[hifimanrookie]

I just read on a thread here on headfi that sennheiser is working on a successor of the infamous orpheus he90 coming out this year... Prices mentioned are 25.000usd or more...WT....is this headphone world becoming totally nuts? Where are the successors of the lcd3's, he6'es, T1's and the hd800's at humanly affordable prices??

 

[ubs28]

I just read on a thread here on headfi that sennheiser is working on a successor of the infamous orpheus he90 coming out this year... Prices mentioned are 25.000usd or more...WT....is this headphone world becoming totally nuts? Where are the successors of the lcd3's, he6'es, T1's and the hd800's at humanly affordable prices??

$25.000 is affordable. Most people I know drive cars way more expensive than that. I guess it's all about priorities on where to spend your money on.

 

[pearljam50000]

Are you comparing cars to headphones?
Why not houses?

 

[HarleyZK]

Its going to be closer to 50,000 dollars if I read correctly. It may be affordable to those who have to much money to spend, but not those struggling with mortgages, or putting their kids into college. But that is the point, ultra exclusive for only the richest, or most devoted to snap up - and that is all they will need to sell them. Unfortunately, headphones is going the way speakers have where it spirals out of control cost wise. Do we really think that modern headphones retailing at some $500 dollars and performing sub par are in any way better than vintage and cheap stax systems of the past or other good vintage gear. The companies are starting to realize that audiophiles are up to spending a high dollar, well over what they would have in the past for good gear - wait 15 years and the flagships may be $10,000 and 20% better than the HD800s, HE6 and LCD3 of today. What strikes me is that they not only want to do a new orpheus but also a HD800 successor at a higher cost (probably to expect 2k+).
 
As for being on topic, will definitely keep an eye out for the HE1000, if it ends up being only slightly more costly than the LCD3 for example, I'll probably buy one down the track.

 

[gahung]

  Its going to be closer to 50,000 dollars if I read correctly. It may be affordable to those who have to much money to spend, but not those struggling with mortgages, or putting their kids into college. But that is the point, ultra exclusive for only the richest, or most devoted to snap up - and that is all they will need to sell them. Unfortunately, headphones is going the way speakers have where it spirals out of control cost wise. Do we really think that modern headphones retailing at some $500 dollars and performing sub par are in any way better than vintage and cheap stax systems of the past or other good vintage gear. The companies are starting to realize that audiophiles are up to spending a high dollar, well over what they would have in the past for good gear - wait 15 years and the flagships may be $10,000 and 20% better than the HD800s, HE6 and LCD3 of today. What strikes me is that they not only want to do a new orpheus but also a HD800 successor at a higher cost (probably to expect 2k+).
 
As for being on topic, will definitely keep an eye out for the HE1000, if it ends up being only slightly more costly than the LCD3 for example, I'll probably buy one down the track.

I think that's why you buy (interested in) Hifiman because the price they offer is lower than their competitors. I wouldn't say a $400 headphone and a $2000 headphone have no difference, but the TOTLs are way over priced. I didn't realize that until I got a lcd-x recently.
I would really like to go to NY to listen to the phones but it's weekday and I am in Ohio. I just hate the fact that there's no chance I can listen to the newest product here.

 

[hifimanrookie]

$25.000 is affordable. Most people I know drive cars way more expensive than that. I guess it's all about priorities on where to spend your money on.

lolz..25.000usd for a car...here in the netherlands u only get the cheapest cars on the market for that amount.. But as already said...u cant compare car prices to headphone prices...25mil for a car is dead cheap..for a headphone is total rediculty...only a few on this world will have the money to buy (or willing to pay) headphones for that amount of money...i remember me buying speakers in the far past for around 1000usd and those were topnotch..now getting topnotch speakers will cost ya the price of a good car. I have a friend who has speakers costing north of 100.000 euro! But hey...he has so much money he buys stuff just to own it...To quote him: i prefer to spend it on stuff then give it to taxes (here u pay huge taxes if u have certain amount of money on ur bankaccount etc)

 

[prot]

I just read on a thread here on headfi that sennheiser is working on a successor of the infamous orpheus he90 coming out this year... Prices mentioned are 25.000usd or more...WT....is this headphone world becoming totally nuts? Where are the successors of the lcd3's, he6'es, T1's and the hd800's at humanly affordable prices??

