[Carl]

I saw these, and was curious. I never knew Sony made any electret headphones. Anyone know anything about them?


Naturally the auction has nothing to do with me.

 

[Edwood]

Interesting.

Design looks quite old. But they look to be in amazing condition.

-Ed

 

[tyre]

Yep, I have a pair of Sony ECR-500 electret headphones, presumably one model above the ECR-400's. There's hardly any info about them on the internet. I got mine off of ebay and that's the only pair I've ever seen for sale. Wualta also owns a pair. He's said in a few of his posts that they are generally better than the other electret headphones sold during that time period, mostly having more bass.

Apparently, Sony made several models of electret headphones over the years...

Sony ECR-400
Sony ECR-500
Sony ECR-600
Sony ECR-660
Sony ECR-800

Those ECR-800's sure look tempting.

 

[smeggy]

I dunno, those 500's have a real 70's radiogram sexiness about them

 

[Carl]

The lower end models look nicer than the higher end models, with their metal accents.


How would you rate the sound of them, Tyre.

 

[tyre]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carl How would you rate the sound of them, Tyre.

They're the only pair of electrostatic headphones I have (so far), so my opinion probably isn't worth that much. But I'd say that they are pretty good, they have pretty decent and controlled bass, although not as much bass as a pair of modern dynamic phones.

If you're looking for accuracy, I'd look elsewhere, perhaps towards a pair of '80's Stax Lambda's. They certainly sound unique though. I couldn't say whether or not that guy's asking price is worth it. I got incredibly lucky on ebay and paid a lot less for mine, although they aren't in as good a condition as the ones in the auction you linked to.

Apparently the ECR-500's were pretty advanced for their time, having a unique transducer. I've taken the earcups apart on mine before and the drivers don't look anything like what I was expecting to see. Wualta mentions in this post that the ECR-500's have a "pentagonal monocharge-electret diaphragm", whatever that means.

 

[Carl]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tyre They're the only pair of electrostatic headphones I have (so far), so my opinion probably isn't worth that much. But I'd say that they are pretty good, they have pretty decent and controlled bass, although not as much bass as a pair of modern dynamic phones.

Thanks.

Quote:

If you're looking for accuracy, I'd look elsewhere, perhaps towards a pair of '80's Stax Lambda's.

Well I own the HE60s (alas currently on their way to Germany to be repaired

), so that isn't the problem.

Quote:

They certainly sound unique though.

That's more why I'm interested. Sony used to make some great electrostatic loudspeakers back in the day, so it's a shame they didn't go more into electrostatic/electret headphones. I guess they didn't want to eat into the margins of the R10 and 010.

Quote:

I couldn't say whether or not that guy's asking price is worth it.

It really isn't. NZ$200 is merely the starting price, the reserve is probably a fair bit higher. Of course, it may fail to sell and get relisted for less.

Quote:

Apparently the ECR-500's were pretty advanced for their time, having a unique transducer. I've taken the earcups apart on mine before and the drivers don't look anything like what I was expecting to see. Wualta mentions in this post that the ECR-500's have a "pentagonal monocharge-electret diaphragm", whatever that means.

They certainly are different from electrodynamic headphones.

 

[wualta]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tyre ...the ECR-500's have a "pentagonal monocharge-electret diaphragm", whatever that means.

I hope the info on these turns up some day on one of these forums, in English, so we can examine them without recourse to my admittedly inexact memory. Heck, I'd like to see some info on these electrostatic loudspeakers Sony made (but never sold in the US, as far as I know). Say what?

Anyway. The diaphragm of the ECR-500 really was pentagonally shaped, instead of circular. Sony's reasoning was that the irregular shape would break up standing waves on the diaphragm. The unipolar electret is an electret with a single charge. Imagine what a magnet would be like if it only had a south pole. Another word for "monocharge" would be "monopole". Back in 1976, a monopole electret was a rare thing indeed. Since they didn't have to worry about keeping the + and - charges separated by the thickness of the diaphragm material, they figured they'd found a way to make the diaphragm extra thin. Recombination losses would be eliminated too. Now-- whether this monopole diaphragm was truly unique to Sony for all time, I don't know. I doubt it, but I really don't know. It must've been remarkable enough for Sony to place a tiny logo at the bottom of the 400 and 500 earcup which says "UNI", for unipolar.

As I said, I hope we come across someone who unlike me was smart enough to save his instruction manual so we can find out how thick the diaphragm was, the sensitivity specs, &c.

