Thanks Amir! i would love to see this graph and filter clipping test with all new DACs
But for AudioQuest, i would say stop wasting your time with there scam products.
Thanks Amir! i would love to see this graph and filter clipping test with all new DACs
Thanks. If I remember right, all of the Audioquest products tested here were either flawed or mediocre at best, but overpriced.
I appreciate that ASR is demasking the high end market and showing that most of it is just good marketing and nice industrial design.
I don't think they make the Nighthawk any longer..With all of these poor Audioquest reviews, I wonder how their headphones would measure up. Hey @amirm , is anyone sending you a pair to test?
I cut one open to see what it looks like inside: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/inside-an-audioquest-usb-cable.19742/This makes it easy to connect to desktop and laptop computers (assuming yours has such USB connection) but needs a chunky adapter to connect to USB-C on phones and tablets. While I did not have it, a custom one comes with Cobalt which makes a secure connection.
Fun fact, from around that level and down, the Dragonfly Black actually reaches a higher output level before clipping compared to the Red and Cobalt.Performance drops much more with a 32 ohm load
AudioQuest NightOwl was the worst performing of the 30 headphones in the 'A Statistical Model that Predicts Listeners' Preference Ratings of Around-Ear and On-Ear Headphones' paper, scoring even worse than the low anchor (Meze 99 Classics):With all of these poor Audioquest reviews, I wonder how their headphones would measure up.
I disagree. We need to know which products to avoid, especially expensive ones with glowing reviews, not just the best ones.Thanks Amir! i would love to see this graph and filter clipping test with all new DACs
But for AudioQuest, i would say stop wasting your time with there scam products.
Indeed. It's a way to survive and prosper.
Add in 'Scandinavian design' and upmarket one-make retail and you have a certain Danish outfit's model that has kept them going for circa six decades despite mediocre internals for much of the time.
They don't, and I wasn't expecting Audioquest to send in a pair to review, but some folks here own them, like myself, and would like to know if anyone has offered to send them in yet.I don't think they make the Nighthawk any longer..
As are some products in the multi-$k range...Bested by the $9 Apple dongle.
Someone is going to come after you for saying that #shitehawkAudioQuest NightOwl was the worst performing of the 30 headphones in the 'A Statistical Model that Predicts Listeners' Preference Ratings of Around-Ear and On-Ear Headphones' paper, scoring even worse than the low anchor (Meze 99 Classics):
View attachment 127635High Anchor (Target): 67.2
HP13 (Sony MDR-7506): 64.0
HP7 (Oppo PM-3): 63.9
HP19 (Shure SRH1540): 63.8
HP25 (Philips Fidelio X1): 62.7
HP26 (Beyerdynamic DT 990 Pro): 62.4
HP14 (Sennheiser HD-800S): 62.0
HP1 (Audeze LCD-4): 55.0
HP8 (Sony MDR-1000X): 55.0
HP15 (JBL Everest Elite 750NC): 54.9
HP20 (Sennheiser HD-650): 54.3
HP2 (AKG N90Q): 54.2
HP27 (Focal Utopia): 54.2
HP21 (Mr. Speaker Ether Flow): 53.0
HP16 (HIFIMAN HE400S): 50.9
HP3 (AKG K712): 49.4
HP28 (Oppo PM-1): 47.5
HP9 (JBL E55BT): 46.9
HP22 (Grado Prestige Series SR325e): 43.9
HP29 (Sennheiser HD-25): 43.6
HP10 (Bose QC-35): 43.4
HP23 (Pioneer SE-Master 1): 42.7
HP4 (AKG K845BT): 38.1
HP24 (Beats Solo2 Wireless): 37.7
HP5 (AKG Y50BT): 36.2
HP6 (AKG K812): 36.1
HP11 (JBL Everest 710BT): 34.8
HP12 (JBL T450BT): 33.5
HP17 (Shure SRH840): 32.1
HP30 (Sony MDR-100ABN): 30.5
Low Anchor (Meze 99 Classics): 19.0
HP18 (AudioQuest Night Owl): 16.4
The Nighthawk also measures extremely poorly, with a predicted preference rating of 33/114.49:
View attachment 127637
https://www.dropbox.com/s/qpt8a5x26ydx5ul/Audioquest Nighthawk.pdf
I disagree. We need to know which products to avoid, especially expensive ones with glowing reviews, not just the best ones.