[sigma]

Moderators should be allowed to assign a modifier rating to users who seem to rate too heavily (for example 0.6 – 0.8) Likewise, members who give too ratings that are too light should have their votes modified to reflect the “true” ratings. Members should have more than a specified number of verified reviews to let their numerical votes be taken into consideration.

 

[enemigo]

Great site and great initiative. Hopefully there will be thousands of reviews there some time soon

I want to offer my opinions on what could be done differently. You should completely remove the "isolation score" for open phones. I am currently looking at the Alessandro MS2 reviews at your (great) site, and the total average suffers from a 1.5 isolation score. For some reason the SR225's have received a 3.5 isolation score...

Likewise, the DT880's get a 1.5 portability score while the ATH-L3000 is far more portable with it's 3.5 average.

Note: I didn't calculate the scores to check if the "closed" score were in on the total score, I just assume it is

It's not easy getting correct, or rather coherent, results when different people review different headphones, as we all know. So, what can be done to remedy this? The average scores might be presented differently. Each phone could have an "audio quality" score, a "portable use" score, a "home use" score and an optional "closed phone" score which would be "audio quality + isolation" that is only displayed for the closed ones.

Also, it might be easier for both reader and reviewer if there were fewer properties to rate. Do people really know the differece between bass impact and extesion or interpret it the same way? I think fewer options might result in more coherent results. You will be trading some detailed info for hopefully more correct info. I am sure you have thoght about what properties you wanted to include, and no matter what you chose, someone will always have complaints about the selection.

I am not saying that my suggestions are the better solution, I just want to offer my thougts for you to concider.

Knut

 

[Jahn]

Hopefully the reviewers who add a review will know the diff between extension and impact(slam) - if not maybe doing a review may not be the best idea lol.

as for the open nature of grados - it's all subjective, so there will be differences. but notice they all agree it's below average isolation and that's what counts more than numbers - people reading the review will get the idea (ok, these dont isolate lol).

 

[enemigo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jahn Hopefully the reviewers who add a review will know the diff between extension and impact(slam) - if not maybe doing a review may not be the best idea lol.

Hopefully

But people interpret things as they wish, and the more room for misunderstanding, the more incoherent results. Anyway, this was just an example to point out that less options may give more coherent data.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jahn as for the open nature of grados - it's all subjective, so there will be differences. but notice they all agree it's below average isolation and that's what counts more than numbers - people reading the review will get the idea (ok, these dont isolate lol).

The grado figures also were just an example. The problem is that the SR225 will get a better average than the MS2 because the reviewers don't agree about how to set the score. For an open phone, the "closed score" is completely irrelevant, as is portability for most highend phones, IMO. The options may still be presented, but not included in the "total score".

Knut

 

[JulianL]

I strongly disagree with this and all other attempts at moderating people's ratings. What would be the point of having a headphone rating site if any scores that disagree with the mod are edited. Why not just have your own website stating what you think they should be. If someone thinks that a certain headphone is great, you cant just say "No it's not, it's crap." It's just like saying "Your opinion is wrong."

Quote:

Originally Posted by sigma Moderators should be allowed to assign a modifier rating to users who seem to rate too heavily (for example 0.6 – 0.8) Likewise, members who give too ratings that are too light should have their votes modified to reflect the “true” ratings. Members should have more than a specified number of verified reviews to let their numerical votes be taken into consideration.

 

[philodox]

If someone gives a poorly thought out ranking it makes the average useless... basically invalidating every other review that has been done for the headphone. I dont think anyone is suggesting that reviews be changed just because someone does not agree with their assesment... just if they are grading too high or low.

Example: Giving the Grado RS-1 a soundstage score of 10 is obviously incorrect. Likewise, giving the AKG K271S an isolation score of 3 is obviously not right.

