Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › LEAK: SHURE SRH240, SRH440, and SRH840 headphones (and pricing) likely to be announced tomorrow! (And mini-review of SRH840.)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

LEAK: SHURE SRH240, SRH440, and SRH840 headphones (and pricing) likely to be announced tomorrow!... - Page 9

post #121 of 431
Ha! I've been doing research on closed headphones for purchase and was about done. Now I think I may wait to hear some opinions on these/listen to them
post #122 of 431
DO WANT! I'm anxious to see the pricing for these babies and hear what they're capable of.
post #123 of 431
Velour pads would be awesome.
post #124 of 431
I can't wait to hear how these sound. I was strongly considering some D2ks, but I think I'll hold out to see how these turn out.
post #125 of 431
I'm already sold on design.

DAMMIT, why can't these come faster!!
post #126 of 431
Quote:
Originally Posted by analogbox View Post
It would be lovely to have velour pads as an alternative but I wonder if it would tip up the bass a bit more than necessary.
Then we want leather
post #127 of 431
Sounds impressive for the price. The more competition the better for all of us. If these sound as good as the testers say they do then these will sell very well. Which in tern will make other companies drop the prices to try to complete. Hopefully brands like Etymotic, Nu Force can jump in also.
post #128 of 431
Quote:
Originally Posted by odigg View Post
Does it really matter? My guess is that every, and I do mean every, manufacturer purchases some part of their headphone from somebody else. It may simply be a screw, washer, or even cable, but probably every manufacturer does it.

And why not? If a company that specializes in something (like Fostex and drivers) can manufacturer a part faster, with better tolerances, to a higher quality, with better durability, for a cheaper price, why wouldn't companies take advantage of that by outsourcing their parts supply?

Most electronics products nowadays contain parts from many different manufacturers. It's just too expensive, and maybe even inefficient, for one company to invest in all the equipment and staff to produce every part of a product they sell.

As long as the Shures sound good, are built well, and last a long time, that's all that should matter.
I would argue that mdb2884 does have a point questioning the driver used in the new Shures. Yes, outsourcing is part of our daily life and we accept it without question. That being said, I think we should examine the rationale behind such outsourcing. If outsourcing is to reduce cost on non-core resources/activities, then it's fine. But if its signals weakness in critical value chain areas, such as product R&D, then it's a red flag.

Allow me to use a few examples. Think about the value chain in sports shoes. The design (R&D, aethetics) and sales marketing are where value lies. Manufacturing is not a high value adding step. So a company such as Nike designs and markets its shoes but makes it in low cost countries. That's a successful model.

Now think about automobile engines. They are a high value adding step in the value chain. In many ways, an engine differentiates a car. Honda made a name for itself in large part due to its engines. So when GM decided to use Honda engines in some GM (I think it's Cadillac) cars, then it's a signal that Honda engines are better than GM's or we can even infer that GM is lacking in engine R&D. A similar case can be made for mechanic watches. Watch makers such as Patek Philippe and Jaeger LeCoultre make their own movements. (Jaeger also sells them to others). In contrast, manufacturers such as Cartier, Montblanc buy their movements. Again, because watch movements are a major source of differentiation and value creation, those who make their own are generally regarded more prestigeous.

Getting back to the Shure headphones, I would think drivers are critically important to a headphone. If the drivers are designed and made by others, then Shure's technological advantage is probably questionable and my willingness to pay for them is also diminished. Of course, I hope Shure is pushing the envelope here. By doing so, it is creating value and then it can rightfully capture some of it.
post #129 of 431
Quote:
Originally Posted by elitiste View Post
Getting back to the Shure headphones, I would think drivers are critically important to a headphone. If the drivers are designed and made by others, then Shure's technological advantage is probably questionable and my willingness to pay for them is also diminished. Of course, I hope Shure is pushing the envelope here. By doing so, it is creating value and then it can rightfully capture some of it.
Your logic almost works...but consider this case:
what if Honda makes an excellent engine, but GM thinks that Honda's body design is whack? Designing a new engine for a car that is not even marketed for its power and such is questionable, and could be a waste of time. Just buy someone else's design, produce your own everything else, and you are set. You can even optimize the design of the engine a bit for your product.

