of course, you can have your opinions, personal values or standards but if you wanna review something and guide people to spend their hard earned money on an iem, that is sometimes expensive, you have to be as objective as possible. for example i like bright signatures but should i put it higher than a neutral signature and miss guide people to choose that type of sound because i like that? no. but most people would believe what tis being told to them blindly, just because x reviewer got 50k 100k 300k subs we all think he can never be wrong. he gets the money and free iems early from manufacturer or retailers like linsoul or hifigo, he maintains his reviewing job and ad revenue by shilling or hyping the product but we lose our hard earned money as costumers. not every single reviewer is fully like that though i have to mention this.
you think the way iems or speakers sound is subjective?
here is the benchmark, the best studio monitor you can get. i post the fr measurements here for you to see. the sound signature should be flat as possible with a slight downward tilt from 20hz to 20 khz
looks great, right?
and this is a rough measuring bad speaker, see the lack of bass before 150 hz, the overly peaky non smooth response? it wont be smooth sounding, wont be neutral and wont be true to the sound.
here are a bunch of rough sounding and non ideal signatures that resebmle the speaker 2 in some ways. if you want an uncolored or neutral sound or want an objectively good sound, these arenât for you. see the recessed or bloated ear gains, rough measuring treble, muddy bass that should stop at 200hz max and lack of treble extension in some?
and here you have the âobjectivelyâ better measured iems that mimic the sound of top tier studio monitors like the speaker 1 as good as they can( they are not perfect though but they are better than most, like most still have a slight shout at 1.5k and the treble is not overly smooth but way better than the first group i posted) also they have subwoofers built in them( dd or ba woofers) and can achieve 20hz effortlessly unlike most if not all studio monitors that are caped at 30z at best without a sub of course.
its not subjective as much as you think, just like you see some iems are better tuned and some iems arenât. and its the reviewers job to point this out and save me, as a costumer to buy bad product, but this wonât be a reality because most iems suck and you should review constantly for the obvious reasons i mentioned earlier.
i wish more iems get tested on b&k 5128 because its just insane how it simulated the ear canal shape and how do we probably hear an iem irl.
Yeah, I donât know, brother. Youâre attitude and post âstyleâ is reminiscent of a Headfi type conversation where things just canât be let go of, opinions need to be not only heard but also agreed with and it can sometimes come off as a bit toxic when you keep beating a dead horse here.
I get it, you seem extremely passionate about this and I can appreciate that, but it seems like you joined this community just a few months ago and I can assure you that @VIVIDICI_111 is one of the most prominent and respected members on here, man, you definitely havenât been on here long enough to really understand who he is.
you are right, i didnât know iems can actually sound good untill a year ago. i remember 12 years ago saving up for arounda year to buy a pair of sure se215 to see what a real pair of in ears sounds like, back then i was around 11 and didnât work like today. but as soon as i tried that set, just hated it since day one and never used it since then it was muddy, recessed and unclear, lacked treble. basically a low res v shaped dull signature that i hate. after that i just spent my money on speakers or studio monitors. but last year i found that iems can actually sound " good" and comparable to speakers in tonality so i got curious and now im here.
well just tell me witch part is wrong or you disagree about what i said. i know very little and still learning like others. mind you that most of what i said was just graphs and objective data, and werenât âmy personal opinionâ to be exact. also the reviewer part is just common sense, thats how the review economy works for any product, and not only iems to be exact.
Iâm not speaking on your knowledge of Audio, I wasnât questioning your experience with IEMs. Quite frankly, I couldnât care less if youâre an audio engineer at this point. If you quoted the rest of what I said, it was clearly trying to point out that you donât know us well enough to pass judgment and if you got to know Jay, youâd know that comparing him to the other YouTube reviewers is just silly. The dude isnât getting a cut from anyone and buys a large portion of what he reviews and what he listens to.
