Hyland Headphones Adds Two New Models To Their Range Of Bespoke, Handmade High-End Headphones

[VSG]

Hyland Headphones, a boutique manufacturer of headphones based in Watford, on the outskirts of London, UK, has introduced their newest headphones: the Eclipse—the first closed-back model in the firm's line-up—and the Venus, the latest step up in the open-back range. The new headphones are the latest products of Hyland Headphones' research and development and feature the firm's widely applauded approach to building their products with care, and in small quantities, from beautiful, ethically sourced hardwoods.

The closed-back Eclipse (priced at £850) uses a complex cup design machined from separate pieces of wood in a two-step, two-day process, to give a sound quality that is the equal of their open-backed designs, but with the advantage of the passive noise cancelling that makes a closed-back design so appealing. The cup features an inner and outer chamber, with sound-absorbent damping in the outer chamber to ensure no stray reflections colour or distort the sound that reaches the listener's ear. The multi-wood design of the Eclipse also allows for additional customisation options: "...how about a creamy white Maple cup with a deep red Padauk top? Or a dark, gold flecked Panga Panga cup combined with the beautiful figuring of rippled Ash?"



The Venus (£650) is Hyland Headphones' flagship open-backed design and is tuned for a romantic listening experience, with a more coloured, V-shaped sound signature than any of Hyland's previous headphones. Both headphones feature large and luxurious sheepskin leather and memory foam pads as
standard, but the Venus also comes with a separate pair of super-comfortable hybrid pads that give the opportunity to tune both the sound (to a more neutral signature) and comfort of the headphone straight out of the box.

Both models use the same 50 mm 32ohm dynamic drivers giving great fidelity and low distortion across the frequency range. The large surface area gives them the ability to plumb the lowest depths of the hearing range with confidence, while their power handling capabilities allow for EQing that can satisfy the most ardent bass-heads without driver break-up. A smooth treble roll-off ensures a sound that is never fatiguing and yet extremely detailed, with excellent separation and imaging that is the equal of any headphones in their price class, either boutique or mass-produced.

All Hyland Headphones models also now come with handmade cables from NLovell Audio as standard and are packaged in a hand-branded wooden box and with a hand-printed protective drawstring bag. Hyland Headphones' unique, super low volume production workflow allows a fully bespoke service, with almost any and every aspect of the headphones customisable upon request: "With the launch of the Eclipse and the Venus, we can finally show you the results of more than two years of research and development. We are very proud to say that the closed back Eclipse, our first closed back model, offer a sound quality usually associated with open back headphones, while the Venus is a further evolution of the previous models that our customers learned to know and love - just with an added "romantic" touch. In keeping with our tradition, we love to work with our customers to create products that they love, allowing them to choose every part of their new headphones from the wood of the earcups to the material of the headband, from the connectors on the cable to the sound signature."

Hyland Headphones Eclipse Details:

• Price: £850
• Closed back, circumaural (around ear) design
• Sheepskin pads
• 50 mm 32ohm dynamic drivers
• Cups turned from a selection of beautiful, ethically sourced hardwoods. Please contact us to
• find out about wood availability.
• Comes as standard with NLovell Cables 1.6 m cable terminated with a 3.5 mm stereo jack + 1/4" adapter. Other lengths and terminations available on request.
• Weight: ~450 g without cable (wood dependent)
• Comes packaged in a padded wooden box hand branded with the Hyland Headphones Logo. Also includes hand-printed protective bag and certificate of authenticity
• 3 year warranty

Hyland Headphones Venus Details:

• Price: £650
• Open back, circumaural (around ear) design
• Sheepskin pads and Hybrid protein leather and velour pads
• 50 mm 32 Ω dynamic drivers
• Cups turned from a selection of beautiful, ethically sourced hardwoods. Please contact us to
• find out about wood availability.
• Comes as standard with NLovell Cables 1.6 m cable terminated with a 3.5 mm stereo jack + 1/4" adapter. Other lengths and terminations available on request.
• Weight: ~360 g without cable (wood dependent)
• Comes packaged in a padded wooden box hand branded with the Hyland Headphones Logo. Also includes hand-printed protective bag and certificate of authenticity
• 3 year warranty

View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[spnidel]

"bespoke"
per-object motion blur intensifies
59 fps? lock it to 30

 

[TheLostSwede]

The 3D printer plastic parts make these headphones look really cheap.

 

[VSG]

The 3D printer plastic parts make these headphones look really cheap.

