[citadel]

Quote:

There seems to be some inconsistencies in your views DefQon...If you can say than any audio-gd is not high-fi, then that should also apply to hifiman....Sorry, but the audio-gd amps have better specs and power planars just as well if not better.

Just to be more precise, I am talking about the audio-gd master 8, ref 10.32, and nfb-27

 

[citadel]

Quote:

He isn't wrong about the bass, but the Stax absolutely destroy the Abyss in treble and do a better job in the (slightly distant sounding) mids. Keep in mind he basically said the exact same thing in his LCD-3 review too (and crowned the LCD-3 the best headphone in the World as a result)

An example of the serious subjectivity of headphone opinions...
 
We will never really agree....just agree to disagree.  One person told me the abyss had equally as good mids and highs as the sr-009...others tell me the sr-009 kills the abyss...
 
Others would say the transparency and speed of the abyss kills the stax, etc...
 
I think another problems is that not only do people have different tastes in sound, they use different amps and sources to make evaluations from each other.
 
Once you get to high-fi/summit-fi, it's almost pointless to compare or convince others headphone A is better than headphone B at point C. 

 

[Darkbeat]

An example of the serious subjectivity of headphone opinions...
 
We will never really agree....just agree to disagree.  One person told me the abyss had equally as good mids and highs as the sr-009...others tell me the sr-009 kills the abyss...
 
Others would say the transparency and speed of the abyss kills the stax, etc...
 
I think another problems is that not only do people have different tastes in sound, they use different amps and sources to make evaluations from each other.
 
Once you get to high-fi/summit-fi, it's almost pointless to compare or convince others headphone A is better than headphone B at point C. 

 
Subjective opinions can easily be backed up by objective measurements and data. The AB-1266s are amazing headphones in so many ways, but they aren't without their flaws. The "headphone A is better than headphone B at point C" argument was started by you on the previous page, vis, the Abyss's bass response against that of the SR-009. The Abyss does have exceptional bass, perhaps the best I've ever heard, but that's far from the whole story and while some people like Steve Guttenberg choose to focus entire articles on nothing else (see also: his LCD-3 review), I'm sure there are many in this thread interested in the complete picture.

 

[citadel]

Quote:

 
Subjective opinions can easily be backed up by objective measurements and data. The AB-1266s are amazing headphones in so many ways, but they aren't without their flaws. The "headphone A is better than headphone B at point C" argument was started by you on the previous page, vis, the Abyss's bass response against that of the SR-009. The Abyss does have exceptional bass, perhaps the best I've ever heard, but that's far from the whole story and while some people like Steve Guttenberg choose to focus entire articles on nothing else (see also: his LCD-3 review), I'm sure there are many in this thread interested in the complete picture.

Firstly, I did not do say any headphone A is better than headphone B at point C  comment with the Stax sr-009 from my own personal experience. I am simply sharing the information that I read and heard from others. I have NEVER heard the star sr-009 before so I cannot make any personal claims or comments.
 
Secondly, Steve Guttenberg did not just focus on bass in his article. To quote:
 
 

Some audiophiles think the Stax SR-009 ($5,250) is the best sounding headphone on the market; I don't agree. Yes, it's even more transparent and clear, but the SR-009 lacks the LCD-3's power, dynamics, natural midrange, and potent bass.

 
Thirdly, the complete picture (which again is subjective) is frankly unknown unless the individual test these headphones for themselves (with a fair setup and a "fair" assessment). 
 
Sure, we can make technical measurements but in the end, we cannot escape subjectivity, as illustrated by the conflicting opinions of experienced headphone enthusiasts.
 
This is like have a tube versus solid state debate. In the end, it is futile, and the individual must decide what he/she prefers!!!

 

[Darkbeat]

Firstly, I did not do say any headphone A is better than headphone B at point C  comment with the Stax sr-009 from my own personal experience. I am simply sharing the information that I read and heard from others. I have NEVER heard the star sr-009 before so I cannot make any personal claims or comments.
 
