• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

HiFiMan HE-R10P Stealth Headphone Review

Rate this headphone:

  • 1. Poor (headless panther)

    Votes: 266 97.8%
  • 2. Not terrible (postman panther)

    Votes: 3 1.1%
  • 3. Fine (happy panther)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 4. Great (golfing panther)

    Votes: 3 1.1%

  • Total voters
    272
First, low move against the user @solderdude. Very distasteful from your part and just egregious/ridiculous. I won't comment any more about that.

Second, Edition XS is not even on the top 100 of distortion at Rtings.


You can get much less distortion for much less money.

That the Hifiman oval cups models are poorly designed has been shown again and again in this forum. All the models with that design have issues with resonances and distortion.

Of course, enjoy transients, separation, resolution, soundstage and so on in your own terms. I have nothing against your subjective evaluation. I just want for headphones to reproduce what it is in the music. If I want resonances and effects I can play with DSPs as much as I want.

Cheers.
Wow. I think you're being a bit harsh and reactionary. Again, I am not trying to start a flame war. Your initial criticism of Edition XS was based solely off of one test review of one sample by one tester with a commercial interest, albeit as a side hustle. I'm sure he's a good dude, but any reviewers with commercial interest deserve the context of disclosure. That is a key element of data analysis, and it's a good thing. That does not mean his data are invalid or there is intent to bias the data. It means the potential exists for his analysis to be interpreted through a different lens than than someone without a commercial interest. If this forum truly values science, then it's members should be comfortable with this discussion. Otherwise, it is just the same good-ol-boys club as every other forum where the only valid input is from longtime users. I understand your instinct to defend a friend, but I'm not exactly criticizing him. You're not exactly making this a welcoming place.
 
You did read what I wrote about the Edition X I reckon (my emphasis)



To give you an idea ... I only sold 2 Edition XS filters and sell those filters with just a very small fee for the hour of work I put in ...
You see... EQ costs nothing that is some stiff competition. :)
I do this for fun and to help people out... my income comes from my day job (thank God, otherwise I would be homeless)
If I had to live of these filters I would have to charge several hundred per filter and certainly would not post the schematics for free.
I am sorry everyone feels I've attacked you for pointing out that you have a commercial interest. For the third time, my intent is not to discredit your work because of that. It is simply to provide context. It does not mean your tests are invalid. But, as someone who has an extensive background in research, I would no include the data of your tests because of the possibility of (or even the perception of) bias, and I certainly wouldn't use only one test to discredit a product. That is how science and research works. I think it's important to have these discussions, even if they create some discomfort. You sound like a good dude.
 
You did read what I wrote about the Edition X I reckon (my emphasis)



To give you an idea ... I only sold 2 Edition XS filters and sell those filters with just a very small fee for the hour of work I put in ...
You see... EQ costs nothing that is some stiff competition. :)
I do this for fun and to help people out... my income comes from my day job (thank God, otherwise I would be homeless)
If I had to live of these filters I would have to charge several hundred per filter and certainly would not post the schematics for free.
To clarify further before everyone jumps on my back again, I did not mean that you were discrediting the product based on one test. I was referring to our fellow David Foster Wallace enthusiast.
 
Perhaps my mistake was assuming that most people on this site would have a working knowledge of research and the scientific method. Truly, there is no snark intended by that comment, as we all come from different backgrounds. To clarify, from a scientific perspective, one test is data, not science. Science is the careful analysis and reproduction of reliable data to draw inferences. If conducting a scientific analysis of a product, I would immediately exclude data from a tester with a commercial interest, no matter how large or small that interest is. That doesn't mean the data from that test is worthless--it simply means it is less likely to be objective than fully impartial analysis Part of the scientific method is the ability to constructively criticize, debate, and analyze data. I believe that's what I did. If that is not welcome on this site, then please let me know.
 
Yep... agreed.
Fortunately I have run over thousands of tests with 150+ headphones in the last 10 years and 40 years+ experience in audio electronics design/service/measurements and know the shortcomings and strong points of HATS as well as my DIY test fixture which is designed to operate in frequency bands where HATS fail.

When criticizing measurements and talking the scientific high road it pays to point out what exactly is incorrect.
By your thesis every single measurement by anyone is unscientific. Even when that would be done on an industry standard fixture simply because of..
Ears differing from industry standard fixtures.
Just a single trace taken in 1 position or an average of a few sweeps.
Seal, headphone placement, calibration reports product variances ... etc.
 
