[04gto]

And for people who haven't heard how it sounds inside an MRI machine, here are some samples we recorded.

Literally a sonic torture chamber. Imagine being trapped in there (120db) for hours without ear protection (or bleeding edge tech, noise cancelling headphones).

 

[tutetibiimperes]

They are being built to order.

Regarding predicting success/flop:
I wish I had a crystal ball to predict how exactly a product would do before it gets to the hands of customers, just by looking at the pictures. Electrostatic headphones make up for only a small fraction of headphones used by audio enthusiasts/audiophiles, the barrier of entry is also high, we realize that; so having realistic expectations is good.

We also realize that competing with the best electrostatic headphones is a huge mountain to climb. I can only hope (as someone who has been listening CRBN for several months now) that CRBN meets or exceeds expectations. Only time will tell, as more of you get to listen. For now, all we can hope for is less speculations; neither hyping nor dismissing a product unheard helps anybody. In the mean time we can try and answer questions the best we can.

(My personal opinion) Success, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder, it need not always be financial:

• I don't think many were aware of the need for better headphones inside MRI scanners (most use pneumatic headphones, a technology used in airplanes from 1960s). These sound horrible and distorted. Imagine trying to calm down a child who is claustrophobic and instructing them not to move inside a MRI machine so the scans are good.
• I don't think anyone (other than a handful) have heard a electrostatic headphone that uses carbon nanotubes instead of metal deposits and how that changes the presentation and timbre.
• What we learnt from building a headphone for use in a very hostile environment., motivates us to apply it elsewhere.
• Exploring and pushing boundaries is a good thing, it ultimately makes technology more affordable and reach a wider audience.

Since you’ve been listening to these for months, and I’d assume have access to the entire catalog of Audeze headphones, how does the presentation of these compare to the LCD series?

Does it have bass slam similar to the planars? Does it have the rich timbre of those, just with better extension in the upper mids?

I’m certainly intrigued by this, and if this manages to combine the Audeze bass and slam with Stax speed and resolution it could be something really amazing.

I suppose my worry is of it sounding too ethereal and insubstantial.

 

[DougD]

I can say that aesthetically you Made a good job.
Just like the LCD series the CRBN looks really good.

As a Bass connosoir I'm naturally worried about the low end performance. However I'm eagerly awaiting reviews

You saw the graph that was posted on the previous page??? Down only 2.5 dB at 20 Hz vs 500 Hz, and close to ruler straight in that range. Granted h/p measurement is difficult, but that is VERY intriguing/promising. It's possible there's other headphones or even speakers that show something similar, but offhand I don't recall any.

I am very afraid I may break my "Don't test drive it, don't listen to it, if you aren't willing/able to buy it" rule.

 

[jude]

...[*]I don't think many were aware of the need for better headphones inside MRI scanners (most use pneumatic headphones, a technology used in airplanes from 1960s). These sound horrible and distorted. Imagine trying to calm down a child who is claustrophobic and instructing them not to move inside a MRI machine so the scans are good...

Literally a sonic torture chamber. Imagine being trapped in there (120db) for hours without ear protection (or bleeding edge tech, noise cancelling headphones).

@KMann, correct me if I'm wrong, but I seem to recall Sankar saying the MRI version offers 60 dB of noise reduction, which, for those of you not sure with what that means, is a lot of noise reduction. And isn't part of the effectiveness gained by knowing on the headphone system's input side the exact nature (including the timing) of the noise that needs canceling?

As someone who's had a couple of MRIs, I can understand the benefits, especially for children and other people with more of a tendency to be anxious or fidgety.

NOTE: Just as a point of clarification for those of you who haven't watched the video, the audiophile version is not a noise-canceling headphone.

 

[eskamobob1]

You saw the graph that was posted on the previous page??? Down only 2.5 dB at 20 Hz vs 500 Hz, and close to ruler straight in that range. Granted h/p measurement is difficult, but that is VERY intriguing/promising. It's possible there's other headphones or even speakers that show something similar, but offhand I don't recall any.

