[435279]

All this bashing of opinions that don't say "The CL2 is perfect, get it now" is frankly turning me right off it, I'm done with this thread, bye. I won't let the door hit me on the way out either.

 

[Kitechaser]

All this bashing of opinions that don't say "The CL2 is perfect, get it now" is frankly turning me right off it, I'm done with this thread, bye. I won't let the door hit me on the way out either.

The bashing is not of the opinions that say the CL2 is not perfect, but of the ridicule of the opinions that say the CL2 is a very very good iem.
Take a look at the poll that he started. 3rd option is tips, copper occ cable and praying in the direction of Mecca cures the mid bump.
He just took a dump on this entire thread in that sentence, and every hands on experience all of us have had here.
Basically turned it all into a joke.

 

[csglinux]

Double posted, because there are some points here that need clarifying on both threads.

Nowhere, in any of my posts, have I insulted anybody's mother. I have not said the CL2 is a bad headphone. I think it's an excellent headphone in every regard except one: I don't like it's tuning. The purpose of the little poll was to find out what proportion of people actually like the mid-range boost and/or don't think it exists (which I'd lump in with liking it, since you can't be concerned about something you don't even notice). There can't possibly be one headphone that works for everybody, but I am curious to know whether this tuning is something that would really maximize RHA's headphone sales. Of course, that might not have been their goal. They may be artists who don't care about sales numbers, and if so, I'd respect them all the more.

As for burn-in doing anything to modify the FR, the truth about this will come out with time. After x thousand hours of burn-in, we can re-measure all these devices. If I'm wrong, I'll be happy to post the new results to these forums, but I'd bet you'll see no significant change. You don't need to believe me, just keep watching this space...

If you actually LIKE the CL2 tuning - great - you have an endgame IEM. Enjoy it. It's utterly pointless to debate which flavor of ice cream is right and which is wrong. To me, the CL2 is a vanilla and anchovy ice cream - it's very unusual and not to my liking, but if it works for you, that's all that matters.

 

[Layman1]

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.

That's pretty much exactly how I do my reviews
I don't often have comparable IEM's in the same price range to compare, but I listen to songs that I love, especially ones that I know have certain moments or qualities that can help me to get a good feel for the capabilities and unique qualities of an IEM.

In the briefest possible terms, my take on the whole burn-in and cables thing is that, having studied some science and engineering and read about research that's been conducted, there is SO much that we don't yet know, and SO many things yet to be discovered in the field of electronics, materials, physics, medical knowledge etc.
Someone won the Nobel prize in 2011 for proving the existence of a kind of quasi-crystal structure that he was mocked about for years for researching by other scientists and theoreticians who "knew" that such a structure was physically and theoretically impossible. So I never take anything for granted and keep an open mind

I have no problem with graphs when used as part of an holistic package of testing to assess an IEM, but for me it always ultimately comes down to how it sounds (to me) with the music.
Does it make me nod my head and grin like a fool? There should be a graph for that, lol

 

[HiFlight]

All this bashing of opinions that don't say "The CL2 is perfect, get it now" is frankly turning me right off it, I'm done with this thread, bye. I won't let the door hit me on the way out either.

I hear you! Yes, there have been a lot of "opinionated" opinions expressed regarding the CL2 but I have noticed that this is not uncommon with other newly introduced "upscale" audio items. Opinions are like noses, everyone has them, some are just more prominent than others.

Is the CL2 perfect...Not at all, no headphone is. Is the CL2 my favorite IEM? No, it is not. but it is right up there, probably more for the fit and build quality than the SQ. As with all products, it becomes a question of whether the positives outweigh the negatives and this can only be determined by one's own ears and personal preferences, not by opinions, measurements or hype.

If you have any interest at all in the CL2, try to separate the wheat from the chaff and attempt to score a personal audition!

 

[antdroid]

I compare A-B headphones/IEMs when I do my reviews. Most people on head-fi do which is great. It's, in my opinion, the best way to review and get a good feel of what to expect. A review without it makes it hard to really judge.

Graphs - graphs do matter in my opinion. You can get a basic sound signature from it. It does not tell the whole story though. But it helps.

EQ in reviews - I sometimes talk about EQ and sometimes I do not. While I think EQ can make a headphone sound better, a -8dB or whatever you guys use, means theres something inherently wrong with the tuning. It's great that planars respond very well to EQ since they have very very little distortion, but EQ isnt available for every source used. That's why reviewing based on an EQ'd headphone isn't doing people any good that can't EQ. At the very least, you should review it as it is out of the box, and how it sounds with a specific EQ setting and mention what that is.

iSine's get rated well when used with the Cipher cable because the EQ is built-in to the hardware. It doesn't rate well on it's own because it sounds off without EQ.

 

[SciOC]

I compare A-B headphones/IEMs when I do my reviews. Most people on head-fi do which is great. It's, in my opinion, the best way to review and get a good feel of what to expect. A review without it makes it hard to really judge.

Graphs - graphs do matter in my opinion. You can get a basic sound signature from it. It does not tell the whole story though. But it helps.

EQ in reviews - I sometimes talk about EQ and sometimes I do not. While I think EQ can make a headphone sound better, a -8dB or whatever you guys use, means theres something inherently wrong with the tuning. It's great that planars respond very well to EQ since they have very very little distortion, but EQ isnt available for every source used. That's why reviewing based on an EQ'd headphone isn't doing people any good that can't EQ. At the very least, you should review it as it is out of the box, and how it sounds with a specific EQ setting and mention what that is.

iSine's get rated well when used with the Cipher cable because the EQ is built-in to the hardware. It doesn't rate well on it's own because it sounds off without EQ.

