Shills and softies

Most people have more or less said what I wanted to say on the first page already. This thread also grew faster than I expected it to so:

I will briefly mention that if anyone reads any of my reviews/opinions/streams of consciousness, you will notice I try to point out details that I both like and dislike, at any price level. 1) There is no such thing as perfect gear for every situation and every person. Just let me know the +/- and I'll decide if it's worth trying or not 2) When reviews sound like the below picture, I feel like I just wasted my time.


For everything else, originally wanted to say more, but:
I can understand both lack of commentary as it's own bad review vs SBAF needs to have more bad reviews that are explicitly bad reviews. Also, sometimes I don't want to say anything about a particular piece of gear. A day later I will want to say something (meaningful - I don't want SBAF to be "just" a more raunchy HF) for same gear as this contributes to the overall knowledge pool of SBAF (which in turn makes it a better resource/place).

IMO pricing is another discussion for another day as it's not directly related to shilling or quality of SBAF posts.

 

Couldn't have said it better myself and this is exactly what I'm on about.

@jexby don't be a dick, no one is calling out ZMF. This is about us as a community being honest and resisting jumping on the band wagon, or am I hitting to close to home? When a thread is 95% positive anyone who will buy gear based on those impressions especially the less experienced will have a really hard time publicly saying their impressions don't match the general consensus.

I loved the Eikon, the mids are to die for when amped properly but I'm surprised no one mentions how bad the low end is actually, bloated and rolled off especially when AB'ing with the Verite and that's OK. Have a look at purrin's HD650J review, a bit on the harsh side but true to the core of how it sounds.

I don't know when exactly it happened but more and more I get the impression we went from I love this headphone despite... and you can include HD650 woolly rolled off bass, HD800 screechy treble, LCD-3 softness,mount beyer etc. to universally praising recent headphones and I know the newer stuff is not that much better than what we had 10 years ago.

Biases do and will always exits but I wanted to raise awareness especially among newer member when auditioning gear, do your best to be critical without bashing, be honest with yourself and trust your gut instinct over the establish opinion.

P.S. pricing has nothing to do with it, that's a separate discussion only after the overall character of gear is agreed upon nasty bits included.

 

@ChaChaRealSmooth Nothing wrong being "too nice". It is easier to be an asshole and hide it behind honesty. I similarly the rule of if you have nothing nice to say, don't say anything all at.

But that has nothing to do with a proper critique because the intention is to give feedback. Which when put too harshly, some people get butt hurt because they/owners can take it personally. And when you have dislike mechanic, it can make one wary. There are two products that have legendary status on this forum that I believe are overrated but don't have the guts to say anything negative about them. But overall I have found on the surface the SBAF is a pretty honest forum with a little bit of bias and some prima donnas. Under the surface though, members when not on the stage are willing to give their honest opinion (positive or negative).

I believe there is room for bashing a product if it strictly objective and does not become personal. But it can happen when you spend your hard earned cash on something that you find disappointing. I can easily understand how this can happen with ZMF products. For $1.5k, a misinformed person could expect the resolution of the HD800s and have some sort of audio enlightenment. They should be expecting the ZMF sound in some sexy handcrafted wood cups. And I will gladly admit that I have come to love the ZMF house sound and overlook the inherit flaws of being on the warmer side. I will sadly say the sound is definitely a sub $1000 sound, though.

As alluded to above, I think pricing does have significant impact on ones impression because there is an obvious expectation in quality. I think it should when objectively reviewing a headphone. If you objectively review the HD660s and the HD58X without considering price the HD660s clearly beats the HD58X. But when you consider it is $500 vs $150, what are those flaws worth? And this is where ZMF can get hit. ZMF is a modern reproduced 67 Camero but as expected it can be out performed by a Kia Optima. I still want the 67 Camero and know what I am getting into. I think most SBAF members know what they are getting into with ZMF and are more gentler with the criticism.

As I stated earlier, ZMF is a boutique brand and it is not trying to hide it (quite the opposite). You are paying for the house sound with its inherit flaws and fantastic craftsmanship. Its boutiqueness (yep its a fake word) is relatively affordable and uninformed people can be jumping into a 67 Camero and expecting a Porsche.

TL;DR: ZMF is working on a closed Verite.

 

Absolutely to the point. ZMF is definitely deserves every praise and we are ready to continue to support it by buying their headphones and spreading the word around. But IMO there shouldn't be any double standards while reviewing a product. It's a disservice to the community and, in the long run, a disservice to the company.

Just my 2cents

 

Just be happy that many price tiers are improving in sound quality, in the realm of this hobby. Even thou the HD800 isn't my cup of tea, I super respect that the quality can be had new for around the "by today's standard" reasonable $1k.

Don't get butt hurt over TOTL stuff being out of reach, when you can hug your HD6... whatever and have a very positive listening experience. Just let that shit go...

I say let shit go. Let the rich people have 1st Class. The more they pay, the more affordable my coach seat can be.

edit - all hail the likes of Tyll and Merv for drawing attention to a more analytical approach to this hobby. Their pioneer spirit is why all this stuff flourishes... just a reminder... that is all...

 

Zach, please continue doing what you do. Your products are brimmed with your passion. I think you're a benchmark what a small boutique shop should be like.

To me, intention is worth more than the action itself. You're an American-based company with American costs. Just for example, I give more credit to a product priced at $2,000 (with $1,000 cost), than a product priced at $1,000 (with $200 cost).

As you said, your house sound is a colored one. I got friends who love it and I got friends who really just don't get it. I belong to the 1st camp. Also, I got friends who don't give a rat's ass about build quality and look. I don't think it is fair. Those exotic wood costs money, and they look fantastic. If people buy your products only because of sound, then they are missing something.

Edit: I have my eyes on the Auteur. It is my favorite ZMF. Just gotta save more...

 

No butthurt to be had here. Perfectly content with my setup with only mild curiosity about other stuff. This is more of an observation from a distance. If people are content to spend thousands on headphones, that's their business.

 

The definition of shill is not reserved solely for those that seek monetary gain. It applies to anything, however small, that leads to a lack of impartiality or even the most trivial of deceits.

If you go easy on something, change the rules, or hide absolutely anything because you want someone or something to succeed or benefit, or because you were asked, even if it is for the greater good, you are with the best of intentions a shill.

This takes place on SBAF.

I’ve guarded against it when contributing, encountered an innocent situation that crossed the line, and have publicly called it out. But the world is not always black and white, and there will be much we are not privy to. So consider this for a moment. If you had a choice of SBAF existing as it is knowing this, or SBAF ceasing to exist entirely, which would you choose?

Personally, I’m a pragmatist, and feel fortunate that SBAF allows me and any other member the luxury to put idealism before pragmatism, even if SBAF does not always do so itself. None of this is to say that we shouldn’t strive for improved impartiality.

 

@m17xr2b point at the start of this thread has great validity. It´s kind of a wake up call, which is needed once and again. It is almost always just like that: we slowly get mechanical and soften down our alertness. I love Georges I Gurdjieffs´ teachings about the need of conscious shocks, if we want to stay on course.

Half of the following posts, especially the ones dealing with money and value are really cathartic stuff which has nothing to do with the thread´s original aim and intended purpose.

Why bother what other people or companies do? You yourself can decide what feels right to buy for how much according to your finances, priorities, values and ethics. Is that not enough? No need to go on a ranting mission imo.

And yes, me too, I like what Zach from ZMF has achieved and I happily congratulate him for that.
In a more and more impersonal world with big companies and mass production, here is someone who passionately makes good products and I can see the face of the maker when I hold my Auteur. There is only one Auteur like the one I own with its own unique woodwork. I like small brands like that and I am often willing to pay a somewhat premium price for this as it corresponds with how I like the world to be. It fits with my values (which have been thoroughly scrutinized over the years), and I try to live according to these values more and more.

I will post my impressions about Verite and comparisons with Auteur (Verite loaner from @Taverius in the house at the moment) some time soon. Yes they are great and no, they are not perfect. I´ve never been overly fond of Eikon and Atticus. And by the way, I don´t like the HD6XX at all, and find it hard to believe that so many people can forgive its flaws... same for HD800...

 

There have been times where SBAF has been a promoter of good stuff or a force for good, over being an impartial resource. At the same time many carry the flag of impartiality as best they can.

So I have another question for you all that lives in the grey. What if you were faced with a situation where a dedication to impartiality and honesty could lead to the end of a good manufacturer, or the success of a bad one, leaving us all worse off with fewer more expensive options in the long term?

Is it more important to be an impartial contributor where integrity is paramount, or a positive force over and above all else?

