[conquerator2]

Hifiman already has a pretty good spread from cheaper models to very expensive ones though.

But I'd argue it's nowhere near as terrific as it used to be. There's a lot more competition now too.

 

[headwig]

This is absurd. Headphones that sounds as good as Hifiman's don't happen by accident, or everyone would be making them. Give them credit where it's due at least.

 

[GREQ]

This is absurd. Headphones that sounds as good as Hifiman's don't happen by accident, or everyone would be making them. Give them credit where it's due at least.

This is a total strawman.
You've simply selected the easy point to argue about sound quality while ignoring the obvious point about lacking build quality.

That said, I'm looking forward to reading some actual comparisons and comparison FR graphs with reputable modern closed back headphones, like Stellia.
I think that will lead to some exciting drama... this thread got stale too quickly

 

[Max Choiral]

This is absurd. Headphones that sounds as good as Hifiman's don't happen by accident, or everyone would be making them. Give them credit where it's due at least.

Absurd is an audio brand taking pride in copycatting something with minimal efforts for R&D and then charging it hella amount of money. Absurd is for people to be content with that and the fact a manufacturer used the same base for two headphones with almost x5 difference in price.

 

[Hifiearspeakers]

This is a total strawman.
You've simply selected the easy point to argue about sound quality while ignoring the obvious point about lacking build quality.

That said, I'm looking forward to reading some actual comparisons and comparison FR graphs with reputable modern closed back headphones, like Stellia.
I think that will lead to some exciting drama... this thread got stale too quickly

Except it’s not a strawman argument. Your argument is a strawman. Engineering drivers at the nano-scale is absolutely an engineering feat. And Hifiman was one of two companies to be the first to do it.

Build quality is a completely separate issue from the internal technology. So you conflating the two is absurd since it’s apples to oranges.

Everyone here knows Hifiman has build quality issues. But to deny the fact that he has a PHD in nanotechnology and makes amazing drivers, is both, erroneous and salty.

 

[Mediahound]

People need to understand that while these are certainly an homage to the Sony R10 headphones, they are not a copy of them. Sure the wood earcups are very similar but really that’s where the similarities end. The driver materials are completely different, the headband is completely different etc.

There more I think about it, if Hifiman chose to name these something else everybody would still be saying- hey you copied the Sony R10. Either way I don’t think Hifiman could really win, but what is better?

At least they’re being up front about it and say that they’re paying homage to that headphone.

 

[headwig]

Absurd is an audio brand taking pride in copycatting something with minimal efforts for R&D and then charging it hella amount of money. Absurd is for people to be content with that and the fact a manufacturer used the same base for two headphones with almost x5 difference in price.

How do you know there were minimal R&D efforts? Neither of these new closed backs is a straight copy of the Sony. They don't use the same kinds of drivers and evidently both have quite different tonalities from the Sony, even if there are some similarities. And these are Hifiman's first closed backs. Seems to me they would have had to do some significant design and engineering work to come up with these.

 

[Malevolent]

Absurd is an audio brand taking pride in copycatting something with minimal efforts for R&D and then charging it hella amount of money. Absurd is for people to be content with that and the fact a manufacturer used the same base for two headphones with almost x5 difference in price.

Well, I don't like the design of this headphone; I think it looks cheap and derivative. I don't like the price of the planar version, either; I think it is absurdly expensive.

However, none of us has had any experience with its sound; thus, this is one aspect of the product that I have reserved my opinions on.

Ultimately, this may just be the best-sounding headphone, or it could be a huge dud. Either way, at this juncture, it's not fair to comment on its engineering and/or R&D, or in this very case, the distinct lack of.

 

[GREQ]

Except it’s not a strawman argument. Your argument is a strawman. Engineering drivers at the nano-scale is absolutely an engineering feat. And Hifiman was one of two companies to be the first to do it.

Build quality is a completely separate issue from the internal technology. So you conflating the two is absurd since it’s apples to oranges.

Everyone here knows Hifiman has build quality issues. But to deny the fact that he has a PHD in nanotechnology and makes amazing drivers, is both, erroneous and salty.

I didn't mention anything negative about hifiman driver engineering.
Nor have I conflated the two.

You're grasping at straws for an argument here where there isn't one.

 

[conquerator2]

I suspect a lot of your critique has to do with said QC issues and driver inconsistencies. AFAIK, the tension of the membrane needs to be just perfect and minor imperfections can result in sonic differences. It has been widely discussed that different headphone pairs have variations in their sound. Now, this is not just on HFM; consistency has been difficult for many boutique manufactures. From my understanding it should generally be a lot lesser of an issue now than it was before. But it is still important to point out, especially when there's a certain coloration or house sound that said variations might emphasize, resulting in mixed opinions from headphone users.

 

[kp297]

Moving on...

If I'm not mistaken, HE-R10 looks to be the very first hifiman headphone using solid wood, not just veneer. I remember Fang stated he used veneer as it was more reliable and didn't crack as often as solid wood. The HE-R10 must have solved this issue for Hifiman to be using solid wood in a flagship design.

 

[ubs28]

Well, I don't like the design of this headphone; I think it looks cheap and derivative. I don't like the price of the planar version, either; I think it is absurdly expensive.

However, none of us has had any experience with its sound; thus, this is one aspect of the product that I have reserved my opinions on.

Ultimately, this may just be the best-sounding headphone, or it could be a huge dud. Either way, at this juncture, it's not fair to comment on its engineering and/or R&D, or in this very case, the distinct lack of.

It is so expensive because it sounds so good. That is the reasoning of Mr. Fang.

 

[ubs28]

FYI, FR curves. Only the dynamic driver FR curve was posted before, so I've included both for handy comparisons. These were pulled from https://www.itheat.com/view/18899.html

PLANAR:



DYNAMIC DRIVER:

If those FR's are true, than the Sony MDR-R10 must be one of the more overhyped headphones ever?

However I reserve my judgment as I only judge by what I hear with my ears rather than graphs.

 

[sennfan83261]

Moving on...

If I'm not mistaken, HE-R10 looks to be the very first hifiman headphone using solid wood, not just veneer. I remember Fang stated he used veneer as it was more reliable and didn't crack as often as solid wood. The HE-R10 must have solved this issue for Hifiman to be using solid wood in a flagship design.

Wasn't the use of veneer related to wood decorative rings surrounding baffles and the like such as Audeze's LCD-2,3,4 lines and Hifiman's upper-tier offerings. Did the context include wood cups used to close off headphones? I vaguely recall him saying or showing bouncing a veneer ring off the ground.

 

[ubs28]

Actually, there are 5 different new models in Hifiman's pipeline

And these chinese knock-off products will cost the same as the original products