My memory says the diaphragm on the 500s was 5 microns, but that's not solid.

To me, the great strength of the ECR-500s was their ability to "image" (there's that word again) sounds outside the head. I discovered this talent of theirs when I was looking for the best headphone to play back my binaural recordings. All I can tell you is that in 1976, the ECR-500 was head and shoulders above anything else, including the Stax SR-X Mark 2 and 3, despite not being as flat or as able to play loudly. I still think they excel at presenting stereo and binaural material, though there are other headphones now that also do well, including the Stax Lambda series and the big Sennheisers. Considering that they're now 30 years old and sold for half the price of the Staxes, the ECR-500s are pretty amazing. And I've gotten two good pairs on eBay for $50 or less, sometimes much less.

 

[Carl]

Quote:

Originally Posted by wualta Heck, I'd like to see some info on these electrostatic loudspeakers Sony made (but never sold in the US, as far as I know). Say what?

One day, when I'm super rich (not if this forum has it's way

), I'm going to track down a set of SS-R10s. They're absolutely gorgeous.

Quote:

Anyway. The diaphragm of the ECR-500 was really pentagonally shaped, instead of circular. Sony's reasoning was that the irregular shape would break up any standing waves on the diaphragm. The unipolar electret is an electret with a single charge. Imagine what a magnet would be like if it only had a south pole. Another word for "monocharge" would be "monopole". Back in 1976, a monopole electret was a rare thing indeed. Since they didn't have to worry about keeping the + and - charges separated by the thickness of the diaphragm material, they figured they'd found a way to make the diaphragm extra thin. Recombination losses would be eliminated too. Now-- whether this monopole diaphragm was truly unique to Sony for all time, I don't know. I doubt it, but I really don't know. It must've been unique enough at the time, because on the earcups of the 400 and 500 headphones you can see a tiny logo at the bottom of the earcup, and it says "UNI", for unipolar. As I said, I hope we come across someone who unlike me was smart enough to save his instruction manual so we can find out how thick the diaphragm was, the sensitivity specs, &c. To me, the great strength of the ECR-500 was its ability to "image" (there's that word again) sounds outside the head. I discovered this talent of theirs when I was looking for the best headphone to play back my binaural recordings. All I can tell you is that in 1976, the ECR-500 was head and shoulders above anything else, including the Stax SR-X Mark 2 and 3, despite not being as flat or as able to play loudly. I still think they excel at presenting stereo and binaural material, though there are other headphones now that also do well, including the Stax Lambda series and the big Sennheisers. Considering that they're now 30 years old and sold for half the price of the Staxes, the ECR-500s are pretty amazing. And I've gotten two good pairs on eBay for $50 or less, sometimes much less.

Some great info there. Thanks!

 

[wualta]

Oo! I found the SS-R10s pictured and tantalisingly described on www.audiocircuit.com. Very old school looking with the wooden frames and the 3-way division of the audio spectrum. And no, they weren't sold in the US and yes, they were and likely still are very very expensive. If you ever get the chance to listen to a pair at length, report back to us here or go over to www.audiokarma.org and spill your guts there. Inquiring minds want to know.

 

[Carl]

Quote:

Originally Posted by wualta If you ever get the chance to listen to a pair at length, report back to us here or go over to www.audiokarma.org and spill your guts there. Inquiring minds want to know.

My owning a set (hopefully) is still years off. They probably go for over a million yen on the second hard market, and if the MDR-R10 and CDP-R10 are anything to go by, there probably isn't more than a few hundred sets in existance.

 

[ScubaSteve87]

anyone have any luck of finding the old sony electrostats anywhere? I would def probably be interested in picking a pair up and trying them out

 

[Carl]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScubaSteve87 anyone have any luck of finding the old sony electrostats anywhere? I would def probably be interested in picking a pair up and trying them out

Auctions sites like ebay and yahoo japan are probably the only source for them now.

If an ECR-800 pops up, let the battle begin.

 

[Tachikoma]

Funny, I can't find anything about the ECR-800 on google. >< the 6 pin plug it uses looks similar to the low bias stax plugs, though.

 

[wualta]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScubaSteve87 anyone have any luck of finding the old sony electrostats anywhere? I would def probably be interested in picking a pair up and trying them out

They could pop up anywhere, but I'd keep a favorite-search thingie going on eBay for the ECR-500. I doubt that you'll see any of the rest of the line outside of Japan, but who knows?

Don't pay more than $50 for them, and be sure to ask if the channel balance is perfect or near-perfect.