or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Summit-Fi (High-End Audio) › High-end Audio Forum › Electrodynamic and electrostatic headphones now obsolete ?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Electrodynamic and electrostatic headphones now obsolete ? - Page 2  

post #16 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by erikfreedom View Post
 

http://www.head-fi.org/t/634201/battle-of-the-flagships-58-headphones-compared-update-audeze-lcd-2-revision-2-6-4-13

 

in the top 10 headphones of the battle of the flagships 5 are electrostatic and the 2 top spots are stats. and that does not includes the airbow sr sc21 and sr sc11 that probably would end up near or at the top of that list.

 

so much for electrostatic obsolescence.


I agree, the Abyss is non-canon!

post #17 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by eric65 View Post
 

What would you do if JPS Lab produced in 2014, a "Baby" Abyss, much less expensive, say $ 1000 ? for example, with 90 or 95% of the potential of the Abyss, using the same technology, but without the accessories or cables overpriced .


Would you buy always an high-end electrostatic or electrodynamic headphones (a priori not more efficient, if not less), but this time 2-5 times more expensive than the hypothetical "Baby" Abyss?

 

Actually, I'd like to see a "baby" Abyss for $4000-$4500 less. JPS Labs would corner the market on the mid to high-end orthos/dynamics if such a headphone were good - have the same sonic sensibilities and better ergonomics and look. A lot of people would still prefer the stats STAX though at 2-5 times price. It's really a different market and STAX have a unique presentation.


Edited by purrin - 12/11/13 at 8:50am
post #18 of 106
Thread Starter 

Let's talk about technical construction Ortho and Electrostast headphones .

Is it that expensive  to build a (very good) planar magnetic headphones, especially with a single row of magnet (only one side)?.

 

As much as I think the technique of making a diaphragm electrostatic headphones, like Stax SR-009, is not within the reach of anybody (very sharp adjustment), as much as I confess my complete ignorance regarding the manufacture (and manufacturing difficulties) of ortho dynamics headphone, in particular that of the Abyss.

 

Eric

 

 

 

post #19 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by eric65 View Post
 

Let's talk about technical construction Ortho and Electrostast headphones .

Is it that expensive  to build a (very good) planar magnetic headphones, especially with a single row of magnet (only one side)?.

 

As much as I think the technique of making a diaphragm electrostatic headphones, like Stax SR-009, is not within the reach of anybody (very sharp adjustment), as much as I confess my complete ignorance regarding the manufacture (and manufacturing difficulties) of ortho dynamics headphone, in particular that of the Abyss.

 

Eric

 

 

I don't want to sound rude, but there are people (just like you and me) DIY'ing their own stats... In fact, I'm pretty sure that a high quality elctrodynamic driver is much much harder to produce

post #20 of 106

Seems easier to produce 'stats on a mass scale. Both orthos and stats need diaphragms with a certain uniform tension (at least most orthos are tensioned). Orthos diaphragms require electrical traces to be put on them. 'Stat's diaphragms don't, but instead will require special coatings to hold a charge. Orthos require magnets on one or both sides of the diaphragm - usually a plate / mesh with magnets on it.  'Stats use stators - metal plates perforated with many holes which act as electrodes.

 

The only screwy thing about 'stats is what it takes to power them: hundreds of volts. Much more difficult to make a proper 'stat amp. And thus why 'stats remain more of a niche product.

post #21 of 106

Stats also have much tighter tolerances.  Spacer thickness on electrostatic HPs usually ranges between 0.3 and 0.7 mm.  Make the diaphragm too loose and it will arc against the stators or stick to one side...make it too tight and it can lose bass heft or tear.  Stats are also picky about dust/humidity, again due to arcing.  Making a stat that works is one thing - making a bunch of stats that all sound the same is another ballgame. 

post #22 of 106

Making orthos which all sound the same is challenge too. The cheapy T50RPs drivers have significant variances. The Audezes have also had their issues with headphones sounding quite different and borked diaphragms. Tolerances would seem to be just as important for orthos.

post #23 of 106
Thread Starter 

In your opinion, what is the actual cost of manufacturing the ortho driver Abyss (see photo above) : $ 500 or $ 1,000 dollars a pair ?, especially if it had to be manufactured in large quantities with cheaper versions of the Abyss (eg with construction plastic / resin  frame and non-aluminum frame and, of course, without the "made home" cable which would cost alone, $ 1,000).

 

Eric

post #24 of 106
When it comes to research and development (R&D for short) you have the problem of "How long is a piece of string?"

You could find the answer to a problem in 5 minutes or 5 months.
You could release a product while continuing the R&D to improve the product or wait until the product meets your satisfaction.

All this time for a commercial venture is costing the company money.
Then there is the problem of how much do you charge for the product.
Do you charge enough to keep the wolves from the door, or do you add some extra to finance ongoing R&D and/or R&D into the next product.?
Do you want to wear designer suits or overalls to project the corporate image?

The list goes on....

Remember, there is more than one way to skin a cat - but the costs are not necessarily equal nor desirable.
post #25 of 106
Thread Starter 

If JPS Lab manages to produce an Abyss "light" (or baby Abyss), call it as you like, with the same drivers as the current Abyss (see photo above), but with a much more reasonable cost (and accessible ) (say less than $ 2,000), well, they succeed a big bang, the jackpot insured (subject also improve the aesthetics of the headphones, which normally should not be too difficult to achieve ;))

 

Eric

post #26 of 106
As those that have read some of the posts I've done will know, looks in audio equipment are almost as important to me as SQ is, and IMO the Abyss is one of the Ugliest headphones I've ever seen.
post #27 of 106
Thread Starter 

In France, we retorted me with the greatest seriousness about the Abyss : a headphone of this quality, you must listen first ;  aesthetics (look) is incidental;  the measured curves are also incidental.