I feel like audio can be both subjective and objective to a certain degree. A pair of IEMs can be tuned âwellâ from a graph standpoint, but how they sound to a certain individual is completely based on their ears and opinion. For example, we can all agree that the Maestro Mini has a ton of bass, objectively. But whether someone enjoys that type of tuning is, again, subjective.
Maybe Iâm just a little invested in this argument because youâre coming off as a little aggressive toward a friend of mine, but Jayâs opinion of the Diva being S tier is completely just that, an opinion. He made a video explaining at length that his specific pair had an unacceptable amount of channel imbalance, and he spent the majority of his review explaining this. Itâs his tier list. His video. If he feels as though the pair was an F due to the channel imbalance and his subsequent experience with the brand, well then he has every right to do so. But if he feels as though the pair still deserves an S-tier ranking considering how it sounds, then again, he has every right to do so. I just donât think we should all get so hung up on any tier list, review, thoughts, write-up, article, etc., etc. Thatâs all. Just like Jay said, itâs not that deep, man.
opinion? you mean taste? yeah you can like what ever you like tbh but that doesnât mean what you or i like is ideal, or objectively the best. sure you, me or anybody can have different tastes so never denied that part.
also ear canals differ slightly and every ear has slightly different hrtf due to de different canal shape, but not by alot. you can expect maximum of 4 db deviation for pinna gain or treble, but most human ears fall in the average diffuse field target. thats why i or reviewers use diffuse field on b&k 5128.
well he tagged me and i replied him my opinions, i really liked most of his content thats why i spent time to watch them despite the timer he sets evey time for his videos for us to wait and criticized some part of it. thats just it
The last thing a sound engineerâs gonna listen to when he gets home from work for musical enjoyment is a âstudio monitorââŚa monitor is a tool like a microscope is to a microbiologist, when they get off of work theyâd more likely relax looking at works of art likeâŚPicasso or a Van Gogh etc instead of analysing the properties of the paintâŚthatâs my take on the Monitor/Measurement/Enjoyment thing
not really, well measuring studio monitors or speakers should have a flat response, but well measuring studio monitors are cheaper than larger speakers( can go for more that 20k a pair) that are meant to be used more in far field situations but monitors tend to remain accurate for close settings and near field situations (0,2 meters to max 2 meters) that i personally use.
Iâm sure exactly why, but you can sometimes come off as being really condescending and I just donât understand why that is. Canât the terms opinion and taste be interchanged between one another? Iâm not sure of your intentions at this point tbh.
Regardless, Iâm going to just move along here. I see that youâre a graph and measurement kind of person which is totally fine - thatâs just not the kind of person that I am so trying to debate and go back and forth with you is going to result in getting no where.
im not a native english speaker. do americans say my opinion is rap music, or my favorite opinion is bassy type of sound? i think taste suits better here but correct my non native speakers ass anytime if i speak wrong.
but jokes aside, your taste, the way certain sound signature of genre makes you feel( like when your dopamine receptors release dopamine when you hear certain genres, or certain sound signature or favorite frequency etcâŚ) effects the overall opinions you have on a specific set, or on the way you perceive or evaluate an iem or this hobby in general.
the more joy you get from a set=the better opinion you have for it and so on.
100%âŚas long as theyâve already explained their library, tuning preferences and chain etcâŚItâs a personal thing after allâŚif theyâve got solid background reviewing sets then thisâs a good thing, a very good thing indeed
It actually is not objective at all because the words âidealâ and âbestâ are subjective based on criteria that is important to the individual. Your argument holds no weight because itâs based on an invalid concept, that there is a singular goal in our journey which is to find the most neutral IEM. Most people arenât looking for that and do not care about neutrality, not when it comes to music which is a very subjective topic. Thatâs equivalent to saying their is an ideal or best type of music. Itâs a silly statement to make.
