The discovery thread!

[crinacle]

It’s not about shilling or not, it’s about unreliability of the list. Example:

• The OG SA6 in the same rank as Aria???
• Chu in the same rank as the OG Andro???
• Chu and Hola are the same rank as Tia Fourte ?????
• Tia Trio is the same as Dunu Vulkan and Blessing 2 ?
• VE Phonix and EE Odin are below Variations ???
• Many more examples

(I deliberately don’t mention IEMs that I actually own from these points)

In what universe are these make any real world sense? This ranking list is simply misleading.

You know what, a few years ago, another reviewer (maybe Crinacle himself) said something akin to “you disagree? Go do it yourself”. I did, and this time I throw down the gauntlet. At least I breakdown the sonic performance of all IEMs and compare each aspect against benchmarks. What kind of process to create such misleading and unreliable ranking list?

What you've said is only true if you assume that your impressions and opinions are objective fact and the undeniable truth. But as with anyone in this thread would agree, nobody can claim that (and I myself have paragraphs on paragraphs of disclaimers on my pages as a result).

We disagree, and that's where I stand on this. However, YOU take this further and accuse me of being misleading, unreliable, whatever you want to say, as if my disagreement with you is wrong because only you hold the truth and facts on what is "better" and what is "worse".

Your tastes and opinions don't represent everybody, no matter how many breakdowns and columns you add into your spreadsheet. You are not God.

 

[MudEnjoyer]

What you've said is only true if you assume that your impressions and opinions are objective fact and the undeniable truth. But as with anyone in this thread would agree, nobody can claim that (and I myself have paragraphs on paragraphs of disclaimers on my pages as a result).

We disagree, and that's where I stand on this. However, YOU take this further and accuse me of being misleading, unreliable, whatever you want to say, as if my disagreement with you is wrong because only you hold the truth and facts on what is "better" and what is "worse".

Your tastes and opinions don't represent everybody, no matter how many breakdowns and columns you add into your spreadsheet. You are not God.

I think one of the issues that some people might have with your ranking list, is that when encountering a perceived lack of cohesiveness there is often a lack of information to drill down and answer why. Descriptions are understandably sparse, but should you want more details you need to find them scattered around in older reviews, short youtube videos or sometimes nothing at all. The perks of a way too large database I would say.

 

[o0genesis0o]

What you've said is only true if you assume that your impressions and opinions are objective fact and the undeniable truth. But as with anyone in this thread would agree, nobody can claim that (and I myself have paragraphs on paragraphs of disclaimers on my pages as a result).

We disagree, and that's where I stand on this. However, YOU take this further and accuse me of being misleading, unreliable, whatever you want to say, as if my disagreement with you is wrong because only you hold the truth and facts on what is "better" and what is "worse".

Your tastes and opinions don't represent everybody, no matter how many breakdowns and columns you add into your spreadsheet. You are not God.

It’s not taste or opinion that assigns my ratings. It’s how an IEM does, side by side, against some benchmarks, in careful A/B, decides where it fits. And it’s not an sweeping test, but aspect by aspect. I carefully try to remove my “taste” and my “opinion” from the technical performance rating, and I actively recommend readers to disregard my assessment of tonality. So, no, it’s not the difference between “my taste” and “your taste”, and the arrogance that “my taste” is better than “your taste”, as you accuse.

You are significant in this hobby. Your ranking list is significant. Therefore, it would subject to scrutiny. And I pointed out questionable points. There were not so many contentious points in the past.

Edit: I shouldn’t have used the strong words of misleading. My apologies.

Edit2: I do have a variations here

 

[crinacle]

It’s not taste or opinion that assigns my ratings. It’s how an IEM does, side by side, against some benchmarks, in careful A/B, decides where it fits. And it’s not an sweeping test, but aspect by aspect. I carefully try to remove my “taste” and my “opinion” from the technical performance rating, and I actively recommend readers to disregard my assessment of tonality. So, no, it’s not the difference between “my taste” and “your taste”, and the arrogance that “my taste” is better than “your taste”, as you accuse.

Neither is it the goal for my taste or opinion to assign my rankings, but ultimately I acknowledge that there will always be a level of personal bias that affects them all. No matter how carefully one tries to "remove" it.

At the end of the day, claiming that your list is somehow better than mine is indeed the arrogance that "your bias" is better than "my bias", if you prefer the wording that way.

 

[Ferdinando1968]

What you've said is only true if you assume that your impressions and opinions are objective fact and the undeniable truth. But as with anyone in this thread would agree, nobody can claim that (and I myself have paragraphs on paragraphs of disclaimers on my pages as a result).

We disagree, and that's where I stand on this. However, YOU take this further and accuse me of being misleading, unreliable, whatever you want to say, as if my disagreement with you is wrong because only you hold the truth and facts on what is "better" and what is "worse".

Your tastes and opinions don't represent everybody, no matter how many breakdowns and columns you add into your spreadsheet. You are not God.

Good morning Crin.
Would you like to explain some IEM classifications that seem unusual to me?

For example in your ranking the B2 have rank A, as well as the U12T.

How is it possible that two products that occupy such different market segments are comparable?

Or am I just misunderstanding the classification?

 

[Benno1988]

Neither is it the goal for my taste or opinion to assign my rankings, but ultimately I acknowledge that there will always be a level of personal bias that affects them all. No matter how carefully one tries to "remove" it.

At the end of the day, claiming that your list is somehow better than mine is indeed the arrogance that "your bias" is better than "my bias", if you prefer the wording that way.

