About the "technical performance"? As if there is any objective way to define what they are actually talking about.
Headfi and Headphone measure the phones they test, too, even if they don't publish complete set of measurments.
My questions and reserves are on the presentation of the Harman curve as an objective measure of intrinsec quality, which is untrue : it's a measure of statistic preference. In his paper published above in this thread, Sean Olive himself, who is one of the promoter of the Harman curve, doesn't rule out this protocol could present some cultural and generational biases.
I'm not the only one who questions the universality of the Harman curve as a supposed benchmark for tonal quality of headphones. Many testers, sound professionals and music lovers have the same questions. As a sum up ( a liitle too general as everysum up) , I would say Harman curve is quite OK for people who listen primalerly to rock/pop/hip hop and "artificially" recorded music (no prejudice or dismissing towards these musical genres, I like them and I was even involved in an mateur rock band in my teenage), but for people who listen mainly to classical or acoustical musics (which is my case now), I'm not sure Harman curve is the right and only way to follow.
Maybe the effect of a bias between Old Europe one side and America and young people in general on the other side ?
We listen with our brain, our culture, our inherated tastes and preferences, not thru unquestionnable tonality curves. This is an objective and scientific fact too.
As for the other objective and unquestionnable measurements, the Truthear is definitely superb for low distorsion and average but fine enough for sensibility.
It's without a doubt a good cheap IEM, but not so universal nor so neutral. Amir has gone a little too far in his enthusiam for this model.
What else can I say ?