Agreed. I only really look at FR graphs from companies I trust to see what they were trying to do in terms of tuning. Otherwise, it's very hard to give an accurate measurement for all scenarios. Some technicians might be very precise in the way they measure (ie. You), I just have an overall problem with the "accuracy" aspect and the fact that QC means that an individual measurement on one unit is simply a case study and may not represent the product as a universe. If you measured the FR of the CL2 and someone else measured the FR of the Andromeda, you can't assume you can compare them....


That's why I'm saying reviews need to be read with correct context. For me, the elevation in the 4khz range, which I think is very slight, is not a problem. I would not use a source with no ability to EQ. Lifes too short to not tweak sound to my liking. It isn't a deal killer for me.

I don't throw away my coffee because I think it needs a little sugar or creamer. Purists can enjoy their hot bean water all they like. The isine20 was a steal on the audeze b stock sale... So long as you don't mind EQing the hell out of something. The CL2, for me, is much better in every way. I also heavily prefer it over the it04 and Andromeda. I actually use less EQ on these than any of those pairs.

My opinion is entirely subjective. If this is Ice cream and anchovy to you, that's fine by me. Like I said, I think RHA made some tactical errors....

FYI, here's the EQ curve I'm using on these right now.

 

[antdroid]

Agreed. I only really look at FR graphs from companies I trust to see what they were trying to do in terms of tuning. Otherwise, it's very hard to give an accurate measurement for all scenarios. Some technicians might be very precise in the way they measure (ie. You), I just have an overall problem with the "accuracy" aspect and the fact that QC means that an individual measurement on one unit is simply a case study and may not represent the product as a universe. If you measured the FR of the CL2 and someone else measured the FR of the Andromeda, you can't assume you can compare them....


That's why I'm saying reviews need to be read with correct context. For me, the elevation in the 4khz range, which I think is very slight, is not a problem. I would not use a source with no ability to EQ. Lifes too short to not tweak sound to my liking. It isn't a deal killer for me.

I don't throw away my coffee because I think it needs a little sugar or creamer. Purists can enjoy their hot bean water all they like. The isine20 was a steal on the audeze b stock sale... So long as you don't mind EQing the hell out of something. The CL2, for me, is much better in every way.

Yea definitely agree that I will do EQ if I can. All my sources have EQ capability, so I dont have a problem, but I know most people dont even know what EQ is or even how to do it correctly.

I will EQ even the smallest of minor changes if I can. A +2dB bass increase or -2dB to mids or something, but I think most people dont really care. My most recent desktop dac/amp purchase has EQ built in which is sweet!

 

[Tragic]

It’s nice to be told it’s ok to like crappy sounding earphones if you really want to.

 

[SciOC]

Yea definitely agree that I will do EQ if I can. All my sources have EQ capability, so I dont have a problem, but I know most people dont even know what EQ is or even how to do it correctly.

I will EQ even the smallest of minor changes if I can. A +2dB bass increase or -2dB to mids or something, but I think most people dont really care. My most recent desktop dac/amp purchase has EQ built in which is sweet!

It boggles my mind people, especially on headfi, don't know how to EQ.... Its also the reason why I love DAPs and especially chipsets like the 9028q2m that do it on the preamp stage so it can be output to a discrete amp.

You can make a $15 dollar kz sound as good as most $100-200 pairs for yourself at the cost of a tiny bit of distortion.... it took me maybe 20 minutes to EQ the CL2 to sound exactly how I wanted it to, the underlying capability of the driver is what made it work, and is to me what's really impressive about the CL2..

 

[SciOC]

It’s nice to be told it’s ok to like crappy sounding earphones if you really want to.

Lol, that's not the point. . Some people love onions, I think they're the worst tasting thing I've ever tasted, that doesn't make me objectively right or you objectively wrong. You might love onions, or only like them if you deep fry them enough, I'll still hate'em no matter what...

 

[Kitechaser]

RHA did make some tactical errors, one of them is not burning in their iems like Audeze does.
That would take out the biggest variable in everyone's experience of the CL2.
Cables coming in a close second.
Tips are understandable.

 

[antdroid]

Lol, that's not the point. . Some people love onions, I think they're the worst tasting thing I've ever tasted, that doesn't make me objectively right or you objectively wrong. You might love onions, or only like them if you deep fry them enough, I'll still hate'em no matter what...

Nope, now I know you're wrong. You dont like grilled onions, onion rings, or funyuns.

 

[geagle]

FWIW, I tried a PMEQ of -3db on 3000 hz, q= 0.7 on a Lotoo Paw Gold and a Lotoo Paw 5000 MKII... and I liked the results

 

[SciOC]

Nope, now I know you're wrong. You dont like grilled onions, onion rings, or funyuns.

I actually do like funyuns.... They taste nothing like onions. It's like the difference between artificial grape flavor and grapes.

Only when onions have been made completely inert in very vinegary salsa are they at all ok to me. If you were to want to torture me, you'd make me mceat McDonald's cheeseburgers with those horrible horrible onion slivers.

There's not a headphone that could sound as equivalently awful to me.

.