Yep... agreed.
Fortunately I have run over thousands of tests with 150+ headphones in the last 10 years and 40 years+ experience in audio electronics design/service/measurements and know the shortcomings and strong points of HATS as well as my DIY test fixture which is designed to operate in frequency bands where HATS fail.

When criticizing measurements and talking the scientific high road it pays to point out what exactly is incorrect.
By your thesis every single measurement by anyone is unscientific. Even when that would be done on an industry standard fixture simply because of..
Ears differing from industry standard fixtures.
Just a single trace taken in 1 position or an average of a few sweeps.
Seal, headphone placement, calibration reports product variances ... etc.
It is true in the context that audio tests are inherently flawed because they can't fully reflect differences in human anatomy and hearing, but that doesn't mean the tests are unscientific. Again, science can help us determine a baseline from which to draw inferences, it rarely reaches universal, firm conclusions. Gravity is still a theory, after all
 
Yep... and that does not invalidate my methods nor findings nor possible solutions nor those of others as there is no single 'correct' measurement fixture and single correct 'squigly' nor single correct EQ no matter on what science it is based.
Industry standards just make it easier to compare measurements of others using the same standard (fixture setup) when using the same targets/compensations.

If there is anything in audio that is inaccurate to start with it is headphone measurements. Even more so than speakers (when measured anechoicly or using Klippel).

There are other threads than this one where you might feel more at home.

As this thread is about the HE-R10P perhaps keep the comments about this headphone.
A possible analog and totally based on science type of solution for the biggest audible concern of this headphone is given in post 178.
If someone wants it built they know where to find me... I promise I won't get rich of it ... unilike hifiman :)
I am pretty sure I will sell 0 (zero) filters for this model.
 
Please point out where I suggest your method of testing is invalid. You will come up empty because that was not my criticism. My criticism is that your analysis of the data placed strong emphasis on the treble response, which at least suggests problematic objectivity, perhaps unwittingly, since you have an interest in designs and products to filter treble response. It is simply cannot be treated with the same weight as a fully objective test--fairly or otherwise--and that's OK. That's why researchers carefully review data

Again, apologies to all for my misunderstanding about this forum, as I assumed that it was largely populated by researchers and academics given its name. What is viewed as constructive criticism in an academic or controlled research environment is often viewed harshly by those not used to it. Researchers have weirdly thick skins--you have to to defend a study or a PhD (I spent a full 45 minutes on a presentation once simply defending the use of secondary data analysis for one small part of a study). This appears to be a forum for technicians and enthusiasts, and that's OK. But if that's the case, it should probably go by a different name, such as "Audio Testing Forum." I see little evidence of science or scientific review being tolerated, nor would it be by people unaccustomed to it. No snark intended--i simply misunderstood the audience here and will delete my profile.
Yep... and that does not invalidate my methods nor findings nor possible solutions nor those of others as there is no single 'correct' measurement fixture and single correct 'squigly' nor single correct EQ no matter on what science it is based.
Industry standards just make it easier to compare measurements of others using the same standard (fixture setup) when using the same targets/compensations.

If there is anything in audio that is inaccurate to start with it is headphone measurements. Even more so than speakers (when measured anechoicly or using Klippel).

There are other threads than this one where you might feel more at home.

As this thread is about the HE-R10P perhaps keep the comments about this headphone.
A possible analog and totally based on science type of solution for the biggest audible concern of this headphone is given in post 178.
If someone wants it built they know where to find me... I promise I won't get rich of it ... unilike hifiman :)
I am pretty sure I will sell 0 (zero) filters for this model.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Please point out where I suggest your method of testing is invalid. You will come up empty because that was not my criticism. My criticism is that your analysis of the data placed strong emphasis on the treble response, which at least suggests problematic objectivity, perhaps unwittingly. It is simply cannot be treated with the same weight as a fully objective test, and that's OK. But it's not science.

