Headphone reviewers that you trust

[Gurkerl]

I don't want to get too philosophical on this one but some people may actually PREFER distortion. Dunno if you've ever played guitar, but I have for many years and some of the sounds you can get by experimenting (obviously this is a far more extreme case) but just, even mild, warmer 'fun' sounds and sure as heck none of it is in any way a 'clean representation/amplification' of the original guitar signal lol

YES extreme example but, I mean also tube amps right? I have heard NEITHER of the amps you mention but just throwing this out there. The most pristine representation of source material is not ALWAYS the most preferred. So while you can not deny measurments and cables are ofc nonsense you can have preference for a certain sound signature or EQ or whatever.

I'm NO expert just throwing this out there.

Sure distortion can be pleasant to some, but I don't get how he can call the A90 straight up bad/empty/hollow/weak, when his only basis for that argument is he and other subjective reviewers he trusts experienced it the same way. Just going by the manufacturer's specs, I don't think the Rebel Amp introduces enough distortion to be audible (though some of the more technical knowledgable members may have to educate me about that), so I believe there isn't even an audible difference between them - provided the Rebel Amp doesn't run out of juice.
I'm just disappointed because he is so curious about what makes certain headphones sound different, how do these differences show up in measurements, how much do we know about measurements, how much do the measurements really show, etc... yet seemingly can't be bothered to show the same curiosity towards amps and dacs to investigate how/if/when they make a difference, but rather chooses to give in to all the audiophile beliefs and how one supposedly hears a difference.

 

[jensgk]

RTINGS is my first choice. They are in my opinion very focused on measurements, they are also very consistent and systematic in their methods. They try to quantify all their subjective impressions, and revise their methods when they find it necessary.

 

[Ron Texas]

Measurements are king. This is the best place.

 

[Hotwetrat]

Sure distortion can be pleasant to some, but I don't get how he can call the A90 straight up bad/empty/hollow/weak, when his only basis for that argument is he and other subjective reviewers he trusts experienced it the same way. Just going by the manufacturer's specs, I don't think the Rebel Amp introduces enough distortion to be audible (though some of the more technical knowledgable members may have to educate me about that), so I believe there isn't even an audible difference between them - provided the Rebel Amp doesn't run out of juice.
I'm just disappointed because he is so curious about what makes certain headphones sound different, how do these differences show up in measurements, how much do we know about measurements, how much do the measurements really show, etc... yet seemingly can't be bothered to show the same curiosity towards amps and dacs to investigate how/if/when they make a difference, but rather chooses to give in to all the audiophile beliefs and how one supposedly hears a difference.

Completely reasonable. I mean I've never heard of him but yeah to call such a proven AMP 'bad' is... really odd ?

 

[thewas]

The lcd-x and lcd-2/3s were highly regarded there but it was one of my most disappointing purchases ever, and the review here proves it. I also liked the sony z1r's that they hated. These are of course just my subjective opinions. I'm sure the z1r won't be accepted well here either.
I've never been disappointed by yolo purchases recommended by amir though.

Surely Tyll wasn't infallible like no human is (that's why I also had written "usually" in my above post), but from the reviews of the commercial press of the past he stood out positively being measurement based and also calling something poor out what it was, which is still unfortunately very rare:

His good sense of humour also was a bonus point.

 

[3kweave]

I appreciate the way that Amir does his headphone reviews in that he presents objective data but he also talks about what he thinks of how the headphone sounds and build quality. Take for example the Focal Celestee. I would think that since it tracks the Harman target pretty well that it would score well.

Per Amir's Review:
"This was a tough review to write and originally was supposed to come out yesterday. But I waited a bit and had my son test it as well. I thought based on measurements that the sound would be more pleasing than it was. Neither, he, nor I thought much of the tonality without EQ. With EQ, you can rescue it but it is still nothing to rave behind. At least I couldn't. Most of the time the problems with headphones are more obvious than here. So this conclusion is not without some reservations."

The other advantage that Amir's reviews have is that there is no apparent conflict of interest. He doesn't advertise or sell any of the stuff he is reviewing. That alone gives his reviews much more cred than people who are selling headphones or want to stay in the good graces of some online store or headphone manufacturer.

 

[Objectivist01]

Ideally. In my case not all headphones I'm interested in are avaliable to demo locally, and return policies for online orders are prohibitive.