Secondly, Steve Guttenberg did not just focus on bass in his article. To quote:
 
 
 
Thirdly, the complete picture (which again is subjective) is frankly unknown unless the individual test these headphones for themselves (with a fair setup and a "fair" assessment). 
 
Sure, we can make technical measurements but in the end, we cannot escape subjectivity, as illustrated by the conflicting opinions of experienced headphone enthusiasts.
 
This is like have a tube versus solid state debate. In the end, it is futile, and the individual must decide what he/she prefers!!!

 
You triple posted with quotes designed to enflame in which the bass of the Abyss was compared favorably to that of the SR-009. That's fine, but when someone else points out that the Abyss simply isn't as balanced and struggles to reproduce the highs on the same level, you act as if this doesn't count.

Steve Guttenberg's article can be summarised as: I liked the bass, this headphone is the best. It's a copy paste of his LCD-3 review in which he said almost verbatim the exact same arguments; flaws be damned, I love the bass. That's fine, by the way.

A fair test is impossible between electrostatic and dynamic headphones in the manner you describe.

Subjectivity is fine, but when subjective opinions state something that is backed up by measurements and data, this is what we call fact. Certainly let the individual decide according to their own tastes, but don't be surprised to find that many aren't as willing to paper over flaws on a 5.5 thousand dollar headphone.

 

[DefQon]

I'm sobering up now as I type this response so it's a good thing I'm not in my "fully awake state" with an ******* of a post coming your way.
Quote:

Why are Steve Guttenberg reviews so looked down on?

There was a time where you gave the man some credit for his reviews, but nowadays his reviews is exactly like Stereophiles, crap. SG's is a prime example of "ohh newer is better", I mean look at it this way, when he heard the HE-6 on the Darkstar he claimed it the best headphone system in the world besting the SR-007 he heard prior, then the he claimed the SR-009 the best headphone, the the LCD3's when that came out, now the Abyss. You know where this is heading with future flagship releases from any of the mentioned companies. 
 
Quote:

There seems to be some inconsistencies in your views DefQon...If you can say than any audio-gd is not high-fi, then that should also apply to hifiman....Sorry, but the audio-gd amps have better specs and power planars just as well if not better.

When the hell did I ever say the NFB-27 was not high-end? Please go back 2 pages and read my posts. I posted clearly in response to you that while I had that model for a day in my possession the amp section was so and so but the dac section was pretty good, I did not mention a single thing about anything of Audio-GD being mid - fi or high-end so please don't pull words out of your arse as if I said it.
 
Please don't stuff words into other peoples mouths which they have not said just because people with more experience then you have rained down on something you wasted your own money on just so you feel it as a justified product.
 
Quote:

Just to be more precise, I am talking about the audio-gd master 8, ref 10.32, and nfb-27

 
Seriously facepalm. This was originally about the NFB-27 which I had in my possession and which you own, why drag other Audio-GD products in here which have no meaningful correlation with the thread topic at hand.

 

[MomijiTMO]

It's the Internet guyssss. Chill.

 

[citadel]

DefQon you may need to sober up a little more. On another forum, you basically made fun of the fact that the abyss was paired with an audio-gd nfb 27. This implied that you believe the nfb 27 is not high fi material...unworthy of the abyss.

Tje question is: Do you really think the ef6 is a whole lot better?

On paper (using thd, s/n and measurements), it's not at all. I have read some review that claim the ef6 is mediocre and that the nfb 27 is excellent.

You are the first person I heard that did not like the nfb 27. I have actually demoed the ef6 with the he6 and found the nfb to be better (believe it or not).

 

[scolaiw]

Hahaha, whilst you guys were having a friendly debate over the internet, I was at the MCG with 95,446 other fans watching my beloved Reds play Melbourne Victory.

My night > Your night. 

