[DarginMahkum]

Atriums? Gee. Surprisingly the tone of the Atrium and Stealth is very close vs any other headphone. But other than that, Stealth excels on every other factor in my demo.

Wow, it lacks a lot in lower treble:

 

[ThanatosVI]

brutal

What a useless review

 

[801evan]

Wow, it lacks a lot in lower treble:

That's kinda why ppl like it...it masks signal chain issues. It's forgiving in that regard but also just as well sensitive to signal chain quality on the lower end.

 

[Arniesb]

brutal

Isnt this same guy who worked for Abyss? Headphones that measure horribly?

 

[MikePio]

Here is another review for those interested.

 

[801evan]

Here is another review for those interested.

Man he should really fix his chain if hugo 2 is on 'white' and he's not even confident on the Diablo based on a guess.

 

[plumpudding2]

brutal

Well I appreciate the fact that he kept stating that others may love it but it just wasn't for him, instead of outright bashing it like a more sensationalist clickbait reviewer might have done.
I was very much surprised that he found it lacking in detail, separation and imaging though, I don't think I have heard anyone else rate the Stealth/Expanse poorly on these qualities.

 

[VandyMan]

Well I appreciate the fact that he kept stating that others may love it but it just wasn't for him, instead of outright bashing it like a more sensationalist clickbait reviewer might have done.
I was very much surprised that he found it lacking in detail, separation and imaging though, I don't think I have heard anyone else rate the Stealth/Expanse poorly on these qualities.

I actually thought that came across as weasley. If you are a professional reviewer and you hear a headphone as congested, stand behind that. If every reviewer takes the point of view that their individual hearing is so personal and subjective as to not apply to others, what is the point of reviews?

 

[theveterans]

I actually thought that came across as weasley. If you are a professional reviewer and you hear a headphone as congested, stand behind that. If every reviewer takes the point of view that their individual hearing is so personal and subjective as to not apply to others, what is the point of reviews?

The associated gears that the reviewer used in evaluation 100% matters. That’s why reviewers like Currawong always point out which gears he used to describe them (and for every other headphones as well)

 

[Chronos]

Well I appreciate the fact that he kept stating that others may love it but it just wasn't for him, instead of outright bashing it like a more sensationalist clickbait reviewer might have done.
I was very much surprised that he found it lacking in detail, separation and imaging though, I don't think I have heard anyone else rate the Stealth/Expanse poorly on these qualities.

He acknowledges a good tube amp makes them sing, yet he concludes his review with these impressions. I don’t get how you come to these conclusions without recognizing they were underpowered in his review.

 

[SolarCetacean]

I actually thought that came across as weasley. If you are a professional reviewer and you hear a headphone as congested, stand behind that. If every reviewer takes the point of view that their individual hearing is so personal and subjective as to not apply to others, what is the point of reviews?

I like DMS' approach to this. Because it's true that everyone will hear a headphone slightly differently due to ear geometry, and beyond that, different people place different weight on different aspects of sound. There is no guarantee that 2 people listening to the same headphone off of the same chain will come to the same conclusion regarding that headphone. Therefore, I would go even further and say that it is dishonest for any reviewer to speak of their impression as authoritative and absolutely true.

My thinking is that the point of a review is to put one person's perspective on a product out there for others to consider. It should be one data point among many. The consumer should find which reviewers have the most similar perspectives to themselves, and thus weight those reviews more when considering that product. Especially if a reviewer has a large audience, they should recognize that not everyone will hear the same things that they do out of a headphone. Also, the Headphone Show is targeting a less audiophile audience than Head-Fi, and the content is meant for an audience that might not be as familiar with the nuances and subjectivity of audio reviews. In audio reviews, every statement about a headphone has an implicit "in my experience/opinion/view" prefixing it, which newer audience members might not recognize yet. The "you might hear differently" line is a reminder of 3 things: that alternative opinions and views will exist, that the viewer/reader might hold that opinion rather than the one of the reviewer, and that no one review or reviewer should be taken as "gospel-truth" in the world of audio.

 

[Chronos]

I like DMS' approach to this. Because it's true that everyone will hear a headphone slightly differently due to ear geometry, and beyond that, different people place different weight on different aspects of sound. There is no guarantee that 2 people listening to the same headphone off of the same chain will come to the same conclusion regarding that headphone. Therefore, I would go even further and say that it is dishonest for any reviewer to speak of their impression as authoritative and absolutely true.

My thinking is that the point of a review is to put one person's perspective on a product out there for others to consider. It should be one data point among many. The consumer should find which reviewers have the most similar perspectives to themselves, and thus weight those reviews more when considering that product. Especially if a reviewer has a large audience, they should recognize that not everyone will hear the same things that they do out of a headphone. Also, the Headphone Show is targeting a less audiophile audience than Head-Fi, and the content is meant for an audience that might not be as familiar with the nuances and subjectivity of audio reviews. In audio reviews, every statement about a headphone has an implicit "in my experience/opinion/view" prefixing it, which newer audience members might not recognize yet. The "you might hear differently" line is a reminder of 3 things: that alternative opinions and views will exist, that the viewer/reader might hold that opinion rather than the one of the reviewer, and that no one review or reviewer should be taken as "gospel-truth" in the world of audio.

I think this applies in general to all reviews for any product. This is what we call a "Cover your behind" statement in many fields. I think in this case, the reviewer knows he is targeting the audiophile audience considering the price for a TOTL DCA headphone.

Lets not forget, controversy gets social media attention.

 

[ra990]

I was very much surprised that he found it lacking in detail, separation and imaging though, I don't think I have heard anyone else rate the Stealth/Expanse poorly on these qualities.

There's a few of us that just aren't hearing what the majority is. Probably has something to do with our heads or ears. If you look back, there's a few posts from me and others that agree with DMS's findings. Nothing wrong with that...I definitely prefer the Stealth, especially for it's 3d stage and instrument separation qualities. The Expanse's mid-bass hump is just too much for some of us and I think it is detracting from all those spatial qualities that are more upper treble focused.

Dan stated himself that about 25% of people would prefer the Stealth and the other 75% the Expanse...I think he was probably pretty close with that estimate.

 

[Resolve]

I just wanted to address the questions around source equipment. DMS made sure to try this headphone off of a wide variety of source equipment that includes the following:

• A90
• Singxer SA1
• FiiO K9 pro
• iFi iCan Pro
• Element 3
• Broadway S
• L50
• Matrix Element M
• Sanyo P55 (power amp)
• Darkvoice
• TA26
• McIntosh MHA200
• Moon 430HA

That's of course also in addition to the ampsandsound amps like Nautilus he got to hear it from at CanJam, which he mentioned in the video.

Now, I won't wade too deeply into this topic here, but there's a common trend for folks to scrutinize source chains when confronted with any less than glowing review of a high end product - often because it's the only way for them to square something they like with the opinion of someone else who is less enthusiastic about it. "It MUST be the headphone is underpowered, or the source is wrong"... I think the simpler answer is rather that what works for some may not work for others.

Not only do we look for different things in audio, but we each have a unique coupling and head-related transfer function that's much more likely to explain differences of opinion on a given headphone. This one wasn't for DMS as he prefers the tuning style of the Noire, but that doesn't mean it's not great for someone else. After all, these adhere closely to a target that's been proven to be enjoyed by many.

 

[paradoxper]

brutal

Quite critical. And a terrible review.

He could have provided direct referential (source, amp, headphone) comparisons to illuminate how Expanse is deficient.

Even if you disagree, you'd better understand the context.