[complin]

I dont want to appear rude but to compare the HD650 as comparable to the HE90 is simply laughable, its a whole other ball game. The speed, frequency extension, clarity, headstage etc, etc is far far better that anything else sennheiser has ever produced! In fact I understand from a contact I had in Sennheiser that the HD800 is their attempt to reach the original Orpheus performance with a dynamic.
You are quite correct in saying that the HE90 is euphonic and not 100% tonally accurate, but then I have never heard any other headphone that is totally accurate either. The question is it  enjoyable to listen to.
People sell things for many different reasons not as you imply because they are not good. As the resale price of the Orpheus had risen dramatically over the years I would guess for many having a large lump of cash and something close to in terms of the performance has been too tempting. I've certainly thought about the same situation myself as $25000 can be used to fund other priorities that at the time are more important.
 
 
Quote:

   
Having heard extensively over the years both electrostatic and dynamic headphones, in my personal opinion, the differences between these driver technologies is dramatically overhyped. I believe the HD650 was designed to have the euphoric hi-fidelity accuracy of the HE90, and as such can be considered a descendant of the original Orpheus sound.

 
 

   
I believe most who have lived with the original Orpheus have now sold theirs. I would be curious to see resale numbers but I have been keeping track over the years and certainly more than half of them have been on the secondary market. 
 
Of course subjective opinions will vary. Of course some thing Orpheus is still the king after 25 years, then again, some who have had Orpheus systems have settled on HD650s as all they need. Still others have held onto their HD580 as the best headphone of all time.
 
Personally I found the HE90 sound signature a bit comical, as it emphasizes euphoric reproduction over absolute accuracy. I suppose that is also why some prefer the Chord Hugo to other DAC styles. Again, there's no accounting for taste.

 

[crashtest33]

Owning,.. Forget it.
However, Having the opportunity to hear it is very high on my 'to do' list. I think I trust Jude's judgement on this system and to hear it would be an unforgettable experience.
You can stare at the Mona Lisa, go to the top of the Eiffel Tower, Ride in a fast jet, but you don't need to take them home with you to have a memory you'll cherish for ever.
You'll be able to say to yourself that you once heard mankind's greatest musical & technological achievement. That would be treat enough for me and I would pay a good sum of money just for that.
The only question is where, when and how.

 

[complin]

You have obviously not read the blind testing carried out as part of Tylls' Big Sound 2015 @innerfidelity.com
Unless you are really familiar with the sound of a violin, a trained musician and listener then blind testing is as much use as flipping a coin.
 
Quote:

  http://www.thestrad.com/cpt-latests/blind-tested-soloists-unable-to-tell-stradivarius-violins-from-modern-instruments/

This is just another myth which should be debunked. 

 

[complin]

Yes there is probably more of a market for something like this now than when the original Orpheus was produced. Lots of people in Asia and Middle East with money burning a hole in their pockets, unlike the rest of us  
I believe they plan to make up to 250 per year probably almost built to order 
Quote:

  Needs Amarra or Audirvana+ and a Mac or PC. Done (plus the 50K in green backs).

 

[o0CosmoMemory0o]

To call the HD650 high fidelity at all is rather laughable... It has a thick, congested sound with an unrealistic tonality. It is dreadful compared to the HD800. The HD800 is the most technically competent Sennheiser headphone that I have personally used, even though I prefer the HD540/HD560 models for their musically engaging quality. Apart from its slightly dull phase quality, the HD800 is the most capable dynamic headphone I've listened to that uses enclosures over the ears (I will leave the AKG K1000 aside here). I am curious about how much more capable the two Orpheus systems could really be compared to the HD800, whose drivers are large, sensitive and already very magnifying of microdetails. Further resolution of the very smallest sonic nuances is possibly the only improvement I may experience. Hopefully they're more musical than the HD800, which sounds somewhat dull despite its fantastic sonic linearity.

 

[calaf]

  To call the HD650 high fidelity at all is rather laughable... It has a thick, congested sound with an unrealistic tonality. It is dreadful compared to the HD800. The HD800 is the most technically competent Sennheiser headphone that I have personally used, even though I prefer the HD540/HD560 models for their musically engaging quality.

this must be the reason why you are selling a HD540...

