Tier lists help

[RangerAudio]

Hi, I'm more of a Headphone guy. I need some help. I'm looking for reviewers that have published review lists. Can anyone point me to anyone that is not on this list. The goal of this is not to say what is better or worst, just opinions and a resource for people who want them. Anyone got any to share to add to the list? (Part of a big project of mine)


Got a list that I can add to the review? Hit me up, and we’ll do it. AMPS, Headphones, iems, whatever is welcome. Hit me up.


Tier lists

Joe N Tells Speakers

Crinacle Head phones and iems

Resolve Headphones

Super reviews iems

DMS Headphones

Soundnews (ratins on site)

Precog iem list

Antdroid IEM Ranking List

Technie Top 5 (gaming headsets)

Hobby talk iem list

Timmy Gizaudio iem list

Bad Guy Good Audio Reviews iem list

Audio science review master list of reviewed product (not a tier list but resource)

Jaakkoppasanen from Github

 

[GaryH]

AutoEq/results/RANKING.md at master · jaakkopasanen/AutoEq

Automatic headphone equalization from frequency responses - jaakkopasanen/AutoEq

github.com

 

[RangerAudio]

AutoEq/results/RANKING.md at master · jaakkopasanen/AutoEq

Automatic headphone equalization from frequency responses - jaakkopasanen/AutoEq

github.com

Thanks GaryH. It's awesome.

 

[GaryH]

Thanks GaryH. It's awesome.

Unlike reviewer tier lists, it's not influenced by subconscious (and conscious) sighted cognitive biases, as it's determined by Dr Sean Olive's algorithm based on Harman's scientifically controlled, double-blind listening tests of multiple users.

 

[RangerAudio]

Unlike reviewer tier lists, it's not influenced by subconscious (and conscious) sighted cognitive biases, as it depends on an algorithm based on scientifically controlled, double-blind listening tests of multiple users.

Yeah it is a very strong list. Definitely the most grounded in Science in my opinion. Thanks again!

 

[dweeeeb2]

AutoEq/results/RANKING.md at master · jaakkopasanen/AutoEq

Automatic headphone equalization from frequency responses - jaakkopasanen/AutoEq

github.com

Wow, thanks, never seen this. I have the Sennheiser HD560S and the HiFiMan Edition XS. To me the HiFiMan's are far superior, especially in the bass. Yet 560S gets a score of 92, XS get 87.....

 

[poxymoron]

Soundnews is mostly subjective nonsense.

 

[Blorg]

Unlike reviewer tier lists, it's not influenced by subconscious (and conscious) sighted cognitive biases, as it's determined by Dr Sean Olive's algorithm based on Harman's scientifically controlled, double-blind listening tests of multiple users.

It's also quite different from Olive's own numbers, and other third parties publishing Harman scores, like Oratory1990. They mesh in the very broad sense but only the very broad, that generally well tuned stuff is towards the top, generally poorly tuned stuff is low.

Samsung Galaxy Buds Pro, Sean Olive gives them 88.42, Jakko's list has them at 81, Oratory 73. This is a pretty big range.

Particularly of note there is Jakko is using Oratory's measurement to calculate 81, while Oratory gets 73 from the same measurement. Possibly this relates to which frequency you use to normalize it to the target? I don't know, if anyone knows why they are different, I'd be interested. But it's an indication of just how much subjectivity is in this ranking, if you can get 81 or 73 from the exact same measurement.

You can put far too much weight on the accuracy of this, it gives you a very broad idea of conformity to Harman, it's no use in very detailed assessments like @dweeeeb2 's comparison of the Sennheiser HD560S and the Hifiman Edition XS, 92 and 87 is a toss-up even on tonality, this is far closer than even the same headphone from the same measurement with different people doing the score calculation.

Amir's own assessment of the very top headphone on that list, not recommended:

It pains me to not recommend a headphone that hits the magical tonality curve but here we are. I want the headphone experience to do things that even good speakers can't. And we simply are not there with Mark Levinson No 5909 headphone.

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...mark-levinson-no-5909-headphone-review.35292/

It's a useful resource as a starting point, I just wouldn't read into it the idea it's some absolute objective truth, there is a lot of room for fudging with it.

 

[GaryH]

Samsung Galaxy Buds Pro, Sean Olive gives them 88.42

Some of those measurements he posts on Twitter were taken with the acoustic coupler + artificial ear, which can produce different results than coupler-only measurements, the algorithm being based on the latter. This is likely true in this case.

But it's an indication of just how much subjectivity is in this ranking, if you can get 81 or 73 from the exact same measurement.

There's no subjectivity. Just likely an error/delay in the digitization by Jaakko of Oratory's measurements (some of which are periodically updated with multiple units measured). I'd take the latter as primary, so when you see any headphone(s) on the ranking list you're thinking of buying, it's a good idea to just quickly double-check the score on Oratory's pdf list. They're mostly pretty close.

It's a useful resource as a starting point, I just wouldn't read into it the idea it's some absolute objective truth, there is a lot of room for fudging with it.

I never said it was absolute objective truth. It's a probabilistic ranking of likely blinded sound preference to the majority. There's no 'fudging', unlike reviewer tier lists which can definitely be subject to such, as well as innumerable subconscious sighted biases as I've said.

 

[Pancreas]

Sennheiser hd560 being up in the top of the list is pure cringe lmao

 

[Andysu]

if only the martian chronicles can make speaker called , tier with 0dB freq flat and smooth and then Peq Q bandwidth filters can used equally on each speaker to lower harshness within the high sensitivity range of ear canal resonate



otherwise speakers headphones are all equally uneven