 

[rsaavedra]

I agree for people to rank the 650's properly, they should have had enough exposure to the very best of the best for long enough. I don't really fall into that category, since I've only heard top-notch systems briefly in meets and exhibits. So I won't submit a review for the 650's, otherwise, except for isolation I'd set almost everything very close to 10. Still, though it's early in the rankings, that 7.4 compared to other headphones above it I think is quite unfairly low. But will see how it changes over time.

Happy Holidays every1!!!!

 

[commando]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DoomForce man, this is a great idea. What i think you need though is added moderation on the reviews, with space for "uber head-fiers" to add their comments on each review. Like if i get a headphone and it is my first one, and i give it a 9.5/10 where it should be 6/10, thats where additional comments should be added by mods. Or a seeding (ranking) prog to categorize everyone so that the more experienced user's reviews weigh heavier than the average one's. just my 2cents...but overally this looks like a very promising website.

I'm considering adding an admin function to let me look at reviews more easily, and take action on reviews I consider unreasonable reviews.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sigma Moderators should be allowed to assign a modifier rating to users who seem to rate too heavily (for example 0.6 – 0.8) Likewise, members who give too ratings that are too light should have their votes modified to reflect the “true” ratings. Members should have more than a specified number of verified reviews to let their numerical votes be taken into consideration.

That's too complex for me to bother with. If people rate headphones too highly they get asked to reconsider. If they do it again their scores are ignored for all headphones. If I think it's deliberate abuse I disable the user.

Quote:

Originally Posted by enemigo Great site and great initiative. Hopefully there will be thousands of reviews there some time soon I want to offer my opinions on what could be done differently. You should completely remove the "isolation score" for open phones. I am currently looking at the Alessandro MS2 reviews at your (great) site, and the total average suffers from a 1.5 isolation score. For some reason the SR225's have received a 3.5 isolation score... Likewise, the DT880's get a 1.5 portability score while the ATH-L3000 is far more portable with it's 3.5 average. Note: I didn't calculate the scores to check if the "closed" score were in on the total score, I just assume it is It's not easy getting correct, or rather coherent, results when different people review different headphones, as we all know. So, what can be done to remedy this? The average scores might be presented differently. Each phone could have an "audio quality" score, a "portable use" score, a "home use" score and an optional "closed phone" score which would be "audio quality + isolation" that is only displayed for the closed ones. Also, it might be easier for both reader and reviewer if there were fewer properties to rate. Do people really know the differece between bass impact and extesion or interpret it the same way? I think fewer options might result in more coherent results. You will be trading some detailed info for hopefully more correct info. I am sure you have thoght about what properties you wanted to include, and no matter what you chose, someone will always have complaints about the selection. I am not saying that my suggestions are the better solution, I just want to offer my thougts for you to concider. Knut

See my first comment above. I've fixed up the isolation thing manually, and made it impossible for people to do that particular thing wrong again. I've also added warnings for really high reviews, to ask people to consider their scores carefully. Your other suggestions are reasonable but too much work right now, i'll take another look after xmas.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jahn Hopefully the reviewers who add a review will know the diff between extension and impact(slam) - if not maybe doing a review may not be the best idea lol. as for the open nature of grados - it's all subjective, so there will be differences. but notice they all agree it's below average isolation and that's what counts more than numbers - people reading the review will get the idea (ok, these dont isolate lol).

If they don't know the difference between those things they shouldn't be submitting reviews.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JulianL I strongly disagree with this and all other attempts at moderating people's ratings. What would be the point of having a headphone rating site if any scores that disagree with the mod are edited. Why not just have your own website stating what you think they should be. If someone thinks that a certain headphone is great, you cant just say "No it's not, it's crap." It's just like saying "Your opinion is wrong."

Bad luck. So long as peoples reviews are within a reasonable range i'll not censor them, but if they give average cans really high reviews or really good cans very bad reviews i'll take action. If people comments are inappropriate i'll either boot them or give them a warning - I gave one today already.

