[SIGcollector]

   
No, spoken like somebody who knows meet impressions are utterly useless and easily manipulated.  If CanJam hadn't died in 2010 we would have setup a test to showcase this in 2011. 

 
I was joking, hence the emoticon. 

  (Did you understand that one?)

So . . . why, precisely, do you feel meet impressions are, "utterly useless and easily manipulated?" And exactly what kind of test would you have utilized to demonstrate your hypothesis?

 

[MacedonianHero]

   
No, spoken like somebody who knows meet impressions are utterly useless and easily manipulated.  If CanJam hadn't died in 2010 we would have setup a test to showcase this in 2011. 

 
Agreed...I've also found lemming mentality quite strong at meets. Nothing beats getting gear at home over several days/weeks to really get to know how they sound and what they're about.

 

[DefQon]

   
So . . . why, precisely, do you feel meet impressions are, "utterly useless and easily manipulated?" And exactly what kind of test would you have utilized to demonstrate your hypothesis?

Apply some simple logic here...
 
Meet impressions are not completely pointless but it just doesn't contribute anything useful here when people post impressions because they found headphone A better than headphone B or something newer is better.
 
Sure you get to try out new gear and have a taste of what a headphone sounds like but it just stops there. Different gear powering the same headphones you may have owned or heard, noisy environment, different source (music genre) compared to what you actually prefer and listen to, bias and placebo (which wear's off once you hear the setup properly in non meet conditions) and finally limited amount of time which is completely useless of drawing a conclusion for anything.

 

[complin]

I think you have probably answered your own question?
 
Quote:

   
I listened to the prototype pair twice during the NYC meet and was impressed both times with direct comparisons against the HE-500 and LCD2, so needless to say I've been very surprised by the strong negative reactions to the audio quality. I have no doubt that MLE's suggestion of a Stax bias here is accurate to some extent, but with THAT many poor reviews it does make me wonder what changed from the setup I demo'd. I suppose it's certainly possible that Drew was running a custom EQ for them at the meet, but I would be surprised if there were significant design changes made for the production models. 
 
 
 

 

[complin]

Totally agree
I've listened to audio gear even in a dealers demo room but when taken home have changed my impression of it completely both good and bad
 
 
Quote:

   
Agreed...I've also found lemming mentality quite strong at meets. Nothing beats getting gear at home over several days/weeks to really get to know how they sound and what they're about.

 

[SIGcollector]

  Apply some simple logic here...
 
Meet impressions are not completely pointless but it just doesn't contribute anything useful here when people post impressions because they found headphone A better than headphone B or something newer is better.
 
Sure you get to try out new gear and have a taste of what a headphone sounds like but it just stops there. Different gear powering the same headphones you may have owned or heard, noisy environment, different source (music genre) compared to what you actually prefer and listen to, bias and placebo (which wear's off once you hear the setup properly in non meet conditions) and finally limited amount of time which is completely useless of drawing a conclusion for anything.

 
I follow what you're saying, but the majority of your listed concerns simply weren't issues for me at this meet. Early on in the meet the place was practically dead and not loud whatsoever, so there wasn't ambient noise to combat, nor did I ever feel rushed to come to a conclusion by someone waiting behind me for a listen. Beyond that, I was able to sample everything I listened to with the exact same source at least twice in back to back comparisons with NO wait. Was it the same as buying everything I was there to hear and demoing them at home? No. However, the significant amount that I did learn, and fraction that I shared, was anything but "useless" or "pointless." I personally wouldn't buy a product basely solely on a couple member's thoughts, but it may very well compel me to further research the product or seek a demo myself. (or stay away depending on those thoughts)

 

[spritzer]

Getting back on subject for a bit.  Got a set of A-T W3000ANV earpads and while the opening is a bit too small for my ears, the sound is very good indeed.  They are very thin which is a plus. 
 
Quote:

   
I was joking, hence the emoticon. 

  (Did you understand that one?)

So . . . why, precisely, do you feel meet impressions are, "utterly useless and easily manipulated?" And exactly what kind of test would you have utilized to demonstrate your hypothesis?

 
The impressions are useless as you don't know the source, the recording or the amplification used.  How are you going to draw any meaningful conclusions with all those variables?  There have been accusations of sneaky MOT's who run the sound through eq and filters to shape the sound so it has to be a part of the equation.  Then we have the aforementioned lemming mentality which is the worst of the worst.  Very few people are willing to go against the grain and post something negative about a product especially after glowing reviews from somebody else. 
 