You can make FR and THD arguments until your blue in the face. It doesnât mean that IEM will sound good to everyone. Good luck continuing your crusade
no singular goal? its literally in the name âin ear monitoringâ. you literally want a transparent, flat and untouched sound from them so they can replay the music the way it was mixed and mastered. the closer it graphs flatly, it will objectively get rated higher and this is not my opinion or my invalid concept. people spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to build a room within a room,foaming up the outer walls then inside it to treat it professionally for the most accurate and transparent sound ever.
Nope wrongâŚIEMâs were designed for use live on stage so each band member could hear what they were playing above everything else without the use of big onstage monitor speakers so helping to save their hearing
I will never understand how people can be so sensitive to the thoughts and views of someone else based on their own subjective experience. (Maybe, just maybe, become a reviewer yourself and aim for those standards you hold for others!)
Is the concept of voting with oneâs wallet non existent now? Truly, from my experience most people who drop this kinda cash on audio arenât going to keep something of this value around if itâs really this bad. I understand the concept of buyers remorse and bias and whatnot that can encourage someone to praise or keep something they might not love, but you just gotta consider thatâs not really the majority driving/deciding factor for most, and if something is really just shit, most people are going to pass it on and cut their losses. With a hyped iem like that, itâs pretty trivial for someone to put it up for sale at a bit of a discount and recover some cash from their apparent mistake (or return it if they have the option to). If you really assume everyone acts with malice you really wonât get that far in life, and you have to understand that people have different experiences, different views, and different reasons for justifying value. Just because you donât feel itâs worthwhile from looking at it on fucking paper, since it really doesnât seem like youâve heard jack shit, doesnât mean itâs not going to be worthwhile to anyone else. I donât even know @VIVIDICI_111, barely even talked to him, but I feel bad having to see him be put on blast for something this dumb. Really for me, a big sign of âthis person actually means what they say about somethingâ is them actually buying it and keeping it. Also, personally not heard the diva either, although have heard the annihilator (which I liked and thought was pretty interesting) and the X (which I thought was kinda mediocre and not worth the price), but just my take, no horse in this race.
You miss the entire point of a review then, at least within this hobby, the value of a review lies exactly within the subjective opinion youâre trying to remove. Now itâs pretty important to remove a decent level of potential bias, influence, and provide a lot of context to your reviews to ensure the person looking at it have as much context as possible, but again at the end of the day the main reason why people watch reviews is for the subjective take the reviewer has. If youâre looking for true objectivity, then go look at how something graphs on paper or whatever measurements and go off that, although making a decision if something is good or not based off that data is subjective in itself, but youâre better off doing that yourself then trying to use a reviewer for that goal. Reviews can be purely subjective, or a subjective take off of objective data (which you seem to prefer), but theyâre going to be subjective either way
Here is the benchmark, what ASR thinks is the best studio monitor you can get. If there really was a âbestâ studio monitor (or anything audio related) you could get, this discussion wouldnât even be happening in the first place, the entire market of the hobby would be different, and everyone would just own all the same shit or the cheaper alternatives of the exact same. Which clearly isnât the case.
Ha
âItâs not as subjective as you think, hereâs my subjective opinionâ
All of it, but itâs just my opinion.
Thatâs very clear
Really doesnât seem like youâre interested in taking steps to learn though
What you said were your subjective takes on graphs and objective data, which is your personal opinion
It seems as if he expects a tier list to be an entirely objective, which is entirely false, a tier list is a subjective ranking of something based on the person whoâs writing itâs opinion. You can incorporate objective data, but the moment you rank them, thatâs a subjective take.
Another small comment about studio monitors, many engineers have multiple pairs of monitors, and donât rely on a single set. Why? Some work better for different workflows, they sound different from eachother and allow for a different perspective into a mix, they have different strengths and weaknesses in what they do well from a technical perspective (not only concerning FR, imo a single set of studio monitors regardless of how well they measure is inadequate to really get closer to the full picture of how your work actually sounds), and also itâs somewhat just preference and what the person working on things knows better. Really some engineers can work magic with speakers that youâd really think arenât suitable for studio work, itâs really all down to really knowing the tools you use and understanding their strengths and weaknesses and compensating for them. And ALL audio products have strengths and weaknesses, if you go into things thinking thereâs truly a completely âtransparentâ audio product, youâve already failed.