It's one guy who does everything here, so I understand the use of 3D printing (which has been used by far larger companies) here. If it is smooth and polished, maybe it works out well as with the shells used on these: https://www.techpowerup.com/review/campfire-audio-honeydew-in-ear-monitors/

 

[TheLostSwede]

It's one guy who does everything here, so I understand the use of 3D printing (which has been used by far larger companies) here. If it is smooth and polished, maybe it works out well as with the shells used on these: https://www.techpowerup.com/review/campfire-audio-honeydew-in-ear-monitors/

Well, that was the issue, the ones in the picture, looks like something someone printer on a low-end consumer 3D printer, not what you expect on products in this price range.

 

[VSG]

Well, that was the issue, the ones in the picture, looks like something someone printer on a low-end consumer 3D printer, not what you expect on products in this price range.

Yeah I see your point, not sure if it's too late to do anything about it but I can forward feedback to the guy.

 

[ZoneDymo]

wonder how many "high end headphones" the world needs, there are SOOO many brands out there....
now if one of them could bring the price down that would be good

 

[hylandheadphones]

Hi, thanks for the feedback! It really is appreciated - once I get past the initial hit to the ego, I have found most constructive criticism to be helpful down the line, if nothing else in keeping me honest, as well as pointing to ways I may have otherwise overlooked to improve my product.

In this case, I can understand where you are coming from. However there are a couple of points to bear in mind:

a) These are not products made at scale. I usually make 1 - 2 pairs of headphones a month, with all structural parts (other than those in question) made by hand - indeed I used to hand machine the blocks from aluminium, using a screw mechanism to keep the rods in place, until the 3D printer (which I originally got just to make grills for the drivers) opened up new worlds of possibility . Now in an ideal world I would have these parts CNCd in aluminium and I did seriously look into this, however not being in a position to work at scale there is no way to make it economical. The part is more complex to machine than it looks (as it turned out), and knowing that I wasn't going to be able to produce at scale meant that even asking for help with CNC design felt like I was wasting someone's time (because, essentially, I was). I also looked into metal 3D printing but it was hideously expensive so that was immediately way out of the question.

b) It's no real excuse as regards my product as someone else's standards have nothing to do with me, but fwiw there are companies mass producing headphones that use the same injection moulded plastic parts in their $100 cans as in their $2000 cans.

c) I personally like the tactility and honest character of the 3D printed blocks. You are correct - they ARE printed using a cheap consumer printer (set up in my bedroom, on a boat, no less) - but I don't necessarily want to hide that. Let's face it, my headphones aren't an item you would be buying for their mass produced perfection - there are plenty of great sounding headphones out there that do that - but are aimed to appeal to those who appreciate the tactility and character of something handmade. I could get a cheap consumer resin printer that would give me a much better finish (not in my bedroom though, cough cough) but it would still essentially be the same thing, but with a bit less of an honest character, imo.

Now that all being said; these comments give me pause, and do make me think that I should look again at least at how I finish the blocks, it's not beyond the realms of possibility to sand off the 'rough edges' so to speak.

wonder how many "high end headphones" the world needs, there are SOOO many brands out there....
now if one of them could bring the price down that would be good

How much do you want to spend?

The point at which diminishing returns kick in is (imo) surprisingly low. A case in point: I recently had the opportunity to test a bunch of high end (and not so high end) headphones. I tried the Sennheiser HD560S (£170) back to back with the new Focal Clear MG (£1400).

Now, the Focals are some of the best made and looking headphones out there. They really look and feel like a £1400 headphone (I know - that statement can sound ludicrous to the unitiated, and depending on where you stand, really could be ludicrous. But, well, some people spend £270,000 on a watch that tells the time just the same as a £10 Casio, so everything is relative). The Sennheisers, on the other hand, are clearly built to a cost - they are lightweight and plasticky, and I found that they had a bit that stuck out and annoyingly pressed against my pinnae.

However, my first impression (and that's all I really had time for) in terms of sound quality, was that there wasn't the difference that the price would suggest - the Sennheisers did, I would say, 90% of what the Focals could do sound wise, with that 10% (if that really) going to technicalities - more extension in the low end, slightly punchier, marginally more detailed at the top end, slightly better staging. But really all pretty marginal in terms of sound quality.