 

[o0CosmoMemory0o]

Well when a man has five HD540 devices sitting in a box unused because he now exclusively uses the K1000, what is the most sensible thing for him to do?

 

[Sal1950]

  To call the HD650 high fidelity at all is rather laughable... It has a thick, congested sound with an unrealistic tonality.

I'm sure you realize there are hundreds if not thousands of HD650 owners that would strongly disagree with you.
Of course your entitled to your opinion but in this case that opinion is pretty lame.

 

[superlowfi]

  I'm sure you realize there are hundreds if not thousands of HD650 owners that would strongly disagree with you.
Of course your entitled to your opinion but in this case that opinion is pretty lame.

 
I think at the end of the day, people are a little too quick to make the jump from "I don't like this headphone" to "This headphone is objectively bad and anyone who likes it has bad taste".
 
Why would I be insulted if you don't like a headphone that I like? And why would you be insulted if I don't like a headphone you like? All that we can say at the end of the day is that we have different taste in headphones.
 
I would also remind everyone that the HD650 was Sennheiser's flagship, most expensive headphone they produced for quite a long time. It was the culmination of decades of engineering expertise, including lessons learned in the euphoric presentation of music offered by the Orpheus. If you don't like it, you don't like it, but to claim it isn't a "high fidelity" headphone is rather absurd.
 
I would also point out that yes, by some random objective measures, the Orpheus "outperforms" the HD650, and yet at the same time, for a different set of objective measures, the HD650 actually bests the Orpheus. What do these abstract objective measures actually mean at the end of the day, when what matters is that you personally enjoy the sound being produced by your particular set of headphones? Do I even need to mention that there is no ideal frequency response curves, only different theories and ideals that different companies target in different ways? And what is the purpose of having a headphone that meets this so called theoretical objectively perfect target, if at the end of the day, you don't really enjoy the sound coming out of the headphones because it is "too bright" or some other variation on your personal listening preferences?
 
It reminds me a bit of a quote, "music lovers use their equipment to hear music. Audiophiles use music to hear their equipment.".
 
By the way, I apologize for getting a bit philosophical in this thread. The announcement of a new Orpheus has me thinking about some of the foundational questions regarding the pursuit of sound, and what it really means to build and define something as "the greatest headphone".

 

[up late]

objective measurements of headphone performance aren't "random", they're as purposeful as any other objective measure of performance

 

[DougD]

objective measurements of headphone performance aren't "random" - they're quite deliberate, like any other objective measure of performance.

 
True.
 
The mistake is to imagine that measured numbers alone define SQ or perfection.
 
The brain is a subjective evaluation machine, and you cannot escape your brain; its limitations are also its extraordinary power. 

 

[up late]

like i said in an earlier post, objective measurements and subjective impressions both have a valid role to play in the evaluation of headphones

 

[saidentary]

  Every electrostatic I've ever heard or owned was lacking in bass authority.  They just couldn't reproduce the lowest of the low end.  Midbass punch was relatively lacking as well.  I've heard the SR-007 and SR-009, and I owned the Lambda (Pro?) SIgnature and another Lambda Signature that was modified to essentially be a 404.  Sometimes people mention this about e-stats, and other times it's ignored.  What do you guys think about the base of the Sennheiser HE1060/HEV1060?
 
JUDE?

Jude? Jude? Jude? Jude? Jude? Jude?

 

[WhatToChoose]

I wonder....do you guys think a hybrid dynamic/electrostatic could happen?
 
Dynamics clearly thrash everything else in bass response, but ES with the detail....do multiple dynamic driver/hybrid over ears even exist? I know people go crazy on IEMs and add tons of BAs in each earpiece, but now that I think of it it seems like over ears are a competition to make the best single driver...?

 

[chowmein83]

  I wonder....do you guys think a hybrid dynamic/electrostatic could happen?
 
Dynamics clearly thrash everything else in bass response, but ES with the detail....do multiple dynamic driver/hybrid over ears even exist? I know people go crazy on IEMs and add tons of BAs in each earpiece, but now that I think of it it seems like over ears are a competition to make the best single driver...?

 
The Enigmaacoustics Dharma is actually a hybrid dynamic/electrostatic over-ear headphone.