Must be india

 

[Jimbob54]

I appreciate the way that Amir does his headphone reviews in that he presents objective data but he also talks about what he thinks of how the headphone sounds and build quality. Take for example the Focal Celestee. I would think that since it tracks the Harman target pretty well that it would score well.

Per Amir's Review:
"This was a tough review to write and originally was supposed to come out yesterday. But I waited a bit and had my son test it as well. I thought based on measurements that the sound would be more pleasing than it was. Neither, he, nor I thought much of the tonality without EQ. With EQ, you can rescue it but it is still nothing to rave behind. At least I couldn't. Most of the time the problems with headphones are more obvious than here. So this conclusion is not without some reservations."

The other advantage that Amir's reviews have is that there is no apparent conflict of interest. He doesn't advertise or sell any of the stuff he is reviewing. That alone gives his reviews much more cred than people who are selling headphones or want to stay in the good graces of some online store or headphone manufacturer.

Interesting point and the Celeste review here is, to me, a good illustration of a couple of key points.

1. We are not at the point where one can look at a limited set of measurements and accurately predict how that will translate to a/the user experience (more than just simple FR deficiencies of course). So simply eyeballing the FR and buying/ discounting a pair isnt recommended

2. There should always be scope in any reviews for a degree of subjective experience (with transducers especially, less sol electronics) , especially where the individual has no vested interest in the product. But we need to understand the reviewers preferences / pet hates etc to put those comments in context.

I like Amir's approach but actually wish he would expand on the subjective elements sometimes. At times I get the impression he actually likes some cans more than his comments and panther rating might lead one to conclude. The pre and post EQ panthers help in this regard.

 

[Hotwetrat]

I like Amir's approach but actually wish sometimes he would expand on the subjective elements sometimes. At times I get the impression he actually likes some cans more than his comments and panther rating might lead one to conclude.

I agree but I think the issue here, can then become one of finding a reviewer who shares your similar tastes - which can be quite some time and trial and error!

 

[robertozappala]

Solderdude

 

[hawk01]

With high expectation I listened to the lcd 2 and boy they suck seriously. Tonality is something from an alien planet. Bass was good though

hmm just for clarification would this be the LCD-2C classic?? been keeping an eye on this one. getting mixed feedback which is generally so-so out of the box, decent with EQ.

 

[HereYaGo]

Become a reviewer. Trust is for people who have to rely on other people to tell them what to think and have "faith" that its accurate. Even if you listen to them you still don't even know if you have good audio quality. Hilarious. Learn what they have to offer then think for yourself. I don't watch reviewers anymore.

 

[KeithPhantom]

hmm just for clarification would this be the LCD-2C classic?? been keeping an eye on this one. getting mixed feedback which is generally so-so out of the box, decent with EQ.

All of them are messed up. Even the Fazor version (has more of the midrange/treble it is missing) is lacking in comparison to the targets. They have good distortion numbers though.

 

[renaudrenaud]

Mainly Solderdude.
Amir, with some distance.
Oluv, more or less.
Rtings maybe.

I really recognise my feelings reading Solderdude.

 

[Sharur]

Beyerdynamic DT880 which are still the best open backs I've heard.

The DT880 600 Ω is the best headphone ever made so no surprise there

 

[Jimbob54]

The DT880 600 Ω is the best headphone ever made so no surprise there

Care to elaborate a little? I've not tried them but give me the elevator pitch.

 

[Sharur]

Care to elaborate a little? I've not tried them but give me the elevator pitch.

Take this with a grain of salt as I am a major DT880 600 Ω enthusiast.

When custom matched to 1000 kHz on Oratory's website, the DT880 is extremely close to the diffuse field target. The 6 kHz peak is less prominent on the DT880 600 Ω, but the 8-9 kHz peak is greater, which according to the diffuse field, is supposed to be there. Some people complain that these headphones have no bass, but I disagree. I've extensively compared the headphones between a 220 Ω output impedance amp and a low output impedance amp. The 220 Ω output impedance amp significantly increases the mid-bass, adding a "boominess" to the headphone. While I do not necessarily dislike this sound signature, it interferes with midrange and vocal clarity, which is why I use a low output impedance amp. Doing so, I am left with articulate mid-bass that never bleeds into the mids and treble, realistic soundstage, and clarity like there is no tomorrow.

