|Originally posted by pigmode
True, and yet maybe not so true. kwkarth, crack open your Creek and compare it to what's in the Grado. Now compare prices. Whataya think???
Well, now you've put me on the spot!
Comparing the quantity and quality of parts and circuit design, I honestly feel the Creek represents easily 20 times the value of the RA-1.
Comparing the sound, I can't because I haven't heard the RA-1 personally.
Frankly, the only thing that appeals to me about the RA-1 is its battery operable portability, but on that score, I think I would rather have a good JMT from what I've read. I actually built a battery supply for my OBH-11SE, and it works ok. It doesn't sound as good as the OBH-2 PS at home, but that's sort of understandable.
The other thing that appeals to me about the Creek is its versatility with a wide array of headphones.
The RA-1 happens
to work well with some other cans, but it was designed for the Grados, period.
The Creek works very well with everything I've thrown at it.
Anyway, you asked, and now I've told. Oh Well.
Honestly, I think the deal is that Grado did as little as they felt they could get away with and traded on their name.
The Creek's design and construction shows a love for the art and science of audio reproduction and music.
There's an analogy that comes to mind.
The Grado is like a cheap timex quartz watch and the Creek, like a Breitling Aerospace, both sold for the same price.
They're both modern quartz time pieces, they both keep fairly good time, and no one can argue with their ability to keep good time, but one reflects abject pragmatism and thrift in manufacture while the other reflects a love for the watchmaker's art and the medium.