This discussion is more suitable for a separate thread so this will be my last reply on the topic. You have to define your standards. Statistics are part of science. Not unsurprisingly all of us used the argument about the amount of studios using a particular model. Harman used statistics to reach its target.
On top of that consider this:
In the crazy world of audio discourse the norm has become to poo poo on anything that's not a flagship, side lining objectively good performing models. The DT990 is very much part of that phenomenon.
Measurements show which headphone tracks closer to the target.
My listening has told me which headphone sounds better to my ears.
That's four different standards which is enough to judge what's a better headphone.
For outliers to be valuable they need to be challenged. In other words, did Yorkshire Mouth try the DT880? If yes then we would know that it's not false data, that would be interesting. But still an outlier.
On top of that consider this:
In the crazy world of audio discourse the norm has become to poo poo on anything that's not a flagship, side lining objectively good performing models. The DT990 is very much part of that phenomenon.
Measurements show which headphone tracks closer to the target.
My listening has told me which headphone sounds better to my ears.
That's four different standards which is enough to judge what's a better headphone.
For outliers to be valuable they need to be challenged. In other words, did Yorkshire Mouth try the DT880? If yes then we would know that it's not false data, that would be interesting. But still an outlier.
Last edited: