If you live in a city as "spontaneous" as Calgary, you would not be surprised by how fast summer quickly turns to winter. Just a few days ago (More specifically, Halloween), I crawled out of bed being greeted with a small patch of snow. We all know the feeling, waking up praying for it to be a beautiful day, only to find the opposite. For Calgary, however, you tend to prepare for the worst before you hope for the best. Much like summer and winter, the world of audio also has two very different ends of the spectrum. No, I am not talking about good audio equipment versus bad audio equipment ordeal, but more along the lines of how audio equipment is tested. On one end, we have objectivists who rely on technical and engineering information as well as experience to test audio devices. On the other end, we have subjectivists who rely on the careful process of individual listening and time to rate a device's worth. Which method is more correct? Well, neither. But since we here at APH Networks are Canadian, we tend to think both methods are right to a certain degree, but we do certainly lean more towards the subjectivist's way of doing things. Is it because we are not comprised of sound engineers? Possibly. But I believe the main reason is, just because you can spout out information regarding the performance of a pair of earphones using the laws of physics, doesn't necessarily mean the device sounds -- for lack of a better term -- good. Today, we just may or may not have this slippery slope upon our feet. Arctic Cooling's new Arctic Sound E461-BM may look quite impressive on paper, boasting amazing performance in the linearity of the earphones frequency response, but how do they sound? Itching to hear what I heard? Well, for that, you will need to purchase the earphones.
Del med dine venner