If it’s the latter can you be sure you’ll always get it right, and won’t make things worse? Are you comfortable taking destiny into your own hands, and posing as someone impartial rather than just being a volunteer marketeer? If it’s the former then what does it matter if there’s no accountability to an ethics body and everyone benefits long term, SBAF would still be the most credible resource available?

I get the latter viewpoint. But it is a slippery slope full of landmines, very likely short sighted, and not one I personally hold.

 

Depends. Does Thanos get the time stone?

 

I got lost: which view is "the latter viewpoint"?

My personal view is that trying to do good by picking winners and losers is a fool's errand. Indeed, doing this lies at the core of how TAS, Stereophile, and that vast audiophile industrial review complex got to where they are at today, and why they are so irrelevant to their readers actual needs and interests.

Please indulge a non-member while he gets this out of his system:

f**k audiophiledom, f**k "supporting good companies", audio savants, and men with reputations, and introverted "you just have to get it" inner circle culture over and above the truth of fill_in_the_blank....ok, I feel better

 

-

A scary prospect if accurate, and a foreboding example of where playing god can take you.

 

You're saying this as if it's a black and white thing. For the most part, the answer is going to be "it depends".

There are companies being run by outright assholes. There are companies being run by some of the best human beings I've met. And then there are people with personality flaws - a bit too greedy, a bit too eager to take offense, unsubstantiated criticism at competitors' products. Do you want to treat the product that is flawed because of outsized ambition and the product that is flawed because of blatant corner cutting in the same way?

Now, I won't rain on anyone's product because they're a dick in person. But if I have the liberty to do so - and these days I pretty much only review something if I appreciate both the product and the company - I'm going to be a bit more forgiving about flaws if the guy on the end talks to me, if only because that means that he's going to listen to customer feedback and is more likely to actually fix the issues.

If that's picking winners and losers, so be it. People should be rewarded for being good human beings. I do agree in the very limited sense that a lot of established review sources have lost virtually all credibility by showering everything they receive with praise. On the reader's part they receive zero information distinguishing one offering from another.

 

I don't think @m17xr2b was being malicious calling out ZMF. He certainly didn't mention anyone specific unless I missed that. I think he used ZMF as the most recent example to illustrate his point, which makes sense to me. Not to single out the company and shame them somehow... because ZMF can't control how people review their product.

 

Because the moment you cross that line you lose all credibility. Ultimately no one gives a damn about what you think about anything other than the product itself, when talking about the product itself.

Even if that were okay there are too many ways for that to go wrong. What if you judge things incorrectly, and they’re really an asshole, or just deceitful. Or the other way around, they were having a bad day or had some bad news and were a bit of a dick, then missed an email. Or swap positions and the person making that judgement is an asshole and doesn’t know it, and receives a cold reception. Or a million other scenarios related to business and manufacturing you may or may not be aware of.

By all means if you have a good or bad experience you should communicate that to others. If you think something was overely ambitious or cut corners you make a note of it, and state whether that is an opinion based on fact or not. If you instead corrupt your opinion in other areas then you have commited a breach of trust. You’ve now misrepresented your true feelings and misinformed others. They will now make a poorer purchasing decision, that they could lose a lot on. You’re better off having said nothing

Doing any of these things while presenting oneself as impartial is a lie. By intention or not you now have a hidden agenda, and have made yourself a shill, or someone with an axe to grind.

Very much agreed. Anyone coming in late to this thread or having only skimmed it please take note. None of this is directed at ZMF specifically.

 

About Eikons. It is important to point out that they are closed back and not many(if any) closed cans beat these in their game. They really do have superb mids and strangely natural sound, especially for closed cans. Violins sounded great with these.

 

Nobody is impartial. You can't be impartial and talk about audio characteristics because personal experience is always going to be at play. If you think that you can just detach that and talk about audio, or photography, or even reviewing a phone or laptop, you're just kidding yourself.

I don't think that most reviewers pretend that they are an impartial source of information. When people say they are unbiased - the context is that they are not being paid specifically to promote the product - and hence the objectivity relative to their other reviews and impressions is intact. I agree that nobody is perfect - and therefore any single piece of review information should be discounted. And no, I wouldn't mistake someone who's had a bad day with an actually terrible and irresponsible person. Fortunately, most of those companies seem to die out reasonably quickly.

People will always have an axe to grind. The question is whether their sensibilities and vantage point agrees with yours, and whether you can trust their judgement on the next piece of gear that they review.