[Maxvla]

I hear this phrase used to allow people to hide behind their previous statements when someone calls them out and they don't have the balls to stand their ground. The phrase is also used by people who don't agree with a poster and try to discredit their findings.

Audiophiles are people who, one would assume, have a trained ear, such that they can focus on sounds they want to hear, and ignore those they do not want to hear. If you do not have a trained ear and consider yourself an audiophile, how can you be sure of your own findings?

When I perform in an orchestra, I often am listening for cues from other instruments to know when to come in, or for tempo, among other things. I focus on just the sound of that instrument and hear little else so I don't miss my cue. This is exactly the step I take when listening to music. I focus on the music I hear and ignore anything else. I will assume anyone with a trained ear to be capable of this behavior. Those who saw me taking notes while listening at RMAF will tell you I was in my own zone.

Meet impressions from someone with these abilities (most of us, I would guess) should be just as valid as anyone who has owned the headphone for a brief time. Depending on how many systems each listened to, the meet listener may actually have a greater grasp on the performance than the owner who only has 1 system he listens to.

Stop this notion of meet conditions affecting your ability to separate yourself from the world to focus on the music you are hearing. Unless someone is talking in your ear, it is possible to avoid 'meet conditions'. The lone exception to this is the AKG K1000 (or anything that may be similarly designed later) because it literally is wide open in that you cannot help but hear some outside speaking/noise.

Stop hiding behind the phrase when you falter in your beliefs. Say what you mean and stand behind it. So what if someone disagrees? We all have our own preferences, that's nothing to be ashamed of. Stop using this phrase to shame a poster into faltering on their beliefs. They heard what they heard. If they say they are not a great judge of sound (which I find many people state, and is totally fine), then don't push them into discounting what they've just said.

This is a forum for people to enjoy trading opinions for or against audio gear. People should be respected for posting what they believe without fear of being pushed into obscurity.

 

[MorbidToaster]

I'm all for it not coming up to discredit someone anymore. I give just as much weight to 'meet condition' impressions as I give to full reviews. The fact of the matter is that without considering 'meet impressions' there's just not enough reviews or opinions on gear. 
 
There's only a select few here that will ever get to stay up to date and review the gear in their own home (because of their funds or their status as a trusted reviewer), but there are hundreds that might get to audition it at a meet and give their opinions. These opinions seem devalued around here sometimes (a lot) by this problem.
 
'I really liked it / disliked it!'
'You haven't really heard the gear. You were at a meet how could you possibly form a valid opinion?'
 
It happens a lot and I'm a bit peeved about it as well. I feel that if it was loud enough to impair people generally say so, but just because there was any outside noise shouldn't make their opinions null and void.

 

[Head Injury]

Unless you're listening to these headphones really loud at meets, the background noise will inevitably prevent quiet sounds in the music from being heard. And no one, no matter how trained their ears are, is immune to the social biases a meet can introduce.
 
Your K1000 comment confuses me. The K1000 is wide open with 0 dB isolation, yes, but most open headphones have an isolation of around 1-3 dB, which is negligible in a loud meet environment. What makes the K1000 so much worse?

 

[GreatDane]

Good points made. I think I have a pretty good skill of blocking out certain sounds/noises but at some point it becomes difficult. For truly critical comparisons I'd rather have dead silence in my listening room.
 
For such times...
 

 

 

[Maxvla]

Unless you're listening to these headphones really loud at meets, the background noise will inevitably prevent quiet sounds in the music from being heard. And no one, no matter how trained their ears are, is immune to the social biases a meet can introduce.

Your K1000 comment confuses me. The K1000 is wide open with 0 dB isolation, yes, but most open headphones have an isolation of around 1-3 dB, which is negligible in a loud meet environment. What makes the K1000 so much worse?

The K1000 is a special case not only because it lacks any isolation, but also because it's speaker-like presentation makes it blend with any sound present in the room making it near impossible to mentally isolate. Open cans do have significant isolation, enough to provide a barrier. Open headphones also direct their sound at you in a way that is easy to mentally isolate.

What do you mean about social biases? I don't care if Jude himself proclaims a certain product to be godly. If I don't like it I'll say so. In fact I already have regarding the SR-009. I do agree with him and others often, but I'm not a blind sheep following the pack.

 

[Head Injury]

Quote:

What do you mean about social biases? I don't care if Jude himself proclaims a certain product to be godly. If I don't like it I'll say so. In fact I already have regarding the SR-009. I do agree with him and others often, but I'm not a blind sheep following the pack.

You might not think you are, but you are. Everyone is influenced by everyone and everything else on some level. That's why so much money is spent on advertising.
 
In a room full of audiophiles "Wow"ing over the equipment they're testing, with the manufacturer of your test headphone hovering over you, with the subtle stresses of the "test" and the crowd on your shoulders, you are being influenced. There's biases in private tests in your own home after purchasing the headphone, obviously, but they're different ones.

 

[Elysian]

Quote:

Stop hiding behind the phrase when you falter in your beliefs. Say what you mean and stand behind it. So what if someone disagrees? We all have our own preferences, that's nothing to be ashamed of. Stop using this phrase to shame a poster into faltering on their beliefs. They heard what they heard. If they say they are not a great judge of sound (which I find many people state, and is totally fine), then don't push them into discounting what they've just said.