Again, apologies to all for my misunderstanding about this forum, as I assumed that it was largely populated by researchers and academics given its name. What is viewed as constructive criticism in an academic or controlled research environment is often viewed harshly by those not used to it. Researchers have weirdly thick skins--you have to to defend a study or a PhD (I spent a full 45 minutes on a presentation once simply defending the use of secondary data analysis for one small part of a study). This appears to be a forum for technicians and enthusiasts, and that's OK. But if that's the case, it should probably go by a different name, such as "Audio Testing Forum." I see little evidence of science or scientific review being tolerated, nor would it be by people unaccustomed to it. No snark intended--i simply misunderstood the audience here and will delete my profile.

One member wrote in Solderdude's defence and Solderdude defended himself. Now you blame the whole forum and keep ranting... You should really take your advice and grow some thicker skin...it's the internet, after all.
 
This appears to be a forum for technicians and enthusiasts, and that's OK
Yep.
Engineers keep the world turning and create/build practical solutions.
About 99% (estimation) of the readers are enthusiasts. There will be some scientists here too but most will not be in audio (there are a few real audio scientists a member here).
This appears to be a forum for technicians and enthusiasts, and that's OK. But if that's the case, it should probably go by a different name, such as "Audio Testing Forum." I see little evidence of science or scientific review being tolerated, nor would it be by people unaccustomed to it.

You're not the first and have a point. The name is there. 'Audio' is what the forum is about (electronics, transducers, music, engineering, acoustics), Measurements is the 'science' part and certain audio equipment is 'reviewed'.

ASR is not about reviewing (audio) science, if that were the case it could have been named RAS (Reviewing Audio Science).
People come hear to read about audio equipment and want to see independent measurements in a comparable way.

My criticism is that your analysis of the data placed strong emphasis on the treble response, which at least suggests problematic objectivity, perhaps unwittingly, since you have an interest in designs and products to filter treble response. It is simply cannot be treated with the same weight as a fully objective test--fairly or otherwise--and that's OK.
The most problematic area in headphones is bass and treble response. Because of the limited capabilities of the 'official industry standard test fixtures' that specific area (treble 8kHz-20kHz) is not reported. 'Sharpness' is a known issue in many headphones and those sensitive to that are generally happy that it is underlined.
Many (if not most) headphones have some sharpness and is not 'seen' on the usual plots. Not all people are bothered by it and some even prefer it (fake detail).
For those that are bothered by it solutions like EQ, modifications or other ways are available.
They just are not in the spotlight by most other reviewers because when it does not show up on industry standard measurements it isn't there.
Also if someone does not hear that it does not mean it isn't there, that listener simply does not hear it that way for whatever reason.

To get back on the HE-R10P and given the measurements I suspect there is also a (not well reported) sharpness present in this headphone. I won't know till I hear it (know what to look for) or measure it (unlikely). Given the track record of hifiman and Amir's measurements I can only assume there will be some sharpness.
 
Last edited:
One member wrote in Solderdude's defence and Solderdude defended himself. Now you blame the whole forum and keep ranting... You should really take your advice and grow some thicker skin...it's the internet, after all.
I openly acknowledged that I misunderstood the audience of the forum based on the name. How more clear can I be here: I wasn't attacking Solderdude personally, and I accept full responsibility for this sidetracked thread due to MY misunderstanding of the forum's membership. I don't think less of the forum because it isn't composed of researchers, I simply didn't understand the audience. Take it down a notch, and learn to accept an apology/clarification. The world is a nicer place when you don't assume the worst in people.
 
I openly acknowledged that I misunderstood the audience of the forum based on the name. How more clear can I be here: I wasn't attacking Solderdude personally, and I accept full responsibility for this sidetracked thread due to MY misunderstanding of the forum's membership.
Saying that measurements by @solderdude cannot be trusted because of a potential financial interest is a personal attack as I understand it. Especially by someone just having joined the forum against one of the most trusted and respected members from the very begin of ASR.
I don't think less of the forum because it isn't composed of researchers, I simply didn't understand the audience. Take it down a notch, and learn to accept an apology/clarification. The world is a nicer place when you don't assume the worst in people.
THIS.
 
Saying that measurements by @solderdude cannot be trusted because of a potential financial interest is a personal attack as I understand it. Especially by someone just having joined the forum against one of the most trusted and respected members from the very begin of ASR.

THIS.
I get the instinct of the herd is to protect, but please take it down a notch. I did not know that the person who did the review is a forum member, let alone one held in high regard. But, importantly, I never said he could not be trusted. Not even close. You are putting words into my mouth to justify what you perceive is an attack against a friend, which, again I understand. A newcomer is not going to know who is off limits for critical analysis (although, nobody should be).