 

[VSG]

Hi, thanks for the feedback! It really is appreciated - once I get past the initial hit to the ego, I have found most constructive criticism to be helpful down the line, if nothing else in keeping me honest, as well as pointing to ways I may have otherwise overlooked to improve my product.

In this case, I can understand where you are coming from. However there are a couple of points to bear in mind:

a) These are not products made at scale. I usually make 1 - 2 pairs of headphones a month, with all structural parts (other than those in question) made by hand - indeed I used to hand machine the blocks from aluminium, using a screw mechanism to keep the rods in place, until the 3D printer (which I originally got just to make grills for the drivers) opened up new worlds of possibility . Now in an ideal world I would have these parts CNCd in aluminium and I did seriously look into this, however not being in a position to work at scale there is no way to make it economical. The part is more complex to machine than it looks (as it turned out), and knowing that I wasn't going to be able to produce at scale meant that even asking for help with CNC design felt like I was wasting someone's time (because, essentially, I was). I also looked into metal 3D printing but it was hideously expensive so that was immediately way out of the question.

b) It's no real excuse as regards my product as someone else's standards have nothing to do with me, but fwiw there are companies mass producing headphones that use the same injection moulded plastic parts in their $100 cans as in their $2000 cans.

c) I personally like the tactility and honest character of the 3D printed blocks. You are correct - they ARE printed using a cheap consumer printer (set up in my bedroom, on a boat, no less) - but I don't necessarily want to hide that. Let's face it, my headphones aren't an item you would be buying for their mass produced perfection - there are plenty of great sounding headphones out there that do that - but are aimed to appeal to those who appreciate the tactility and character of something handmade. I could get a cheap consumer resin printer that would give me a much better finish (not in my bedroom though, cough cough) but it would still essentially be the same thing, but with a bit less of an honest character, imo.

Now that all being said; these comments give me pause, and do make me think that I should look again at least at how I finish the blocks, it's not beyond the realms of possibility to sand off the 'rough edges' so to speak.

Thanks for joining in and sharing your thoughts, it does help provide more context. Having a fancy resin printer here, I can say that it does result in better quality prints but I don't think it would be worth it for 1-2 pairs a month of headphones when that's not as critical a component. I would go with the sanding idea myself.

 

[TheLostSwede]

Hi, thanks for the feedback! It really is appreciated - once I get past the initial hit to the ego, I have found most constructive criticism to be helpful down the line, if nothing else in keeping me honest, as well as pointing to ways I may have otherwise overlooked to improve my product.

In this case, I can understand where you are coming from. However there are a couple of points to bear in mind:

a) These are not products made at scale. I usually make 1 - 2 pairs of headphones a month, with all structural parts (other than those in question) made by hand - indeed I used to hand machine the blocks from aluminium, using a screw mechanism to keep the rods in place, until the 3D printer (which I originally got just to make grills for the drivers) opened up new worlds of possibility . Now in an ideal world I would have these parts CNCd in aluminium and I did seriously look into this, however not being in a position to work at scale there is no way to make it economical. The part is more complex to machine than it looks (as it turned out), and knowing that I wasn't going to be able to produce at scale meant that even asking for help with CNC design felt like I was wasting someone's time (because, essentially, I was). I also looked into metal 3D printing but it was hideously expensive so that was immediately way out of the question.

b) It's no real excuse as regards my product as someone else's standards have nothing to do with me, but fwiw there are companies mass producing headphones that use the same injection moulded plastic parts in their $100 cans as in their $2000 cans.

c) I personally like the tactility and honest character of the 3D printed blocks. You are correct - they ARE printed using a cheap consumer printer (set up in my bedroom, on a boat, no less) - but I don't necessarily want to hide that. Let's face it, my headphones aren't an item you would be buying for their mass produced perfection - there are plenty of great sounding headphones out there that do that - but are aimed to appeal to those who appreciate the tactility and character of something handmade. I could get a cheap consumer resin printer that would give me a much better finish (not in my bedroom though, cough cough) but it would still essentially be the same thing, but with a bit less of an honest character, imo.

Now that all being said; these comments give me pause, and do make me think that I should look again at least at how I finish the blocks, it's not beyond the realms of possibility to sand off the 'rough edges' so to speak.


How much do you want to spend?

The point at which diminishing returns kick in is (imo) surprisingly low. A case in point: I recently had the opportunity to test a bunch of high end (and not so high end) headphones. I tried the Sennheiser HD560S (£170) back to back with the new Focal Clear MG (£1400).

