[qboogie]

Anyone with CRBN living in NYC willing to allow a kind, respectful and fully vaccinated (with booster) head-fier to audition for an hour or so? I have never spent time with an e-stat before and am excited by this particular can but the price of entry including amp is shall we say restrictive.

Willing to bring snacks and beverages, good conversation (or as minimal as desired), provide free expert medical advice within reason, and lug any gear in my sig to share in the listening experience.

Also willing to babysit.

 

[rayofsi]

Anyone with CRBN living in NYC willing to allow a kind, respectful and fully vaccinated (with booster) head-fier to audition for an hour or so? I have never spent time with an e-stat before and am excited by this particular can but the price of entry including amp is shall we say restrictive.

Willing to bring snacks and beverages, good conversation (or as minimal as desired), provide free expert medical advice within reason, and lug any gear in my sig to share in the listening experience.

Also willing to babysit.

I'm in the NYC area. Whenever I get mine, will make sure it works then bring them to Kerry who is also on NYC. He built the T2 I use. Could possibly set something up in the future hah

 

[buzzlulu]

I have never spent time with an e-stat before

Start first with the original inventor of e-stat headphones - STAX

 

[qboogie]

I'm in the NYC area. Whenever I get mine, will make sure it works then bring them to Kerry who is also on NYC. He built the T2 I use. Could possibly set something up in the future hah

@rayofsi Excellent, thank you for the opportunity. I'm sure these mini meet-ups used to be much more common. I just hosted another head-fier with quite a lot more experience in the game at my apartment and we had a good time.

How much does a DIY T2 cost? I hear @paradoxper giving it great praise all the time.

Is cable rolling as much of a thing in e-stats as it is in other driver types?

 

[rayofsi]

@rayofsi Excellent, thank you for the opportunity. I'm sure these mini meet-ups used to be much more common. I just hosted another head-fier with quite a lot more experience in the game at my apartment and we had a good time.

How much does a DIY T2 cost? I hear @paradoxper giving it great praise all the time.

Is cable rolling as much of a thing in e-stats as it is in other driver types?

No cable rolling at all hah. I believe the cost is $10-12k depending on builder. Maybe more nowadays.

 

[qboogie]

Start first with the original inventor of e-stat headphones - STAX

I did briefly audition the 009S at canjam for a few minutes, long enough to understand the "ethereal" and "out of thin air" quality that it has. It was bass-lite and a little bright for my music tastes. I am aware that the showfloor conditions are not optimal

What excites me about the CRBN is the supposedly thicker, more natural sound and more present bass, large staging, coupled with nearly the same detail and speed as other e-stats, excluding those that are sold for 5 figures or as a complete system. Also, Audeze tend to have product revisions 1-2 years into the lifespan, but gut feeling tells me they won't be doing that with the CRBN.

Who knows, maybe the new Stax can will bring the heat

 

[qboogie]

No cable rolling at all hah. I believe the cost is $10-12k depending on builder. Maybe more nowadays.

Well that's good I guess. But that amp price is an eye-opener for sure, my goodness hahaha

 

[buzzlulu]

Who knows, maybe the new Stax can will bring the heat

Mine arrived yesterday. Trust me - it definitely brought the heat

 

[Audio Addict]

I am visiting a friend Sunday and will be able to listen to the CRBN for a few hours. I am taking my 009S for comparison.

 

[DougD]

I am visiting a friend Sunday and will be able to listen to the CRBN for a few hours. I am taking my 009S for comparison.

I need to upgrade my friends. To Friends Version 21-11 I suppose.

I assume you are posting this not to gloat, but as a heads-up to the community to look forward to some compare & contract impressions.

TIA. Looking forward to it.

 

[Zeleni Zec]

If someone could help me understand how an e-stat sounds different from a planar I would appreciate it. I have several ToTl headphones and they are all good, but different. Never having heard an e-stat, I'm wondering is the actual sound or timbre of an instrument different on an e-stat? For instance if listening to a well recorded string quartet, would the e-stat, namely, the CRBN, bring something to the actual sound of the instruments that planners and dynamics can't? If the best planar and the best e-stat sound alike then why bother with the e-stat and the need for special amplification. I trying to get at the actual reproduction of the recorded instruments.

This comes with some delay but I hope it will shed more light on differences between electrostatic and planar headphones.

Leaving aside dynamic and ribbon headphones, planar and electrostatic headphones are very similar by nature of producing sound: both use flexible diaphragm which is moved by electromagnetic or electrostatic force. All similarities end up here, nature of these two forces are completely different.

Electrostatic force is limited by physical dimensions of design, reducing the distance between diaphragm and stators increase the force but also increase the possibility of sticking the diaphragm to one of the stators. By increasing the tension of diaphragm, you reduce the stickiness but you lose low frequencies. It's not easy to find right balance between these two contradictory demands. Electromagnetic force is limited only by strength of the used magnets and configuration of magnetic circuit. No stickiness or arching and if your amplitude is within mechanical limits you can achieve much higher sound levels than with electrostatics. With our more efficient headphones (LCD-MX4, LCD-X, LCD-4z) you can easily reach 130 dB SPL (not recommended!) and we did it unintentionally on some occasions. Basically, planar headphones can have much higher dynamic range than electrostatic headphones and that is their big advantage. This comes with the price though - added weight of the magnets. Here are some examples:

CRBN driver - 75 grams each
LCD-5 driver - 97 grams each
LCD-2 driver - 158 grams each
LCD-4 driver - 186 grams each

