jumbos, and no mention of any music.
That one always gets me.

 

[toughnut]

I do agreed that EQ play a role (that’s why EQ exist in the first place) but not all headphone respond favourably. Planar driver, afaik, response well (based on my experience with iSine 10/20). Planar have more headroom in term of EQing.

However the question or subject now is the stock tuning by manufacturer. Why the unconventional tuning instead of playing safe letting the users do the altering with EQ?

PS: Nothing personal so don’t try to act like one. I noticed a few acted as such in few threads whenever CL2 is being brought up as subject comparison with other earphone...

 

[Kitechaser]

I do agreed that EQ play a role (that’s why EQ exist in the first place) but not all headphone respond favourably. Planar driver, afaik, response well (based on my experience with iSine 10/20). Planar have more headroom in term of EQing.

However the question or subject now is the stock tuning by manufacturer. Why the unconventional tuning instead of playing safe letting the users do the altering with EQ?

Once you listen to it first hand you will understand.
The tuning works after burn in.
Its a really unique and fun signature.

 

[Azanulimbar]

Having found an offer that I simply couldn't refuse in the classifieds, I've jumped on the CL2 bandwagon!

This is undoubtedly my most expensive purchase when it comes to audio (well... till the next one I suppose?)
Hopefully these will be arriving by Friday!

 

[SciOC]

I do agreed that EQ play a role (that’s why EQ exist in the first place) but not all headphone respond favourably. Planar driver, afaik, response well (based on my experience with iSine 10/20). Planar have more headroom in term of EQing.

However the question or subject now is the stock tuning by manufacturer. Why the unconventional tuning instead of playing safe letting the users do the altering with EQ?

PS: Nothing personal so don’t try to act like one. I noticed a few acted as such in few threads whenever CL2 is being brought up as subject comparison with other earphone...

I feel like planars EQ well except for bass, which really, is the most important and difficult area to do well.

Some planars simply aren't capable of much in the bass department or have limits. These don't have any problems EQing, but my PM-3 was awful, and the isine20 is only ok in that department.

Audeze claimed previously that tuning a single driver planar doesn't work the same way as a dynamic or multi driver, hence the wonky tuning of the isine20 is. I don't know if there's truth in that, but the CL2 is way, way less crazy than the isine20 in terms of tuning. This was clearly a preference versus a design limitation for the CL2. The isine20 was supposedly a design limitation and essentially required EQ. I actually EQ these much less than most of my pairs. I have -2 at 2khz and-1 at 4khz right now.

 

[Carlsan]

I am new here. I see a lot of things that these reviewers are doing that defy common sense.
And the worst offense in my estimation, is the rigidity in their way of thinking.
They truly think they are above the rest of the community, and act as gatekeepers of acceptable thought.
Entire reviews about graphs and coma inducing mumbo jumbos, and no mention of any music.
That one always gets me.

I agree with this. Reviewers should play some tunes then compare A-B earphones in the same price range. Listen to different aspects of the sound.If something shoots above the price range then A-B with those earphones. Easy enough to do. Listen with your ears as to what you hear and report it back to the community.
It shouldn't be a science project.

 

[Kitechaser]

I am on direct source on the Sony NW-ZX300. 0 eq of any kind.
I had the sound options set for a bass boost till about the 350 hour mark, but since the bass has fully opened up, I find the neutral tuning the best to my ears.

 

[Azanulimbar]

Forgot to mention, my plan is to accompany the CL2 with a ZX300 soon, using a OCC pure copper 4.4 cable I bought from Ali. Am I in for a treat?

 

[Kitechaser]

Forgot to mention, my plan is to accompany the CL2 with a ZX300 soon, using a OCC pure copper 4.4 cable I bought from Ali. Am I in for a treat?

It's a really great combo

 

[Azanulimbar]

It's a really great combo

That's what I have read here, on this very thread. The thing is, I must import a black ZX300 since Europe's color is silver. Not my cup of tea to be honest
Unless I find a black ZX300 somewhere in Europe that is!