Now, the Focals are some of the best made and looking headphones out there. They really look and feel like a £1400 headphone (I know - that statement can sound ludicrous to the unitiated, and depending on where you stand, really could be ludicrous. But, well, some people spend £270,000 on a watch that tells the time just the same as a £10 Casio, so everything is relative). The Sennheisers, on the other hand, are clearly built to a cost - they are lightweight and plasticky, and I found that they had a bit that stuck out and annoyingly pressed against my pinnae.

However, my first impression (and that's all I really had time for) in terms of sound quality, was that there wasn't the difference that the price would suggest - the Sennheisers did, I would say, 90% of what the Focals could do sound wise, with that 10% (if that really) going to technicalities - more extension in the low end, slightly punchier, marginally more detailed at the top end, slightly better staging. But really all pretty marginal in terms of sound quality.

The issue isn't the fact that they're 3D printed, it's the way they look considering the asking price. There are nice looking 3D printed items, but at least in the pictures above, the parts look like something that have either been printed with too low "resolution" so to say, to try and save time printing them, or having been printed using a printer that isn't capable of higher quality, or alternatively, haven't been properly finished after having been printed. Maybe it's just the picture that makes them look rougher than they are?

Plastic can look great and it can look like the cheapest possible crap. The choice of material is only part of this, as even the same material can look quite different depending on several factors like colour, the quality of the injection moulding company, or 3D printer or CNC machine, as well as finishing touches. I've been involved in quite a few product developments and had hand made mockups look better than the final production units, simply because of the limitations of injection moulding.

Even though I don't have any plans of buying your headphones, I was just surprised to see such an unpolished part when you're asking for £650+ for your products. Even though it might be printed on a consumer 3D printer, there are several ways to improve the overall finish that aren't going to cost you a fortune. Maybe that's not the look you're going for, but that would be impossible to know from reading the news post.

Anyhow, good luck with it all, it seems like a lot of work is going into making the products since each unit is made by hand.

 

[bug]

Are these identical (save for the enclosure type)? If yes, I had no idea a closed back could add this much to the cost.

Unrelated, but I went from closed to open backs about a couple of years ago. I still can't decide which I like better.

The issue isn't the fact that they're 3D printed, it's the way they look considering the asking price. There are nice looking 3D printed items, but at least in the pictures above, the parts look like something that have either been printed with too low "resolution" so to say, to try and save time printing them, or having been printed using a printer that isn't capable of higher quality, or alternatively, haven't been properly finished after having been printed. Maybe it's just the picture that makes them look rougher than they are?

Plastic can look great and it can look like the cheapest possible crap. The choice of material is only part of this, as even the same material can look quite different depending on several factors like colour, the quality of the injection moulding company, or 3D printer or CNC machine, as well as finishing touches. I've been involved in quite a few product developments and had hand made mockups look better than the final production units, simply because of the limitations of injection moulding.

Even though I don't have any plans of buying your headphones, I was just surprised to see such an unpolished part when you're asking for £650+ for your products. Even though it might be printed on a consumer 3D printer, there are several ways to improve the overall finish that aren't going to cost you a fortune. Maybe that's not the look you're going for, but that would be impossible to know from reading the news post.

Anyhow, good luck with it all, it seems like a lot of work is going into making the products since each unit is made by hand.

Lighten up, you can't see those parts with the cans on your ears

On a more serious note, my AKG cans are perfectly fine looking, yet have developed an annoying squeak when you move them (even slightly) on the head. That is something I would avoid if possible. Subpar looks, I can live with.

 

[TheLostSwede]

Lighten up, you can't see those parts with the cans on your ears

Work related damage. I always strive for perfection when making things for my clients.

 

[hylandheadphones]

Work related damage. I always strive for perfection when making things for my clients.

You see this is why, once I've gotten over the initial ego damage, I genuinely welcome criticism.

But putting stuff out there can be nerve wracking haha.

Are these identical (save for the enclosure type)? If yes, I had no idea a closed back could add this much to the cost.

Unrelated, but I went from closed to open backs about a couple of years ago. I still can't decide which I like better.


Lighten up, you can't see those parts with the cans on your ears

On a more serious note, my AKG cans are perfectly fine looking, yet have developed an annoying squeak when you move them (even slightly) on the head. That is something I would avoid if possible. Subpar looks, I can live with.