 

[etherlite]

We were implying that nfb 27 was unworthy of the abyss, yes. But not that it's not a high fi material.
 
And although I haven't got the chance to listen to EF6, I did listen to nfb 27 before and I can say that I'm not a fan of nfb 27 either. Which one is better? I can barely read measurements anyway so I'd rather not say. :x
 
I believe what DefQon & Darkbeat are trying to say is that Abyss, as a 5500$ headphone, although excels in some areas, still has some inferior parts compared to other headphones, although we can say that it's neck-to-neck with SR-009. the rests is down to preference.
 
@scolaiw: screw you, I couldn't go to Sydney to watch my beloved Reds play A-league Super Stars due to class and exams T_T

 

[VisceriousZERO]

Hahaha, whilst you guys were having a friendly debate over the internet, I was at the MCG with 95,446 other fans watching my beloved Reds play Melbourne Victory.


My night > Your night. 

Congrats!

On my part I'll wait to get my 1266 then do my own impressions of them vs my SR-009 sitting at home...

 

[preproman]

Quote:

I have read some review that claim the ef6 is mediocre and that the nfb 27 is excellent.
 

 
Can you point us to this review?

 

[purrin]

On SR-009 vs AB-1266, it's difficult to say which one is "faster". Speed may mean different things to different people. And even if they don't, the characteristics of fast or "transient response" are too difficult to generalize into one metric. The main difference between the two in terms of transient response speed is how they accelerate or decelerate.
 
As I've mentioned elsewhere, the SR-009 tends to slowly ramp up before coming up to lightning fast speed and then slow down gently. It's a subtle effect, but the effect IMO does contribute to the SR-009 relaxed ethereal sound. The AB-1266 tends to accelerate like a four wheel drive launch and stop like an F1 car with carbon fiber brakes. Also, IMO, the SR-009 sounds faster or at least cleaner in the treble. High-hats, brushes, fast percussion is more delineated on the SR-009. However, bass on the SR-009 isn't as taut as the AB-1266. There's no such thing as "fast" bass, but bass does sounds faster on the AB-1266. Personally I feel the SR-009's relaxed ethereal sound is a coloration which is not heard in real life. The AB-1266's approach sounds much more realistic. But this really doesn't matter because that STAX sound is quite seductive, realistic or not.
 
In terms of overall balance, the SR-009 sounds like it has a midrange emphasis with a slightly downward slope toward the bass (bass volume getting less and less as we get lower). The AB-1266 has a slight downward tilt from the the bass to the treble. Personally I find the overall balance of the AB-1266 more palatable to my tastes. However the AB-1266's treble is rough and has a peak near 9kHz. The extent of how annoying this peak is will depend upon other equipment in the chain.
 
I highly doubt anyone who currently enjoys the SR-009 will see the AB-1266 as the superior headphone. The SR-009 costs a lot of money, and the folks who have it know what they are doing and are spoiled in the sense that the midrange and treble are exceptional. The SR-009 aficionado may likely find the rougher treble of the AB-1266 an unacceptable show-stopper issue. The weakness of the SR-009 IMO is the lack of low bass impact and overall tonal balance not suited for genres other than jazz or small venue classical. (Since I don't listen to Jazz, I'm always thinking Henry Purcell or other early Baroque with the SR-009s.)
 
Ultimately it comes down to what one's sonic priorities are, what one is accustomed to, and what deficiencies one can find acceptable. I've sold my SR-009s long ago. I'm looking for some way to obtain the AB-1266.

 

[scolaiw]

Quote:

Congrats!

On my part I'll wait to get my 1266 then do my own impressions of them vs my SR-009 sitting at home...

Nice, looking forward to reading your impressions.

 

 

[forbigger]

buy a 009, buy this. cut into half, make a new headphone with each left/right 009/1266 , you'll get the best of both world at each of your ears too with one spare in case one goes bad. 
 
now, where's the 1277 or 1266 revision 2? bring it on !!!