All IEMs, regardless of their rating by one reviewer or another, be it A rated, S, D, or any other system, and if they have good tonality, subjectively bad tonality, amazing technical chops or not, are ded if they cost under 3000 USD. Straight ded.

 

[o0genesis0o]

Neither is it the goal for my taste or opinion to assign my rankings, but ultimately I acknowledge that there will always be a level of personal bias that affects them all. No matter how carefully one tries to "remove" it.

At the end of the day, claiming that your list is somehow better than mine is indeed the arrogance that "your bias" is better than "my bias", if you prefer the wording that way.

So, because “my bias”, suddenly the Chu is less resolving, has smaller stage, less dynamic, than the Fourte, whilst if I am “unbiased”, they would sound the same on each and every single separate aspect in A/B?

I would love to learn that un-biased perception. It would save me a few grand, since I have a Chu right here.

Regretful that our first conversation ever turned out this way. I’ve always looked up to you as a reviewer.

 

[crinacle]

So, because “my bias”, suddenly the Chu is less resolving, has smaller stage, less dynamic, than the Fourte, whilst if I am “unbiased”, they would sound the same on each and every single separate aspect in A/B?

I would love to learn that un-biased perception. It would save me a few grand, since I have a Chu right here.

Regretful that our first conversation ever turned out this way. I’ve always looked up to you as a reviewer.

Who said there was ever a such thing as a truly "unbiased" opinion? You came into this thread claiming to be unbiased and true in this subjective hobby, and then act offended when I say that nobody can represent everybody because everyone has their own biases.

Yeah, when your first conversation with me is accusing me of very serious things while claiming that you yourself hold superior "opinions", clearly I'm not going to be a nice guy about it.

 

[MudEnjoyer]

Both Andromeda and Chu are terrible earphones please don’t fight.

 

[conorair]

What you've said is only true if you assume that your impressions and opinions are objective fact and the undeniable truth. But as with anyone in this thread would agree, nobody can claim that (and I myself have paragraphs on paragraphs of disclaimers on my pages as a result).

We disagree, and that's where I stand on this. However, YOU take this further and accuse me of being misleading, unreliable, whatever you want to say, as if my disagreement with you is wrong because only you hold the truth and facts on what is "better" and what is "worse".

Your tastes and opinions don't represent everybody, no matter how many breakdowns and columns you add into your spreadsheet. You are not God.

Hello Crin, I've been meaning to ask you a question. If we consider that distortion, phase response, and frequency response are all identical, what is the specific technical performance that you place significant importance on when judging your iems.

 

[Tsukimi]

Both Andromeda and Chu are terrible earphones please don’t fight.

Them's fighting words! Chu II are very nice for the price though and I will die on that hill.

 

[Altes]

It’s not taste or opinion that assigns my ratings. It’s how an IEM does, side by side, against some benchmarks, in careful A/B, decides where it fits. And it’s not an sweeping test, but aspect by aspect. I carefully try to remove my “taste” and my “opinion” from the technical performance rating, and I actively recommend readers to disregard my assessment of tonality. So, no, it’s not the difference between “my taste” and “your taste”, and the arrogance that “my taste” is better than “your taste”, as you accuse.

You are significant in this hobby. Your ranking list is significant. Therefore, it would subject to scrutiny. And I pointed out questionable points. There were not so many contentious points in the past.

Unfortunately for us readers, technical performance is susceptible to a mere eartip choice (a potential explanation for differing tech scores between reviewers). In another occasion, I recall Precog using 3rd party tips/cables to augment IEMs he ranked favorably, while not doing so for other IEM reviews he seemed to rush through. While I don't doubt his honesty, I'm also hesitant about whether some IEMs had an advantage.

I agree with @MudEnjoyer that the main concern is too little known info is provided for us. For example, when I click on an IEM on Crin's list, I expected to be directed to Crin's review (for example, to understand why a mid-tier might tie with a top-tier IEM). It seems the current issue I face is that they all redirect to a graph instead of a review so I cannot attempt to figure out the rankings by myself, which means crin needs to explain it in the forums, on twitter, etc.

@crinacle do you think this is something that has need to be addressed in the future?

 

[Ace Bee]

A discovery that I for sure am not going to pursue:

Spirit Torino Twin Pulse​

Dual Beryllium (plated, as far as I can interpret from their description) Driver in isobaric formation. My biggest peeve is the faceplate, which completely disturbs the continuity of the design. It looked quite fine, an industrial sort of design, up till that, and then it feels that suddenly Spirit Torino remembered that they had a signature design element that they forgot to implement, and in haste just slapped on that faceplate that aesthetically does not come within miles of the rest of the design.

 

[lgcubana]

Must be time for another AliExpress sale:

Less than $300 (USD) to my door (for the Sound Rhyme SR7), is hard to resist.

 

[AsciiJC]

Both Andromeda and Chu are terrible earphones please don’t fight.

Thats biased! (joking here)

A discovery that I for sure am not going to pursue:

Spirit Torino Twin Pulse​

Dual Beryllium (plated, as far as I can interpret from their description) Driver in isobaric formation. My biggest peeve is the faceplate, which completely disturbs the continuity of the design. It looked quite fine, an industrial sort of design, up till that, and then it feels that suddenly Spirit Torino remembered that they had a signature design element that they forgot to implement, and in haste just slapped on that faceplate that aesthetically does not come within miles of the rest of the design.

The weird design is why I got one haha