[RRod]

   
An on what objective basis, is this founded, I might ask? This is as subjective and unfounded as can be. Sadly, it is just one of may samples of late. This crazy even dips into religion.
 
Somebody send me a PM, if reason returns to this thread, and the bashing is bearable. Until then, I have no time for this.

 
So you're arguing that things like confirmation bias and bandwagon behavior don't exist?

 

[JVC steven]

   
So you're arguing that things like confirmation bias and bandwagon behavior don't exist?

I told myself not to get involved once i'd found my answer but the fact that audiophiles have an ecumenical understanding with commonalities
over particular headphone models suggests that you are thinking outside the box. Ask yourself ,- does objecting to  the "confirmation bias" perception of sound of headphones really and truly matter when such differences in ear/head shape are generally miniscule? NO IT DOESN'T....if you dislike/object to the universal standards of the business then why are you on Head Fi?!  That doesn't make much sense im afraid to say...

 

[RRod]

 
I told myself not to get involved once i'd found my answer but the fact that audiophiles have an ecumenical understanding with commonalities
over particular headphone models suggests that you are thinking outside the box. Ask yourself ,- does objecting to  the "confirmation bias" perception of sound of headphones really and truly matter when such differences in ear/head shape are generally miniscule? NO IT DOESN'T....if you dislike/object to the universal standards of the business then why are you on Head Fi?!  That doesn't make much sense im afraid to say...

 
You have no objective evidence to call such differences "miniscule". Ever seen person-specific HRTF output data? Funnily enough, if I went around saying, for example, that high bit-rate lossy compression doesn't matter because the differences are "generally miniscule," I'd be hanged in any sub-forum but here, where objective kinds of people would probably tend to agree with me.

 

[castleofargh]

 

  ... when a guy gives a feedback about a gear that is the same as what most people already said before. you can take it as the guy making a fair analysis of sound. but you can also take it as the guy regurgitating all the stuff he read before(consciously or not). how do you know? at best you take a guess, and when people agree with you, you take their statements as being more meaningful than statements disagreeing with you. bias is everywhere. ...

 
An on what objective basis, is this founded, I might ask? This is as subjective and unfounded as can be. Sadly, it is just one of may samples of late. This crazy even dips into religion.
 
Somebody send me a PM, if reason returns to this thread, and the bashing is bearable. Until then, I have no time for this.

what is unfounded? I see you lashing out in the air, but you don't say what's wrong, you don't explain why it's wrong, don't even try to give an argumentation to show what is the proper way to go at it. did you read your post before talking about who's doing the bashing? seriously?
 
bias are what they are, there are thousands of evidences and examples that it's easy to fool or influence someone by suggestion or by playing with our senses. from scientific tests, to funny games, to "magic tricks", and of course not forgetting advertising and marketing that are almost entirely based on how to convince people about something that is not. and why is it used everywhere? because it works amazingly well.
and it's not religion it's called psychology, you can try it it's pretty interesting.
we learn about some patterns of behaviors and reactions very common to humans.  just like how I'm probably wasting my time because just by merely arguing with you, I become the enemy and you won't think my point is valid even if I'm saying that a ball is round in shape. just another bias that turns something into something else because of the preconception that is our conflict.
 humans naturally behave that way. so what's so scandalous about acknowledging it that you have to make such a comedy?

 

[JVC steven]

   
You have no objective evidence to call such differences "miniscule". Ever seen person-specific HRTF output data? Funnily enough, if I went around saying, for example, that high bit-rate lossy compression doesn't matter because the differences are "generally miniscule," I'd be hanged in any sub-forum but here, where objective kinds of people would probably tend to agree with me.

I'm done here but your right i dont have objective evidence. I'm happy with the evidence of "confirmation bias" which by the way is at the very heart of the multi-billion dollar industry and without it you wouldn't be able to object like you do. Good day

 

[Redcarmoose]

The argument to my prior posts:


How is public opinion bias when a new musical group emerges? The same is said for movies to gather million dollar cameo appearances by famous actors. The old known actors or actresses add a level of familiarity which can charm and endear us as perceiving audio or visual information. It gives us commen grab-posts to latch onto in a strange world.


