This is a classic argument that unfortunately is wrong. As I explained in my video, subjective reviewers are notoriously unreliable in their assessment of sound. From the peer reviewed research cited in my video:There is definitely value in subjective opinions, especially once you become familiar with a particular reviewer's tastes.
That's a pretty weak analogy, like really reaching... But, sure, as long as I make it clear that I strongly prefer green.If you like green, and that is your favorite color, would your buy a TV that tinted everything green - and then persuade people enjoying clear TV sets they have it all wrong?
What is NOT OK is for a reviewer with a straight face make assessments that have no foundation.
Before we get into measuring anything, you need to demonstrate that it is a thing in controlled listening tests. There is none for "slam," punch" or "air." There is for soundstage and that is extensively studied. By far the biggest determinant of that is in the content, not the reproduction device. I can pan a signal left and right and even the cheapest stereo speakers will present it that way. Second is frequency response as you state and that determines spatial content and not necessarily soundstage.Also, there are certain aspects of the sound that can currently only be described subjectively, like slam, punch, detail, air, soundstage width - none of which can currently be measured specifically - but may turn out to be based very closely on frequency response and distortion measurements.
Your measurements are not in dispute here. And their value is established. As I explained, I read and watch your reviews on that front.I've also supplied objective information that reveals things about the driver resonance frequency and driver damping, as well as on-head measurements that also haven't been provided here.
Not interested in your hypothesis on this front. You have no controlled test, research or anything solid to back said hypothesis. Before you get into explaining things, you need to run a controlled listening tests with more of a sample than yourself. You said you haven't done that so there is nothing there.Additionally, I've given a running hypothesis on why these types of headphones may be subjectively experienced this way by some, myself included.
You need to calm down. My subjective remarks about speakers and headphones are challenged all the time even though mine have far more of a foundation than yours. And I run this site! The standard of proof in this forum is very high. You want to play here? You need to have your best game on and provide back up, not just say you are mad.You may disagree with my opinion, you may dislike me, but that doesn't give you license to behave like a petulant child repeatedly discrediting me, slandering me, and accusing me of positions I do not hold - even going as far as to attribute words to me from articles I did not write.
Your measurements are not in dispute here. And their value is established. As I explained, I read and watch your reviews on that front.
Not interested in your hypothesis on this front. You have no controlled test, research or anything solid to back said hypothesis. Before you get into explaining things, you need to run a controlled listening tests with more of a sample than yourself. You said you haven't done that so there is nothing there.
There is for soundstage and that is extensively studied. By far the biggest determinant of that is in the content, not the reproduction device. I can pan a signal left and right and even the cheapest stereo speakers will present it that way. Second is frequency response as you state and that determines spatial content and not necessarily soundstage.
On spatial qualities, by far the determinant for that is lack of energy in the 1 to 5 kHz. In countless headphones with this issue, I am able to correct that with EQ and spatial qualities become substantially better. So the proof you are looking for is in the frequency response.
I think you drastically misunderstand the function of a first impression... Anyway, I've had enough of this stuff as you can tell. So let's just stop.
Seems reasonable to back up your claims with data. If you want to establish credibility in this forum, post a detailed review with data that backs up your impressions.
whether it is the tiniest detail or grand slams of the bass notes, it makes my jaw drop in amazement!
Please provide proof with a controlled study of multiple people for this subjective impression - that this is indeed a truthful claim about the effects this headphone had on listeners. I would genuinely be interested in seeing the results.
You see the problem here... We're quibbling over slightly different subjective experiences even though our objective results agree.
So if someone is looking to replicate your experience, which are the headphones that clearly trump the Stealth in micro / macro dynamics? And which music tracks, say on Spotify / Tidal, can best illustrate these traits? I'm sure in the coming days, more and more people will be able to do comparisons.
So I can get a better idea of how to interpret the subjective aspects of your reviews, please let us know if you believe that a power cord makes a difference in sound quality. Your answer will provide us with a basic understanding of what relevance to place on your subjective opinions.
Thanks for indulging me.
While I see your point here, I am also genuinely interested in seeing reliable data about micro- and macrodynamics qualities in audio reproduction. Really, if there is such data, I am very interested to learn about it.
And if there isn't, I would find it quite impressive if you would at least try to conduct your own rigorous scientific investigation into it. Maybe @amirm would be willing to support you with those investigations?
But first and foremost: you have to clearly define what those terms mean. If you have no clear definition about what you are investigating. The investigation is quite useless. It cannot be reproduced by others, because no-one knows what they should be looking for. Even you don't actually really know it, before you have a well established definition.
Do you wear glasses while listening (said that seal was non-issue)?Random first impressions:
- The Harman target, if implemented properly, is way less bassy than I previously expected. I would personally call bass elevated slightly, but very tastefully. Maybe the elevation is only the bump around 120 Hz, where the Stealth deviates from the target.
- 2-4 kHz is much higher than expected. I should have anticipated that, because TrueFi headphone EQ previously gave me some issues in that frequency range with other headphones. The question is whether my hearing is extra sensitive here or I am simply not used to correct levels in this range.
- Sound insulation is okay both ways, but people nearby will still hear faint music in an otherwise quiet room. Still beats hearing faint music in the next room, as with open headphones.
- Fit is comfortable, but weirdly loose. Seal seems to be not an issue at all, however.
- Thermal insulation seems comparable to the Ether 2 (maybe even better), which is open, but not exactly airy.
- Whether I like the sound of it highly depends on 2-4 kHz content right now.
- The box has been packed for shipping with great care. Love the attention to detail.
- It has the same characteristic smell like other DCA headphones.
- Non-zero macrodynamics.
Broken seal measurements and multi-position measurements should probably be a part of every review, for completeness's sake