Sorry to bring this topic back, but I didn't have the chance to speak out before given some stressed end of year for me and I felt there were some missing points in the discussion I wanted to share, ....so yes, it's about the Caldera review at ASR.
To me, there is not a perfect place to get information/feedback about the audio gears you are interested, that's why I have learned to use different sources that won some trusting on me and learnt what are the strong/weak points of each source and ASR is not the exception.
To me, ASR is a very valuable source of information, Amir's lab tests are excellent, because of their accuracy and because the type of tests, which give you an objective picture of a device. There is no other site like that. I find it very valuable for example to double check the specs published by manufactures, to spot broken designs and oil snake products and under which conditions your devices can work avoiding distortions. I think is very good for us, the costumers, that exists a place like ASR, it pushes companies to deliver better products.
But here is what I think is the problem with ASR, and not with the essence of the site, "scientific reviews", but with the rhetoric of Amir tries to impose, that his graph translate directly to what people want/like to listen, the better the graph, the better the people are going to like it, and that's a misconception. I am completely sure there are many of his tops rated devices people don't like. In my case for example I had in loan for a week his highly praised Topping A90 headphone amp and to me is one of the most boring amps I ever tried, too analytical and dry!. Also, the other way around, many highly praised product by costumers that were bad rated by ASR. So the graphs matter, nobody want distortions, but his graphs cannot interpret our human nature of diversity. Sorry
@amir but it's hard to take you seriously when you say "the Caldera sounds boring without EQ....". The Caldera got the "Best Headphone – Orthodynamic" prize by Headfonia and one of the highest rated headphones EVER by Headphonics and both tested the Caldera without EQ. Underestimating the importance of the subjective listening and the taste of people is the path to the dark side of the force!!.
Also Amir graphs cannot show other very important aspects of headphones to take decisions, like soundstage, layering, decays, slam, etc. These should be IHMO included in any subjective listening, specially if you are going to draw conclusions to recommend a product using also subjective listening. While I find Amir's methodic for labs tests superb, his subjective listening leave a lot to desire. First, he should start with the subjective listening, spending some good time with the headphones (which seems he doesn't) and ONLY then going to the lab tests, otherwise your subjective listening will be completely compromised and biased (the placebo effect that Amir himself talks about). Second, for Amir all headphones should align to the Harman curve. "If that would be really the case", he should at least provide some decent settings for EQ, with the same level of accuracy as his lab tests, or simple pointing to AutoEQ project where they have accurate settings, otherwise you are not reaching the Harman target anyway.
These are Amir's EQ parameters for the Caldera: With these, to me, the Caldera sounds bloated in the bass and too shouty. To me it only destroys the nice tuning created by Zach, that we all know spend like zillions of hrs locked down in his lab so that you like it.
And these are some more accurate settings from the AutoEQ project for the Caldera with stock pads. Please notice the difference around 200 HZ and the relative gain and coverage of the 3 peaks.. This is really the Caldera tuned Harman!
With these settings I liked the Caldera, but no more that Zach's tuning. To me with Zach's tuning (compared Harman) the Caldera sounds a bit more mid-centric (nice for acoustic genders) and also more relaxed, nothing stands out, which I find is nice for long listening sessions. With Harman EQ (compared house tuning) the Caldera becomes more forward and more dynamic. The bass get a big boost but only at the more deep bass content that is only found on some music genders that call for it, like EDM, OST, but not for the majority of other genders, so for the last the difference is only subtle. Which one you like more is I think a matter of taste or your mood.
And at last, Amir's rhetoric that that all industry should align to the Harman target because of the famous scientist study and that everything else cannot be recommended
(sorry I could not find a better facepalm emoticon). Again, you are completely underestimating our human nature of diversity. We all have different tastes, hearing capabilities or want to try different tastes. That's why many of us own several headphones or like tube rolling's. I could ran a different statistical study on international food and probably will find that a great percentage of the people will choice Italian or Chinese food. Following Amir's logic, then all restaurants should align to that and any other restaurant like Indian or Japanese should not be recommend. Of course it's always interesting to know what human prefer most, it could be a good guideline, but let us to decide what we like/want more.
Look at the Verite Closed for example, one of my favorites ZMFs and highly appreciated by our community. It sounds amazing with vocals and acoustic genders, specially for its unique cup reverberation when notes fade away slowly, is to die for, and guess what, it's far away from Harman tuning. In fact trying to EQ the VC like Harman will make it sound completely odd. So
@amir, how would you explain that?
Jokes apart. I think Amir, you should stick on your labs graph and objective results (where the Caldera shinned), that's where you are probably the best at, very appreciated work! but stay away from subjective territory, where others do a better job and where I think is driving you to wrong conclusions, take in mind many people is listening to you!