But look at it from my perspective. I thought this was a forum populated by researchers and scientists, and it is actually a sign of respect in that group when someone offers criticism of our research. It means that they're analyzing it critically. I now know it's a place for audiophiles, which is great, but not what I thought. The name of the site gave me a false impression, and I am in the wrong for the misunderstanding. I also now know that
This site is fiercely tribal, and that can make for an unwelcoming environment for newbies and an environment that is hostile to traditional science and critical review, which appears to be the namesake of the site. I know you'll disagree and argue I'm the problem, but I encourage you to at least consider my point of view as I'm trying to consider yours.


For the record, this is what I said about Solderdude, "I'm sure he's a good dude, but any reviewers with commercial interest deserve the context of disclosure. That is a key element of data analysis, and it's a good thing. That does not mean his data are invalid or there is intent to bias the data. It means the potential exists for his analysis to be interpreted through a different lens than than someone without a commercial interest."

If you and your buddies truly read through this thread, actually try to understand the context, and still wanna accuse me of a personal attack, then I'm worried about society

I know I'm wordy, which some mistake as defensive. I'm not--I'm just wordy. I have asked Amir to delete my account. I do hope he takes the time to read this thread to see what this newbie's experience has been.
 
Saying that measurements by @solderdude cannot be trusted because of a potential financial interest is a personal attack as I understand it. Especially by someone just having joined the forum against one of the most trusted and respected members from the very begin of ASR.

THIS.

He raised the concern that was put to rest....IMO that's all fine. But this weird thing about ASR's membership and the wrong audience makes no sense. I mean, either he stands by his point or he doesn't. What has the membership background got to do with it??. Then he receives a little bit of pushback and leaves.
 
I found the mere suggestion that my observations (wishful thinking because of measurements) were 'skewed' because of financial gain (selling of filters) was not really in order.
I understand the thinking though as the admiral never heard that on either of his hifiman. Not strange because most people perceive it as 'highly detailed' and not un-natural and it usually cannot be seen on other measurements as it is right at or near the frequency band where industry standard fixtures dip.
That dip, however, can be at a different frequency for some people and they are bothered by it (I am) but others are not. (real science says so)
My plots and findings simply did not match his experience so that makes it suspect.

The financial gain bit is hilarious. I heard the issue with many headphones and decided to measure it and do something about it and share the knowledge for free.
Those who want a filter and cannot make one I can make them for them. As it is at most one or 2 per month it really is not for financial gain. Most people just use EQ or buy another model. Or, in most cases a simple modification is enough. Not making money on those.

In fact this whole 'business' is costing me more than I get out of it... I don't mind... hobbies cost money.
 
He raised the concern that was put to rest....IMO that's all fine. But this weird thing about ASR's membership and the wrong audience makes no sense. I mean, either he stands by his point or he doesn't. What has the membership background got to do with it??. Then he receives a little bit of pushback and leaves.
I came here because I thought I was joining a forum for scientists. Now that I know it's a different audience, I am going to leave the forum because I am looking for a different audience. What else is there to understand?

I'm honestly sticking with this thread until Amir deletes me because it's interesting to see how my posts are being interpreted.
 
I'm not sure why there is an obsession about the much or little money you make, as that's beside the point. It is rational from a scientific perspective to weigh data collected for commercial purposes differently than objectively collected data. I hope you do well and enjoy what you do. Truly. I'm sure your methodology is sound, but any data with a potential commercial conflict should be given less weight that data that's undergone more rigor. A forum member presented your single test as a conclusive argument, and I simply pointed out how one test is not a conclusion. I know this comes across as pretentious here, but I'm not sure how many people are really familiar with the scientific process, so maybe it's useful to some brave chap willing to view it in the spirit in which it's intended rather than assuming the worst and blindly protecting a beloved forum member.
 
I'm curious... do you get involved in many flame wars?
What has been your contribution to the discussion, other than singlehandedly kicking up the drama? You're the first to accuse me of attacking Solderboy when that's clearly not the intent.
 
What has been your contribution to the discussion, other than singlehandedly kicking up the drama? You're the first to accuse me of attacking Solderboy when that's clearly not the intent.
I suspect that the answer is "Yes".

Do check the data - I've not accused you of anything. :)
 
Back
Top Bottom