Granted, I have not tried thousands of headphones. Other "audiophile" headphones I have tried are the HD 6XX and ER4XR. I originally got the 6XX because of the extreme praise it gets, but was not satisfied with the sound. Without knowing what frequency response actually meant, I purchased the ER4XR because they were glorified for their supreme accuracy. I still enjoy the ER4XR for what it is, but they are extremely uncomfortable, lack soundstage, treble clarity, and sound like a single blur in complex songs. After asking around for a similar sound signature in a pair of full-sized headphones and getting mixed results, I learned to read frequency response graphs. This made the DT880 600 Ω seem like exactly what I wanted. I got them, and surprise, they sounded exactly how I wanted.

Obviously, the DT880 600 Ω is not the best headphone in the world for everyone, which is why I said to take what I'm saying with a grain of salt. But to me, there is no beating them.

250:

600:

 

[markanini]

Take this with a grain of salt as I am a major DT880 600 Ω enthusiast.

When custom matched to 1000 kHz on Oratory's website, the DT880 is extremely close to the diffuse field target. The 6 kHz peak is less prominent on the DT880 600 Ω, but the 8-9 kHz peak is greater, which according to the diffuse field, is supposed to be there. Some people complain that these headphones have no bass, but I disagree. I've extensively compared the headphones between a 220 Ω output impedance amp and a low output impedance amp. The 220 Ω output impedance amp significantly increases the mid-bass, adding a "boominess" to the headphone. While I do not necessarily dislike this sound signature, it interferes with midrange and vocal clarity, which is why I use a low output impedance amp. Doing so, I am left with articulate mid-bass that never bleeds into the mids and treble, realistic soundstage, and clarity like there is no tomorrow.

Granted, I have not tried thousands of headphones. Other "audiophile" headphones I have tried are the HD 6XX and ER4XR. I originally got the 6XX because of the extreme praise it gets, but was not satisfied with the sound. Without knowing what frequency response actually meant, I purchased the ER4XR because they were glorified for their supreme accuracy. I still enjoy the ER4XR for what it is, but they are extremely uncomfortable, lack soundstage, treble clarity, and sound like a single blur in complex songs. After asking around for a similar sound signature in a pair of full-sized headphones and getting mixed results, I learned to read frequency response graphs. This made the DT880 600 Ω seem like exactly what I wanted. I got them, and surprise, they sounded exactly how I wanted.

Obviously, the DT880 600 Ω is not the best headphone in the world for everyone, which is why I said to take what I'm saying with a grain of salt. But to me, there is no beating them.
View attachment 131186
View attachment 131185

250:
View attachment 131190

600:
View attachment 131188

Actually it tracks Harman perfectly between 200Hz and 4kHz. The 6kHz peak is in the measurements, but you don't react to it when it's on your head, the treble sounds coherent, very crankable. AKG K612 has better spatial effects, but the DT880 has a special tonality, female vocals make the hairs on your arms stand up.

 

[Sharur]

Actually it tracks Harman perfectly between 200Hz and 4kHz. The 6kHz peak is in the measurements, but you don't react to it when it's on your head, the treble sounds coherent, very crankable. AKG K612 has better spatial effects, but the DT880 has a special tonality, female vocals make the hairs on your arms stand up.

It's interesting because the harman target wasn't a thing when the DT880 was made. Beyerdynamic understood what the perfect midrange response was then

 

[JohnYang1997]

I like Resolve's headphone reviews quite a lot as well, but I have to zone out whenever he starts talking about Amplifiers & Dacs. How can he be so spot on when talking about cables (like how much of the supposed difference comes from our brain thinking cables make a difference, thus experiencing said difference), yet throw that completely out of the window when talking about amplifiers. He repeatedly mentions in his livestreams how the Rebel Amp sounds way better than the Topping A90, or how the Topping A90 sounds straight up bad. How can a demonstrably transparent amp sound bad?

As far as other reviewers go: Solderdude, Amir, Crinacle - because there is a basis to their evaluation you can fall back on.
And to be completely honest, I enjoy Zeos quite a bit. I don't put a lot of stock in his evaluation of sound, but he talks a lot about build quality, fit, comfort, usability... the little things that one only finds out after extensive use of the product at hand. Plus his ramblings are hilarious sometimes.

I used to watch Zeos. But it's a big big mistake to take any feedback from him. He's incredibly inconsistent in his preferences and can change view even in the same video. He probably only cares about making through the video in one take than what he actually said.