 

I quite agree with your aesthetic sensibility ; the current version of the Abyss is very special to behold with his new industrial look and with screws everywhere.

Sure, there are prettier headphones to look ;).

 

Eric


Edited by eric65 - 12/12/13 at 5:43am
post #28 of 106
Thread Starter 
Hello,

This thread has been created for a specific purpose, that of trying to understand how ortho-dynamic headphones, as innovative as it is, and as expensive as it is (Nb: the price does not mean much, and it is positioning range, often with little relation to the actual quality) is currently perceived by a majority of testers of my country, as one of the best headphones ever listen if not the best, to the point that a reseller Stax in France (admittedly also dealer JPS Abyss wink.gif) publicly stated that the Abyss associated with Audiovalve RKV mark 3 is for him the best overall headphones + amp never listen (the most resulted), apparently better (for him) than the SR-009 + Electra and better than the SRM T2 + SR Omega (or SR-009).

However, the measurement curves and distortion of Abyss vs. SR-009 are not very conclusive.

In theory, the electrostatic headphones , with lighter membranes should normally remain the fastest and most accurate headphones (because less inertia ) .

The truth seems to be different for those who have heard; Abyss is almost unanimously acclaimed by the testers of the Abyss HCFR thread, and I want to understand why , hence the assumption of a significant technological advance, with the emergence of a new class of headphones with innovative technology : the revolutionary "asymmetric ortho-dynamic" .
(with a single row of magnets instead of two , on one side , and natural damping by air) .

Promising new technology which, if confirmed with other versions ( cheaper ) of the Abyss, could undermine the " old " technologies headphones (become now obsolete) : Electrodynamic, Electrostatic and "old" Ortho-dynamic generation headphones.
Hence the title of the thread and the issue of obsolescence of these "old" technologies of Headphones. Now ?

Eric
post #29 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by eric65 View Post

Hello,

This thread has been created for a specific purpose, that of trying to understand how ortho-dynamic headphones, as innovative as it is, and as expensive as it is (Nb: the price does not mean much, and it is positioning range, often with little relation to the actual quality) is currently perceived by a majority of testers of my country, as one of the best headphones ever listen if not the best, to the point that a reseller Stax in France (admittedly also dealer JPS Abyss wink.gif) publicly stated that the Abyss associated with Audiovalve RKV mark 3 is for him the best overall headphones + amp never listen (the most resulted), apparently better (for him) than the SR-009 + Electra and better than the SRM T2 + SR Omega (or SR-009).

However, the measurement curves and distortion of Abyss vs. SR-009 are not very conclusive.

In theory, the electrostatic headphones , with lighter membranes should normally remain the fastest and most accurate headphones (because less inertia ) .

The truth seems to be different for those who have heard; Abyss is almost unanimously acclaimed by the testers of the Abyss HCFR thread, and I want to understand why , hence the assumption of a significant technological advance, with the emergence of a new class of headphones with innovative technology : the revolutionary "asymmetric ortho-dynamic" .
(with a single row of magnets instead of two , on one side , and natural damping by air) .

Promising new technology which, if confirmed with other versions ( cheaper ) of the Abyss, could undermine the " old " technologies headphones (become now obsolete) : Electrodynamic, Electrostatic and "old" Ortho-dynamic generation headphones.
Hence the title of the thread and the issue of obsolescence of these "old" technologies of Headphones. Now ?

Eric

Wait a few months till those guys get to really live with the Abyss and put things into perspective... Remember, it was the same old stuff with the HD800... "best ever!!" "Game changer!!" "So good the only I want is to hide in a cave and listen to the sweet music for the rest of my days..."

 

In the end "le soufflé va retomber" and the abyss will naturally take its place in the panthéon of headphones, until the new flavor of the month comes out and blows us away... Again...

 

In my long experience with high-fidelity no technology can really break the mould without adding its own amount of troubles, so as to make other technologies obsolete...

 

Plasma headphones, though, would get me very excited.


Edited by customcoco - 12/12/13 at 1:50pm
post #30 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by eric65 View Post

Hence the title of the thread and the issue of obsolescence of these "old" technologies of Headphones. Now ?

 

I don't feel the other technologies are obsolete because I (and a few others I know) happen to prefer the Abyss. I have friends who still prefer the HD800 because they feel it is the most detailed headphone out there, even better than the Abyss. I can't say I disagree, because as with speakers, the cone + voice coil arrangement is more detailed and especially more dynamic sounding than planars. Others prefer the STAX because of the smooth mid and high end with consistently low distortion across the band, not to mention the comparatively arguably and "faster" attack and more gentle decay in treble region.

 

In other words, I don't consider the Abyss to be the best at anything except bass rendering. However I do consider it a very well rounded headphone with the best tonal balance provided that a suitable amp or certain tweaks are implemented to tame the slight mid-treble peak.

 

It's always a trade-off with different technologies. We just get to pick the trade-offs we like most.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: High-end Audio Forum
This thread is locked  
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Summit-Fi (High-End Audio) › High-end Audio Forum › Electrodynamic and electrostatic headphones now obsolete ?