Skinner001
Active Member
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2021
- Messages
- 115
- Likes
- 232
I believe most here have been criticizing performance, it performs poorly out of the box and requires heavy EQ to make it OK (but will not fix everything and make it smooth anyways) - this combined with the price is eliciting the harsh comments.Sorry if I made you misunderstood, I might have worded my last post poorly.
What I meant more precisely in this situation is that Amir's subjective experience with this product was okay enough to voice a recommendation (with EQ). So along with the already-undisputable measurement data, that too can be taken as a point of reference instead of being completely discarded because the points I found in this thread like 1) "It's only good because of EQ" (because all headphones can benefit from EQ to certain degrees) or 2) "The price is just too much I can have X headphones for Y price and gain Z% performance of this" (this fact is already a rule of thumb because of diminishing return) and so on.
I don't vouch for badly measured products or even worse, largely overpriced ones, especially in a place like here. I believe in the cause and characteristics of this community, I just want to make a point that if people are going to criticize a product, they should criticize the correct aspects (performance of these headphones) instead of less relevant ones (gimbals, pads, looks) because one has a clear standard but the other doesn't.
If you value high fidelity then yes - measurements are the "correct" aspects. But let's be honest, we're not here only for measurements (otherwise we'd all own one pair of fairly cheap headphones, one dac/amp stack with the lowest price for the features we desire). Each one of us know what are the "correct" aspects for our own decisions. Build and comfort are basically as important to me as sound quality - it can be the best measuring headphone on Earth, but if I don't find it comfortable the measurements won't save it. Build quality is certainly an aspect I look at and the looks to less of an extent. There are a bunch of other things one might consider as well - from wanting to own something, having a variety of tech options (e.g. different driver types represented in the collection) to favouring a specific company. All of these may be "correct" or utterly unimportant - depends on the objective - and since fidelity is not the only objective there are more "correct" aspects than just measurements.
Certainly, for a lot of people here (myself included), fidelity is the primary objective so is the "most correct" aspect to look at, but still not the only one.
This headphone for me personally looks like crap, is all out of whack out of the box, it's comfortable for Amir but that's very personal so I'd have to put them on, and is priced at a ridiculous price for what it is. For me it fails on performance (miserably) and the other aspects are not up there, including my perceived value (considering aspects I value).
I also don't think "every headphone benefits from EQ" is a blank check to make any type of crap as long as it can be made bearable with the consumer doing the legwork. There is a clear difference between something that I tune at a few places, that doesn't distort, provides a smooth experience I can tune to my preferences with the least amount of problems - and this headphone. Therefore, I find the criticisms pretty fair.