This is a forum for people to enjoy trading opinions for or against audio gear. People should be respected for posting what they believe without fear of being pushed into obscurity.

This is a good point, and I've been ruminating over a related point lately.  I've gotten pretty used to the voicing of my system after doing a lot of tweaking, and I sometimes wonder if I disqualify a component because it simply sounds different, or because I really do think it's worse.  Lately, I've been swapping in some older components, and telling myself that this is a brand new expensive component.  It works up to a point, but after testing extensively after awhile, I always end up regressing back to my most recently stabilized opinion.  The latest test was going between Foobar, JRiver Jukebox, and Cplay.  It's interesting how first opinions can change after extended listening.
 
Anyway, after listening long enough, I think people naturally create their own preferences about their favorite house sound.  There seems to be a desire, particularly among technophiles, to be able to rank things relative to one another, but it's only a useful exercise up to a point (especially for system tweakers).  It might be easier to discuss gear if we weren't so personally defensive about our favorite equipment, but also if people understood that each component is only a discrete element of an integrated system.  I've heard headphones that I'm generally ambivalent about, sound great on a solid source+amp pairing.

 

[Maxvla]

@head injury

I don't think you understand me. When at RMAF the Phonak guy was there talking to me and I flat out told him his platinum in ear model was very poor. $600 IEM. I then moments later told him how good his $100 IEM was and that I preferred it even if prices were the same.

Advertising surely does draw my interest, but it doesn't affect me when listening or buying.

 

[Head Injury]

Yes, it does. Citing one example of a time when it didn't doesn't make you immune to bias, priming, or any number of other psychological phenomena. They don't always work, but they do have an effect.

 

[Maxvla]

Not responding to this further. You don't know me and my decision making process. Let's return to the topic.

 

[cAsE sEnSiTiVe]

I go to meets to socialize and to make mental notes as to what might be on my short-list-to-audition items. But I don't put a whole lot of stock into what I hear there....both good and bad. The systems are completely unfamiliar to my ears (i.e...how do you determine which component in the chain is making...or breaking your experience?).
 
The ambient noise typically makes it impossible to listen for the proper decay into silence of notes, boundaries of the sound-stage, how the system handles micro-details of the recording....on and on and on.
 
Only if I am there to evaluate an entire system from head to tail will I actually come away with something tangible....and even still, you have the issue with ambient background noises to deal with.
 
As always, this is my point of view.
 
YMMV

 

[Blue Boat]

Quote:

Yes, it does. Citing one example of a time when it didn't doesn't make you immune to bias, priming, or any number of other psychological phenomena. They don't always work, but they do have an effect.

Ok no one's immune to bias. We get it.
 
A review may not be 100% accurate what with all the bias going on around, but it certainly doesn't make the content (the reviewer's opinions) invalid. 
 
 
 
 

 

[Head Injury]

Quote:

Ok no one's immune to bias. We get it.
 
A review may not be 100% accurate what with all the bias going on around, but it certainly doesn't make the content (the reviewer's opinions) invalid. 

I'm not saying it makes the review invalid. I'm saying that it contributes to the "meet conditions", just like ambient noise, that may lead to different conclusions than those made at home. A trained ear isn't going to prevent this, and you can't hide behind one to justify your meet conclusions.

 

[Maxvla]

I go to meets to socialize and to make mental notes as to what might be on my short-list-to-audition items. But I don't put a whole lot of stock into what I hear there....both good and bad. The systems are completely unfamiliar to my ears (i.e...how do you determine which component in the chain is making...or breaking your experience?).

The ambient noise typically makes it impossible to listen for the proper decay into silence of notes, boundaries of the sound-stage, how the system handles micro-details of the recording....on and on and on.

Only if I am there to evaluate an entire system from head to tail will I actually come away with something tangible....and even still, you have the issue with ambient background noises to deal with.

As always, this is my point of view.

YMMV

Regarding the gear I completely agree that is why I have the full chain available in the post I make or one that is accessible. While you typically can't listen to a setup with the components you want, it does give you the chance to hear what they are capable of. For instance the Boulder source Ray had at his table is unavailable to me at its price, but having heard it, I know the LCD3 is capable of being a great headphone. It would then be up to me to try to find components I can afford that could reproduce that level of performance, if possible.

Headphones are so wildly different from each other that I don't feel going to the lowest level things like decay and micro details are that important in a purchase decision. Any small quirks like that can be handled by a return policy if it is truly offensive, though as I've said before, something of that degree of dislike should be immediately noticeable.

 

[scompton]

I listen at low enough levels that the background noise at most meets effectively drowns out the music.  I've only been to a few meets that were quiet enough to do any meaningful evaluations, let alone a critical review.
 
I find your K1000 comment that the music blends with any sound present to be true for any open headphone when the music is playing a 70dB and the background sound is the same.   I actually find it pretty true for most closed headphones too since most of them don't isolate very well. 
 
However, I'm not a trained musician and I don't consider myself an audiophile either.