I am very afraid I may break my "Don't test drive it, don't listen to it, if you aren't willing/able to buy it" rule.

Bass extension is not the only factor in bass performance. Slam, punch, and timbre play quite big roles as well and is where estats traditionally fall short

 

[KDS315]

Not sure what you mean. Are you talking about the bit on their site where they reference a distortion measurement at 200Vpp? I don't believe they are implying that's the maximum output, if that's your concern.

Read their tech doc, max output is 200Vss...

 

[KMann]

As a Bass connosoir I'm naturally worried about the low end performance. However I'm eagerly awaiting reviews

Since you’ve been listening to these for months, and I’d assume have access to the entire catalog of Audeze headphones, how does the presentation of these compare to the LCD series?

Does it have bass slam similar to the planars? Does it have the rich timbre of those, just with better extension in the upper mids?

I’m certainly intrigued by this, and if this manages to combine the Audeze bass and slam with Stax speed and resolution it could be something really amazing.

I suppose my worry is of it sounding too ethereal and insubstantial.

As someone who is with Audeze, I avoid providing any strong subjective opinions and try to keep it technical/objective to the extent possible. I will leave subjective opinions to others. My personal preferences affects my perception too. I prefer well controlled, well extended, tight and fast bass with good bass texture and I will take that over hard hitting bass. Many headphones have a underdamped bass with resonance near 40-60hz, that gives the perception of better bass slam, but it is not natural in my books. There are characteristic qualities associated with each technology (Dynamics, Planar, Ribbon, Estats) these are controlled by the underlying physics and so it is not possible to make a headphone sound like it was using a different technology and neither is that our goal. Our hope is to try an improve what is possible within each category.

Some background behind bass as it relates to CRBN design:
By controlling the amount of carbon nanotubes in the diaphragm, a we achieve high efficiency by allowing it to hold more charge at the same time keeping the resistivity high enough to prevent charge migration (which will cause distortion) especially at low frequencies.

The high efficiency of the carbon nanotube diaphragm also allowed us to reduce the tension just enough to increase the space between the stator and diaphragm to allow higher excursion with lower diaphragm resonance frequency, without the risk of the diaphragm coming into contact with the stator. The low resonance frequency of the diaphragm combined with the large area makes for great bass response. The bass response is further improved by carefully chosen acoustically transparent damping material that not only provides dust protection but also damps the diaphragm to provide smooth bass response. Having experience designing planar headphones with good seal to provide great bass response, we improved the bass response further by carefully designed earpads that provide the necessary seal.

Imaging, speed, high frequency extension...
We chose an optimal diaphragm and stator size that is large enough to provide excellent imaging without compromising on high frequency extension due to capacitance. The perforation on the stator (with more than 50% open) was also optimized to provide excellent high frequency extension and sounding open without compromising efficiency. The lighter than air carbon nanotube infused diaphragm has naturally low inertia that allows the diaphragm to accelerate fast. We employ edge damping to further eliminate distortion and smooth the frequency and phase response.

The stators use a proprietary PCB manufacturing technique that allows us to achieve high rigidity with uniform thickness and flatness. and the Conductive surface of the stator is coated to ensure high dielectric strength. A rigid stator of uniform thickness is important to achieve uniform force distribution and for a linear response.

 

[Hoegaardener70]

Is the design of this electrostat as fragile - dust, humidity etc. as Stax?

 

[KMann]

Is the design of this electrostat as fragile - dust, humidity etc

Unlike resistive coating typically used in electrostatic headphones, the carbon nanotube infused diaphragm is immune to the elements and does not degrade over time.

 

[KDS315]

As someone who is with Audeze, I avoid providing any strong subjective opinions and try to keep it technical/objective to the extent possible. I will leave subjective opinions to others. My personal preferences affects my perception too. I prefer well controlled, well extended, tight and fast bass with good bass texture and I will take that over hard hitting bass. Many headphones have a underdamped bass with resonance near 40-60hz, that gives the perception of better bass slam, but it is not natural in my books. There are characteristic qualities associated with each technology (Dynamics, Planar, Ribbon, Estats) these are controlled by the underlying physics and so it is not possible to make a headphone sound like it was using a different technology and neither is that our goal. Our hope is to try an improve what is possible within each category.