No, the cup design is a lot more involved for the closed back - it's more expensive because of a) the R&D that went into making a closed back that works well and b) the sheer pain in the arse of making each. Fwiw I prefer the sound of the open back, and they don't get as warm. But the closed get more head time for practical reasons.

 

[TheLostSwede]

You see this is why, once I've gotten over the initial ego damage, I genuinely welcome criticism.

But putting stuff out there can be nerve wracking haha.

If you ever get to the point of needing something injection moulded, let me know, I know a very good company here in Taiwan.
Doesn't make sense for a couple of units a month though.

 

[hylandheadphones]

If you ever get to the point of needing something injection moulded, let me know, I know a very good company here in Taiwan.
Doesn't make sense for a couple of units a month though.

Thank you. Definitely keeping things small for the foreseeable (I like it that way) but who knows what the future holds?

 

[Octopuss]

lol the audifascism will never die

 

[Reeves81x]

Hmmm. Exposed threads on the yoke screws. thats a problem. also will probably loosen and fall apart over time. Fine tooth screws and wood Don't go together well. A couple cheap stainless steel or aluminum sleeves to cover the threads and an inset nut on the inside of the cup would be smart. The leather looks like it was cut with cheap scissors. Build yourself a template and cut with a razor. That 3d printed plastic is rough... to say the least. They need some fine tuning in design. Not being a mean. Just stating what i see.

 

[hylandheadphones]

Hmmm. Exposed threads on the yoke screws. thats a problem. also will probably loosen and fall apart over time. Fine tooth screws and wood Don't go together well. A couple cheap stainless steel or aluminum sleeves to cover the threads and an inset nut on the inside of the cup would be smart. The leather looks like it was cut with cheap scissors. Build yourself a template and cut with a razor. That 3d printed plastic is rough... to say the least. They need some serious fine tuning in design. Not being a mean. Just stating what i see.

Over 5 years or so and over 100 pairs of headphones, no reports of problems regarding wear and tear of wood due to screws yet. And I do encourage customers to get in touch if they have any problems (an advantage of being so small) and my pairs get treated pretty roughly by and large (as I am always able to repair if necessary and want to be the first to know of any weaknesses in build) and overall they have proven quite hardy. My cable guy is also not a fan of the exposed threads so it is something I am looking into to improve.

Comments regarding details otherwise duly noted

Thank you.

 

[Tardian]

My son, who knows his headphones, sneered dismissively at these bespoke units and said that they look cheap. He wouldn't touch them with a barge pole? There is no pleasing some folk.

When pressed for specifics he (my son) doesn't like the wood.

It is too thick, he then showed me some high-end headphones as an example of what you should be aiming to emulate.

Me personally, I think the metalwork looks like you did it in a shed.

This is provided as constructive criticism.

Tardian

 

[VSG]

My son, who knows his headphones, sneered dismissively at these bespoke units and said that they look cheap. He wouldn't touch them with a barge pole? There is no pleasing some folk.

When pressed for specifics he (my son) doesn't like the wood.

It is too thick, he then showed me some high-end headphones as an example of what you should be aiming to emulate.

Me personally, I think the metalwork looks like you did it in a shed.

This is provided as constructive criticism.

Tardian

FYI ear cup material thickness for closed-back headphones is contingent on a lot of things. For example, look at the HiFiMan HE-R10 that is extremely thick and round in this regard. This allows for good soundstage with enough space inside to allow resonances while still being closed and sealed.

The metal is probably indeed made in a shed, but the actual wood thickness is not really something that is an issue based on the photos provided.

 

[Tardian]

FYI ear cup material thickness for closed-back headphones is contingent on a lot of things. For example, look at the HiFiMan HE-R10 that is extremely thick and round in this regard. This allows for good soundstage with enough space inside to allow resonances while still being closed and sealed.

The metal is probably indeed made in a shed, but the actual wood thickness is not really something that is an issue based on the photos provided.

The HiFiMan HE-R10 $5,499.00 USD looks exquisitely manufactured. However, I wouldn't be seen dead in public wearing them. They aren't cool either in looks or design:

The HiFiMAN HE-R10 are meant to be spiritual successors to the much-acclaimed Sony MDR-R10, produced between 1989 and the end of the ’90s. HiFiMAN saw that the patent for the Sony MDR-R10’s earcups had expired, so took the opportunity to launch their own twist on them: thus were born the HE-R10, which are offered in dynamic and planar variants.

