headr
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- May 14, 2017
- Posts
- 108
- Likes
- 241
Is it just me or are Tyll's opinions getting more and more sensationalist lately? Certainly I noticed with the Z1R review that he used rather extreme language to disparage the headphones, and now with the 660S he seems a bit over the top harsh. It almost comes across as if he is chasing drama instead of fulfiling the role as a measured and rational headphone evaluator.
Further, I find his usage of the term "grainy" to be downright mystifying. For a while now he seems to equate the term "grainy" with energy in the treble region. This is not the traditional usage of the term "grain". Grainy traditionally means distortion in the treble region, which typically comes across as a veil, hence "veiled sounding".
He begins the review by saying that 660 S have finally lifted the Sennheiser veil, and yet goes on and on about how grainy they are.
It comes across as Tyll co-opting terms to mean things that deviate from standard definitions. And the whole review reinforces what I've long suspected - that Tyll does not appreciate energy in the treble region, he may in fact prefer a distorted veiled treble which is not accurate (which would be the typical usage of "grain"), and further, he has almost confirmed as much by his preference for more treble roll off with respect to the Harman curve.
All in all, I chalk the entire review up to more Tyll drama rather than a serious headphone review. In terms of advice, if you have hearing and preferences with perfectly line up with Tyll, by all means, heed his advice. Otherwise, I find his recommendations to be deviating further and further from what the general public would consume and treat as general headphone advice, and as always, try before you buy is in full effect.
CanJam NYC is coming up in a few months. Great opportunity to visit NYC, enjoy some great cans, and actually use your own two ears.
Further, I find his usage of the term "grainy" to be downright mystifying. For a while now he seems to equate the term "grainy" with energy in the treble region. This is not the traditional usage of the term "grain". Grainy traditionally means distortion in the treble region, which typically comes across as a veil, hence "veiled sounding".
He begins the review by saying that 660 S have finally lifted the Sennheiser veil, and yet goes on and on about how grainy they are.
It comes across as Tyll co-opting terms to mean things that deviate from standard definitions. And the whole review reinforces what I've long suspected - that Tyll does not appreciate energy in the treble region, he may in fact prefer a distorted veiled treble which is not accurate (which would be the typical usage of "grain"), and further, he has almost confirmed as much by his preference for more treble roll off with respect to the Harman curve.
All in all, I chalk the entire review up to more Tyll drama rather than a serious headphone review. In terms of advice, if you have hearing and preferences with perfectly line up with Tyll, by all means, heed his advice. Otherwise, I find his recommendations to be deviating further and further from what the general public would consume and treat as general headphone advice, and as always, try before you buy is in full effect.
CanJam NYC is coming up in a few months. Great opportunity to visit NYC, enjoy some great cans, and actually use your own two ears.