Also, itâs really heavily dependent on the room itself, so if youâre really going to go for the measured approach, youâd need to exactly design your room for the exact speakers you use to get a flat response, and you can achieve a pretty damn flat response even with some more free field measured uneven speakers if you can work with the room and design with that in mind
Youâd really think if there was really an objectively best monitor to humans that all the top engineers and studios would be flocking toward it, all using the same thing as long as they have the budget, but thatâs just not the case
Pretty much
Seems like thatâs his plan
So does everyone, until they realize it isnât attainable. If I had a dollar for every time I heard someone say theyâve found an audio product that did that, Iâd be able to own any system Iâve ever wanted all at once lol
The only way to replay music the way it was mixed and mastered is to use the exact same system, exact same room, and have the exact same hearing and brain as the person who mixed and mastered it. Also consider, that when mixing and mastering, the goal is to make the result sound most enjoyable on the widest range of systems most of the time, and typically that means itâs really not going to sound as good as youâd think on the systems they were mixed and mastered on. If engineers strove to make their work sound the best on their own system, youâd find it to sound pretty unappealing/inappropriate on a lot of consumer systems which would go against a lot of the goals of music production
Again, flatter = better/rated higher is an opinion
A monitor can be whatever you really want it to be. A fucking crappy soundbar can be a monitor (and is sometimes used as a monitor/reference), as youâre using it to monitor how your work sounds like on a consumer soundbar. A monitor is a reference, and can have a different goal from other monitors. You can have a set of monitors that is meant to be a final test of overall fidelity, or you can have a monitor thatâs goal is to emulate the sound of something else, or just offer a unique perspective into your work that might help you out (or not). A monitor is meant to be a studio tool, but what that tool is supposed to will vary from tool to tool. Different tools for different situations
Which is the goal for a lot of people in this hobby, and itâs typically likely for someone to rate something higher if they enjoy it more. What they enjoy might be brutal accuracy and realism, some might enjoy a more colored shift, itâs really harder to know why someone likes something without asking them or really getting all the info and context behind what theyâve said. For some, the fact that something measures flatter on a graph brings them joy, hence the higher they rate it. Thatâs not the case for others. Some get joy out of a set when they think itâs the âobjective bestâ
You can continue to post measurements of various audio products you have no experience with to try and make yourself feel superior, and whatever be my guest to do so, although Iâd prefer you donât go out of your way to assume and attack/accuse someone of acting with malice in their posts with the intent to mislead without actually taking the time to think about what youâre saying beforehand. Not really doing yourself any favors
I think you broke this down in a very clean and concise way that most of us can understand, however, I truly believe thereâs just going to be another reply backing up his claims from earlier. This is a dead end argument, unfortunately. But that negative shit doesnât fly here, usually so thatâs the one positive outcome.
I know, itâs an endless argument, that was already proven many posts above lol. But hey if theyâre going to waste other peopleâs time, might as well waste theirs in the process. And Iâm already sure I can predict what the âbacking upâ will be, but really itâs just a disagreement of opinion so itâs not going to go anywhere meaningful. Donât really plan on saying more since itâs not going to be worth the time, just felt bad for people who have to read this stuff lol
Itâs important to properly show that, gotta make people whoâve overstayed their welcome realize that somehow, otherwise they continue to do so
it was muddy, recessed and unclear, lacked treble. basically a low res v shaped dull signature that i hate. after that i just spent my money on speakers or studio monitors. but last year i found that iems can actually sound " good" and comparable to speakers in tonality so i got curious and now im here.
and criticized some part of it. thats just it
.