Some background behind bass as it relates to CRBN design:
By controlling the amount of carbon nanotubes in the diaphragm, a we achieve high efficiency by allowing it to hold more charge at the same time keeping the resistivity high enough to prevent charge migration (which will cause distortion) especially at low frequencies.

The high efficiency of the carbon nanotube diaphragm also allowed us to reduce the tension just enough to increase the space between the stator and diaphragm to allow higher excursion with lower diaphragm resonance frequency, without the risk of the diaphragm coming into contact with the stator. The low resonance frequency of the diaphragm combined with the large area makes for great bass response. The bass response is further improved by carefully chosen acoustically transparent damping material that not only provides dust protection but also damps the diaphragm to provide smooth bass response. Having experience designing planar headphones with good seal to provide great bass response, we improved the bass response further by carefully designed earpads that provide the necessary seal.

Imaging, speed, high frequency extension...
We chose an optimal diaphragm and stator size that is large enough to provide excellent imaging without compromising on high frequency extension due to capacitance. The perforation on the stator (with more than 50% open) was also optimized to provide excellent high frequency extension and sounding open without compromising efficiency. The lighter than air carbon nanotube infused diaphragm has naturally low inertia that allows the diaphragm to accelerate fast. We employ edge damping to further eliminate distortion and smooth the frequency and phase response.

The stators use a proprietary PCB manufacturing technique that allows us to achieve high rigidity with uniform thickness and flatness. and the Conductive surface of the stator is coated to ensure high dielectric strength. A rigid stator of uniform thickness is important to achieve uniform force distribution and for a linear response.

Ehemm ... you basically re-invented the Stax SR-009 using different materials, looking at the so far published (unfortunately non-normalized) measurements. Happy to see that, but don’t really understand all that hype now...
Looking forward to reading some realistic sound comparisons about its musical qualities...in comparison to the SR-009 (and possibly the Dan Clark VOCE)

 

[eskamobob1]

Ehemm ... you basically re-invented the Stax SR-009 using different materials, looking at the so far published (unfortunately non-normalized) measurements. Happy to see that, but don’t really understand all that hype now...
Looking forward to reading some realistic sound comparisons about its musical qualities...in comparison to the SR-009 (and possibly the Dan Clark VOCE)

Fr isn't the entire story. If it was we would all use cheap AKG stuff

 

[trellus]

Fr isn't the entire story. If it was we would all use cheap AKG stuff

+1, cuz the AKG K371 has a great FR and it’s pretty dang cheap

 

[M3NTAL]

Can anyone imagine the bass capabilities of the medical unit? It requires something like double the voltage to perform full-spectrum at 120db. @KMann or @Audeze - can you describe the experience of using the medical product? What sort of microphone is used that can also be near the imaging unit?

Also - were there things that the Audeze team learned in the noise cancelling field while working with the other partners? Electrostatic in-ear's with active noise cancellation... This new CNT film is going to be awesome!

 

[arjuna93]

So far resisting the urge. This does look exciting but requires a complete system commitment.

They look Stax-compatible. If so, you aren’t locked with Audeze, but have quite a few alternatives (Stax, Kingsound etc.).

 

[KMann]

Ehemm ... you basically re-invented the Stax SR-009 using different materials, looking at the so far published (unfortunately non-normalized) measurements. Happy to see that, but don’t really understand all that hype now.

Yes, both are electrostatic headphones housing an electrostatic transducer. But beyond that, I am not sure of what similarity you saw in what I posted. If you went purely based on measurements, there was also a measurement that compared to HD650, and HD650 has a similar oval shape too, so one could claim we reinvented HD650 with better bass using a different technology

ps: Meant in jest - meaning it is better to listen for oneself.