Similarly, that scenario can be easily imaginable with headphones (think how much sound can be changed as the dampening of the driver is altered). Stax SR-404 and 4070 use the same driver, but don't sound much alike - and would you wrong someone for buying the 404 driver and making a completely different headphone out of it? Then why frown upon Shure?
post #130 of 431
Quote:
Originally Posted by elitiste View Post
Allow me to use a few examples. Think about the value chain in sports shoes. The design (R&D, aethetics) and sales marketing are where value lies. Manufacturing is not a high value adding step. So a company such as Nike designs and markets its shoes but makes it in low cost countries. That's a successful model.
It takes more than slave labor to make a headphone driver

Also (and this is a little ot, I know), manufacturing is a high value step in terms of brand value. That's why Nike is so tacky now.
post #131 of 431
Quote:
Originally Posted by rds View Post
It takes more than slave labor to make a headphone driver

Also (and this is a little ot, I know), manufacturing is a high value step in terms of brand value. That's why Nike is so tacky now.
No it doesn't. Computer manufacturers employ random people all the time, and I'm sure soldering requires much more handiwork than winding a driver.

Same with indians who polish diamonds which are the size of strawberry seeds.
post #132 of 431
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaloS View Post
Your logic almost works...but consider this case:
what if Honda makes an excellent engine, but GM thinks that Honda's body design is whack? Designing a new engine for a car that is not even marketed for its power and such is questionable, and could be a waste of time. Just buy someone else's design, produce your own everything else, and you are set. You can even optimize the design of the engine a bit for your product.

Similarly, that scenario can be easily imaginable with headphones (think how much sound can be changed as the dampening of the driver is altered). Stax SR-404 and 4070 use the same driver, but don't sound much alike - and would you wrong someone for buying the 404 driver and making a completely different headphone out of it? Then why frown upon Shure?
First of all, I am totally open minded. I have nothing for or against Shure. I know it's a company reputed for its professional gear so I would expect it's new line of headphones to be very good.

Going back to engines, your argument is correct if the Cadillac line is not trying to differentiate itself on engines. Then in this case, engines are low-value added and could be rightfully outsources. But I would be mightily disappointed if a BMW M5 uses a Honda engine.

The argument of "same headphone driver, different SQ" is here with us. I could buy it. I don't know much about Stax but I think the Senn HD580/600/650 did just that. That being said, the designers have to be very careful about not making them too similar. I think the HD600/650 are often mentioned together. At any rate, let's get the facts and some reviews on the new Shures first before we attempt to reach any conclusions.
post #133 of 431
Quote:
Originally Posted by cegras View Post
No it doesn't. Computer manufacturers employ random people all the time, and I'm sure soldering requires much more handiwork than winding a driver.

Same with indians who polish diamonds which are the size of strawberry seeds.
It's not like polishing rocks or soldering components. The issue is if they design their own driver then they need to manufacture custom parts for it. Designing and building the equipment to produce those parts is very expensive. That would add a lot of cost (at least initially) and it seems their mo is to offer a much better value than any of their competitors. I think this is smart business and perhaps the best way to do thing regardless (specialization).
post #134 of 431
this srh840 may replace my rs-1.
post #135 of 431
With tons of experience of making cartridges, listening devices and microphones(notice the similarity between that and dynamic headphones), I don't see why Shure, which founded before AKG and Sennheiser, would outsource the R&D of the new line of headphone, but nothing is impossible
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › LEAK: SHURE SRH240, SRH440, and SRH840 headphones (and pricing) likely to be announced tomorrow! (And mini-review of SRH840.)