Our plan was to build 3 identical amps but only on the outside.  On the inside would be 3 very different ways of driving Stax headphones, one excellent and two lacking but those would be tailored to be pleasing to the ear.  No way to tell the amps apart, all would run as hot, have the same sockets, knobs etc.  No doubt in my mind that the less than stellar designs would win out in such an environment. 

 

[SIGcollector]

   
The impressions are useless as you don't know the source, the recording or the amplification used.  How are you going to draw any meaningful conclusions with all those variables?  There have been accusations of sneaky MOT's who run the sound through eq and filters to shape the sound so it has to be a part of the equation.  Then we have the aforementioned lemming mentality which is the worst of the worst.  Very few people are willing to go against the grain and post something negative about a product especially after glowing reviews from somebody else. 
 
Our plan was to build 3 identical amps but only on the outside.  On the inside would be 3 very different ways of driving Stax headphones, one excellent and two lacking but those would be tailored to be pleasing to the ear.  No way to tell the amps apart, all would run as hot, have the same sockets, knobs etc.  No doubt in my mind that the less than stellar designs would win out in such an environment. 

 
I've clearly TWICE established the fact that I provided the source / recording / material, and if you need an explanation as to why the KS and the LCD2 can't share the same amp, well, there's simply no hope for you. Could Drew have duped everyone by running a modified EQ on their material? Sure, I suppose it's possible. However, it's equally possible that a bunch of narrow-minded Stax fans purposely blackballed a competing electrostatic company's first headphone. Am I definitively claiming one or the other happened? No. All I can say is that my thoughts (and the thoughts of others) on the prototype CLEARLY differ from those of the Stax family that reviewed the commercial product in this thread. Hopefully the fall NYC meet actually takes place and I have the opportunity to compare them again, but until then, we'll never know.
 
As far as testing your hypothesis, why, exactly, would listeners choose the, "less than stellar design" over the "excellent design?" In particular, why would they make that choice at a meet as opposed to at home?

 

[Insidious Meme]

Man, this thread has become as fun as a toxic waste dump. Time to stop the posturing on both sides and just agree to disagree. :rolleyes:

 

[gilency]

Last 2 posts are....well. I am speechless.
This is the reason I spend more time at the other site and less and less time in this one.

 

[wink]

Quote:SIGcollector.

As far as testing your hypothesis, why, exactly, would listeners choose the, "less than stellar design" over the "excellent design?" In particular, why would they make that choice at a meet as opposed to at home?

It's the same reason that when you compare two sets of speakers in a hifi shop, most people invariable pick the set that sounds best to them only to return them later for something else.

 

[spritzer]

The bottom line here is how many hours did the people listening to these at an audio show spend with them?  Dozens or even hundreds like those of us that actually bought a set?  Then there is the small issue of what people consider a reference.  Ever heard a SRS-2170 or a ESP950?
 
Ohh and please explain to me how the LCD-2 and the Kingsound can't share an amp and I'll explain how they easily can.  I've even driven electrostatics directly off an iphone... 

 

[SIGcollector]

  It's the same reason that when you compare two sets of speakers in a hifi shop, most people invariable pick the set that sounds best to them only to return them later for something else.

 
The main reason for speakers being returned is that they literally sound differently than they did in the store due to the room acoustics changing. (VERY important aspect with speakers) Room acoustics play next to no part in headphone performance, therefore your analogy makes zero sense. Probably best to just let Spritzer try to explain his theory . . .

 

[SIGcollector]

  The bottom line here is how many hours did the people listening to these at an audio show spend with them?  Dozens or even hundreds like those of us that actually bought a set?  Then there is the small issue of what people consider a reference.  Ever heard a SRS-2170 or a ESP950?
 
Ohh and please explain to me how the LCD-2 and the Kingsound can't share an amp and I'll explain how they easily can.  I've even driven electrostatics directly off an iphone... 

 
The bottom line is actually that you can't answer a simple question about your grandiose hypothesis and test. (hence the desperate evasion above) The question still stands:
 

 
As far as testing your hypothesis, why, exactly, would listeners choose the, "less than stellar design" over the "excellent design?" In particular, why would they make that choice at a meet as opposed to at home?
 

 
Wink at least made a legitimate attempt at bailing you out . . . 

 

[shipsupt]

Ok.  You heard them, and you liked them.  Got it.  Moving on.