On the other hand, laws of physics are on the side of electrostatic headphones. Namely, acceleration is directly proportional to the moving mass. Electrostatic headphones have much lighter diaphragms than planar headphones. How much lighter depends on the type of the film which is used as substrate and how much of metal (usually Aluminum) is attached to it. In so called "nano scale diaphragms" the metal (not always Aluminum) is vacuum deposited directly on carrier. in all other cases Aluminum foil is laminated to the carrier introducing a layer of glue in between. There is a difference between metal thicknesses as well, Aluminum foil is very difficult to find thinner than 4.5 microns (at least in quantities needed for headphones production, if you are willing to order hundreds of tons it’s a different story) while vacuum deposited layer of metal can be easily deposited in sub-micron layers. Generally speaking, electrostatic diaphragms are about half of the weight of nano scale diaphragms which in turn are approximately five times lighter than laminated diaphragms. Lighter diaphragm leads to faster, more accurate sound.

There is one more fact in favor of electrostatic headphones, driving force is uniform across the diaphragm while planar headphones have driving force only under the surface of the conductors which never cover the whole diaphragm surface. There are always parts of diaphragm that are just passively following and sometimes even partially moving out of phase. Another disadvantage of planar drivers is that sound wave has to go around magnets and combined with sound coming from directly exposed portions of diaphragm it can lead to some loss of details and transparency. We tried to alleviate that problem with Fazors, it helps but it's not completely gone.

Advantages and disadvantages are on both sides, what is more important (desirable, needed) is up to everybody to decide for himself.

 

[qboogie]

This comes with some delay but I hope it will shed more light on differences between electrostatic and planar headphones.

Leaving aside dynamic and ribbon headphones, planar and electrostatic headphones are very similar by nature of producing sound: both use flexible diaphragm which is moved by electromagnetic or electrostatic force. All similarities end up here, nature of these two forces are completely different.

Electrostatic force is limited by physical dimensions of design, reducing the distance between diaphragm and stators increase the force but also increase the possibility of sticking the diaphragm to one of the stators. By increasing the tension of diaphragm, you reduce the stickiness but you lose low frequencies. It's not easy to find right balance between these two contradictory demands. Electromagnetic force is limited only by strength of the used magnets and configuration of magnetic circuit. No stickiness or arching and if your amplitude is within mechanical limits you can achieve much higher sound levels than with electrostatics. With our more efficient headphones (LCD-MX4, LCD-X, LCD-4z) you can easily reach 130 dB SPL (not recommended!) and we did it unintentionally on some occasions. Basically, planar headphones can have much higher dynamic range than electrostatic headphones and that is their big advantage. This comes with the price though - added weight of the magnets. Here are some examples:

CRBN driver - 75 grams each
LCD-5 driver - 97 grams each
LCD-2 driver - 158 grams each
LCD-4 driver - 186 grams each

On the other hand, laws of physics are on the side of electrostatic headphones. Namely, acceleration is directly proportional to the moving mass. Electrostatic headphones have much lighter diaphragms than planar headphones. How much lighter depends on the type of the film which is used as substrate and how much of metal (usually Aluminum) is attached to it. In so called "nano scale diaphragms" the metal (not always Aluminum) is vacuum deposited directly on carrier. in all other cases Aluminum foil is laminated to the carrier introducing a layer of glue in between. There is a difference between metal thicknesses as well, Aluminum foil is very difficult to find thinner than 4.5 microns (at least in quantities needed for headphones production, if you are willing to order hundreds of tons it’s a different story) while vacuum deposited layer of metal can be easily deposited in sub-micron layers. Generally speaking, electrostatic diaphragms are about half of the weight of nano scale diaphragms which in turn are approximately five times lighter than laminated diaphragms. Lighter diaphragm leads to faster, more accurate sound.

There is one more fact in favor of electrostatic headphones, driving force is uniform across the diaphragm while planar headphones have driving force only under the surface of the conductors which never cover the whole diaphragm surface. There are always parts of diaphragm that are just passively following and sometimes even partially moving out of phase. Another disadvantage of planar drivers is that sound wave has to go around magnets and combined with sound coming from directly exposed portions of diaphragm it can lead to some loss of details and transparency. We tried to alleviate that problem with Fazors, it helps but it's not completely gone.

Advantages and disadvantages are on both sides, what is more important (desirable, needed) is up to everybody to decide for himself.

This is fascinating. I appreciate you taking the time to share this with us.

 

[amsync]

Basically, planar headphones can have much higher dynamic range than electrostatic headphones and that is their big advantage. .

I remember someone from Audeze at Canjam mentioned that the MRI version of the CRBN has much greater dynamic range than the consumer model because they run on a much higher volt (1000v?) amp/system. If that’s true then what is it to stop the standard from moving beyond the Stax Pro Bias 580v standard?

Basically my (noob) question is whether this current standard is holding back the development of better consumer grade implementations with new amp technology?

 

[arnaud]

I’d guess safety + easier to enter the market using standard plug and bias.

 

[Chefguru]

I remember someone from Audeze at Canjam mentioned that the MRI version of the CRBN has much greater dynamic range than the consumer model because they run on a much higher volt (1000v?) amp/system. If that’s true then what is it to stop the standard from moving beyond the Stax Pro Bias 580v standard?

Basically my (noob) question is whether this current standard is holding back the development of better consumer grade implementations with new amp technology?

Pretty sure the main reason for higher voltage was to allow for noise canceling. Outside of the one system, Audeze building amplifiers is a entirely different risk profile to an already questionable market.