HiFiMAN HE-R10P review: an odd tribute - Soundphile Review

Is it even possible to recreate a classic? They say we’re living in the most nostalgic of eras and the … More

www.soundphilereview.com

extremely thick and round ... it takes all types, but I am not on that team.

If you are chasing a good soundstage then you have open-back headphones.

Closed-back headphones tend to have:

• The bass has more meat and impact than in open-back headphones.
• Good isolation characteristics help here too, especially if you work in a noisy office.
• Users who travel a lot will find many benefits in superior isolation and additional active noise cancellation.

Source: My son

We feel if you are paying top dollar for headphones then they should be superior to:

Sennheiser HD 820 Closed-Back Headphones.

Hi-Fi

Tardian & Son

Lucky for you the other son wasn't home.

However, if money is no object then get:

Sennheiser HE 1

or better.

 

[VSG]

Unfortunately the HD820 is widely regarded as one of Sennheiser's worst headphones because it actually didn't do as marketed, which is compete favorably with the HD800(s) in sound resolution and soundstage, so that's not a very good example. I get what you are saying, just that there are different reasons to go with wood (even different materials have an impact) and associated thickness.

 

[Tardian]

Unfortunately the HD820 is widely regarded as one of Sennheiser's worst headphones because it actually didn't do as marketed, which is compete favorably with the HD800(s) in sound resolution and soundstage, so that's not a very good example. I get what you are saying, just that there are different reasons to go with wood (even different materials have an impact) and associated thickness.

By whom?

Verdict
If you must have closed-back headphones and can stretch to the HD 820s,s you won’t be disappointed. They’re comfortable and obviously engineered to last.
Most of all they’re hugely talented and rarely sound less than entertaining, almost regardless of source material. Highly recommended.
Scores

• Sound 5
• Build 5
• Comfort 5

https://www.

whathifi.com/au/reviews/sennheiser-hd-820

and

Sennheiser HD820 vs. HD800S Review
When the Sennheiser HD820 was announced, we at the store were pretty intrigued. Could Sennheiser capture the HD800S series sound in a closed-back design? Could this be the headphone that finally delivers a reference level, open back experience in a fully sealed, noise isolating design?
We can confidently say that as far as this particular aspect of the HD820 goes, this design works, and it works well. The HD820 is the most open-sounding closed headphone that we have heard, with very little of the typical enclosed sound that a closed headphone typically exhibits. In fact, when wearing the HD820 you could almost be fooled into believing you are listening to an open headphone. The HD820 delivers a wide, expansive soundstage, though it’s still not quite as wide as the HD800S.
The HD820 changes a few things about the HD800’s sound. Firstly, there is more bass, long considered an advantage with closed-back designs. The bass on the HD820 is punchier and digs deeper, though there is little bleed into the mid-bass. Sennheiser reportedly concentrated on ensuring that the increase in bass response did not come with a muddying of the mid-bass range. The result is clean and visceral, and this is something that both I and Eric appreciated immensely. The change in the bass response immediately makes it my favourite out of the HD800/800S/820 triplet, and Eric (who also owns a Sony MDR-Z1) has similar praise for the way the bass adds some fun colour to the sound.
Personally speaking, this is the only headphone in the three that I genuinely quite enjoy listening to, though I still would prefer a bit more absolute slam in the bass and sweeter, richer vocals. And to me the HD820 is more of an easy long term listen than some other closed back flagships, like the Fostex TH900 and the Sony MDR-Z1, which both have treble responses that strike me as fatiguing after a few minutes. But Eric and I both agree, the HD820 is more of a side-grade than an upgrade to the HD800S formula.
https://www.minidisc.com.au/blog/hd820vs800s.html

Should you have said IMNSHO? I know for certain my family never has had a humble opinion!

Tardian

The meek will inherit the world ... if that is OK with you?

 

[VSG]

By whom?

and

Should have said IMNSHO? I know for certain my family never has a humble opinion!

Tardian

The meek will inherit the world ... if that is OK with you?

By actual customers, including myself who promptly sold it? By actual established reviewers who did objective measurements such as Resolve, Amir, Crinacle (two samples, two different frequency responses)?Anyway this is getting out of topic now for this thread about a completely different product

 

[Tardian]

By actual customers, including myself who promptly sold it? By actual established reviewers who did objective measurements such as Resolve, Amir, Crinacle (two samples, two different frequency responses)?Anyway this is getting out of topic now for this thread about a completely different product

Really quick response. I note it does not contain my last-second edits.

I had to take the dog for a walk.