Thanks for all the feedback everyone, it's much appreciated

 

[Jahn]

I'm just sad the MS-2 has fallen below the 225 in the top 10 open supraaural category. Curse TrevorNetwork's low marks!

 

[Eagle_Driver]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jahn I'm just sad the MS-2 has fallen below the 225 in the top 10 open supraaural category. Curse TrevorNetwork's low marks!

Also, I think I've overrated the HD600 a bit. I readjusted my scores, so that the Grado HP-1000 is now #10 overall (the HD600 occupied that spot previously).

The one other headphone that I rated is the Sony MDR-V6/MDR-7506. It certainly deserves its current overall rating of 5.9.

In addition, I think the one reviewer of the HD595 was a bit optimistic, as well - giving that 'phone an overall score that's equal to the average overall score of the HD650.

 

[commando]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jahn I'm just sad the MS-2 has fallen below the 225 in the top 10 open supraaural category. Curse TrevorNetwork's low marks!

Them's the breaks when you let lots of people review headphones! If they're deserving they'll rise up the rankings later. I'll put a value ranking in some time too.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eagle_Driver Also, I think I've overrated the HD600 a bit. I readjusted my scores, so that the Grado HP-1000 is now #10 overall (the HD600 occupied that spot previously). The one other headphone that I rated is the Sony MDR-V6/MDR-7506. It certainly deserves its current overall rating of 5.9. In addition, I think the one reviewer of the HD595 was a bit optimistic, as well - giving that 'phone an overall score that's equal to the average overall score of the HD650.

5.9/10 means it's above average, which is pretty good for a headphone of that price.

I agree, Aman has rated the HD595s above the average for the HD650s, but he has both - although he hasn't reviews the 650s AFAIK. He has a fair bit of experience with a range of gear though, so i'd not like to try to change his mind. I might drop him an email in the new year to browse the top 10 some time and to change is review if he things it warrants it.

 

[KJ869]

Some of those street prices seem to be way off, like the ultrasone HFI 650 VS 700, there should be 10$ difference

 

[Chisum]

Hi,

first of all I wanna say that this database is a great idea! I am very well aware of the difficulties to collect all these informations and get a proper "image" of all cans displayed here. Second, I just wanna correct 2 mistakes on the site concerning the Sony CD3000 (well, not mentioned the much too low rating, of course

):

- The phone is not open, it's closed, circum-aural by definition.
- The enclosure material is not "plastic", it's very unique organic fibre composite material. You don't call the Senn HD600/650 "plastic", but "carbon fibre" as well, do you??

Cheers

Chisum

 

[3lusiv3]

There are 50 & 120 ohm versions of the HD 555 & 595. Should they be reviewed as being the same or should they be in the db as separate entries? They probably are the same but I don't really know, and the 120ohm version would be more amp dependant.

 

[commando]

Quote:

Originally Posted by KJ869 Some of those street prices seem to be way off, like the ultrasone HFI 650 VS 700, there should be 10$ difference

If anyone spots problems use the contact link, and please send me the correct information.
Quote:

Originally Posted by Chisum Hi, first of all I wanna say that this database is a great idea! I am very well aware of the difficulties to collect all these informations and get a proper "image" of all cans displayed here. Second, I just wanna correct 2 mistakes on the site concerning the Sony CD3000 (well, not mentioned the much too low rating, of course ): - The phone is not open, it's closed, circum-aural by definition. - The enclosure material is not "plastic", it's very unique organic fibre composite material. You don't call the Senn HD600/650 "plastic", but "carbon fibre" as well, do you?? Cheers Chisum

I'll change the enclosure to "other". I'm going to leave them as open cans, becuase although they're technically closed they don't offer any isolation, which could be misleading.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 3lusiv3 There are 50 & 120 ohm versions of the HD 555 & 595. Should they be reviewed as being the same or should they be in the db as separate entries? They probably are the same but I don't really know, and the 120ohm version would be more amp dependant.

If someone adds the new ones and tells me what to change the existing ones to I can do that.