The musical group gathers no respect at first, then maybe overnight they are almost perfect. How is it that public opinion is so very fickle? Placebo? I feel it is almost learning to hear.


Led Zeppelin was belittled upon arrival in the English press view. Why? They were bombastic, different, ...............Headphones can be reviewed here the same in many ways.




And that is the issue with folks being told what to hear. Still ability is ability, it's ........just ........that the public opinion of correct can change and it is not always scientific. IMO

 

[castleofargh]

but nobody is saying an opinion has to be scientific. you guys always want to fight the wrong battles.
you think your opinion is truth, demonstrate it with factual evidence. if all you have is belief or opinion, then bias might very well play a role in it, so an opinion it should stay. "I feel like", "I prefer".
who would be dumb enough to deny opinions to people. even a dictator doesn't have that power. I certainly never said anything about that.
 
on this topic alone we've had a few fallacies already where incomplete understanding of a process leads to a false belief( about hrtf, about digital EQ, about vinyl being superior to CD...). ignorance is just another bias that stops us from making a correct assertion.
 
the all point is that biases are part of what we all are, and we shouldn't deny it or pretend they don't exist. most of the time it's not even necessary to fight biases in our lives, I prefer black gears for audio, how does that hurt anybody or ruins my enjoyment of music? well it doesn't so no problemo.
but science is about finding patterns to explain things, and reducing the chances of us being wrong. so of course getting rid of biases when trying to talk about the science behind headphones, that should be the very first priority in every mind. and casual sighted evaluations of headphones plugged into random gears, that shouldn't be the material we use to make an educated decision on flat headphones. that's all I've been saying.
 
you're all free to keep your beliefs and preferences when we talk about taste and preferences. but if we pretend to talk about how headphones and human ears really work, then facts and any form of evidences should be what matters. not rhetoric, not how many friends I have to agree with me. instead, any way to get rid of bias should be used in the process.  2 different targets with 2 different methods. pick yours, but this is sound science and the question was a very objective one.

 

[poikkeus]

  but nobody is saying an opinion has to be scientific. you guys always want to fight the wrong battles.
you think your opinion is truth, demonstrate it with factual evidence. if all you have is belief or opinion, then bias might very well play a role in it, so an opinion it should stay. "I feel like", "I prefer".
who would be dumb enough to deny opinions to people. even a dictator doesn't have that power. I certainly never said anything about that.
 
on this topic alone we've had a few fallacies already where incomplete understanding of a process leads to a false belief( about hrtf, about digital EQ, about vinyl being superior to CD...). ignorance is just another bias that stops us from making a correct assertion.
 
the all point is that biases are part of what we all are, and we shouldn't deny it or pretend they don't exist. most of the time it's not even necessary to fight biases in our lives, I prefer black gears for audio, how does that hurt anybody or ruins my enjoyment of music? well it doesn't so no problemo.
but science is about finding patterns to explain things, and reducing the chances of us being wrong. so of course getting rid of biases when trying to talk about the science behind headphones, that should be the very first priority in every mind. and casual sighted evaluations of headphones plugged into random gears, that shouldn't be the material we use to make an educated decision on flat headphones. that's all I've been saying.
 
you're all free to keep your beliefs and preferences when we talk about taste and preferences. but if we pretend to talk about how headphones and human ears really work, then facts and any form of evidences should be what matters. not rhetoric, not how many friends I have to agree with me. instead, any way to get rid of bias should be used in the process.  2 different targets with 2 different methods. pick yours, but this is sound science and the question was a very objective one.

Makes sense to me.
 
I've tried or owned the HD800 and K701 - headphones cited in the first post. They're both relatively "uncolored," but they're also relatively light on bass and more suited for certain types of music. I wouldn't prefer to listen to dub on a K701.

 

[Sal1950]

The only non-colored transducer is a broken one.