There are many rumors about succesors to both hd800 and he90. I expect at least one of those will be released or at least officially announced this year. However, judging by senn's price policies of late (the $300 cable wow), I do not have any hopes for affordable cans.

 

[up late]

$25.000 is affordable. Most people I know drive cars way more expensive than that. I guess it's all about priorities on where to spend your money on.

spoken like a rich dude

 

[bfreedma]

$25.000 is affordable. Most people I know drive cars way more expensive than that. I guess it's all about priorities on where to spend your money on.

spoken like a rich dude

Well, this is Summit-FI.

I don't understand the frustration over the cost of Halo products. A lot of the R&D costs for low production/high cost Halo's end up in the vendors next run of products in their retail lines. There's nothing to be gained by stressing over things I can't afford or which are bad investments for me. If someone else wants to spend $50k on headphones and can do it while keeping the rest of their priorities funded, good for them.

 

[up late]

sure

 

[dan.gheorghe]

Well, this is Summit-FI.

I don't understand the frustration over the cost of Halo products. A lot of the R&D costs for low production/high cost Halo's end up in the vendors next run of products in their retail lines. There's nothing to be gained by stressing over things I can't afford or which are bad investments for me. If someone else wants to spend $50k on headphones and can do it while keeping the rest of their priorities funded, good for them.

The problem in HiFi is that some of it is extremely overpriced. 
 
Some of the reasons for that:
 
1. Small companies invest important sums for them in R&D  and pay a lot on the production process. No huge company like Samsung for example entered seriously on this market, and if they do, they will go to point no 2 and increase the price accordingly. Had hopes for Asus for example, but I've seen they approached the same strategy with their latest products (essence 3 for example). R&D is more expensive and harder for smaller companies with smaller budgets.
 
2. It is seen as a deluxe market where people are willing to pay big bucks to get what they want.
 
3. There isn't a clear sense on which product is better like in video cards for example. There are a lot of subjective opinions and interpretations. 
 
4. This market is relatively small, compared to others like smartphones, computers, tablets, etc. This means that aside from the small companies, the big guys aren't quite interested in high end. It's easier to sell overpriced, but still affordable headphones like Beats.
 
I am sure I can find a lot more reasons, but you can see the consequences for yourselves. 
 
Besides this, I've recently read an interesting post in Purrin's dac comparison thread. I also hate when people say about DACS that the DAC chips used are not important and only the implementation matters. There are a lot of usages of the DAC chips besides audio in other industries. Some have considerable better precision ( for example the ones used in aerospace engineering ), but they said that they are too good for audio use, so nobody used them. Another case when this market is not taken seriously.

 

[Terja]

This is for jelt2359 (thread starter) .... Isn't the HE1000 simply a planar headphone, not a "planar-dynamic"? The initial header may be confusing to some readers sort of implying this headphone is using dual drivers. Suggest you edit 'dynamic' out, or sub it with Hifiman's own market-speak "ultimate-planar". Just my 0.002.

 

[citraian]

Planar headphones are dynamic...

 

[money4me247]

The problem in HiFi is that some of it is extremely overpriced. 

Some of the reasons for that:

1. Small companies invest important sums for them in R&D  and pay a lot on the production process. No huge company like Samsung for example entered seriously on this market, and if they do, they will go to point no 2 and increase the price accordingly. Had hopes for Asus for example, but I've seen they approached the same strategy with their latest products (essence 3 for example). R&D is more expensive and harder for smaller companies with smaller budgets.

2. It is seen as a deluxe market where people are willing to pay big bucks to get what they want.

3. There isn't a clear sense on which product is better like in video cards for example. There are a lot of subjective opinions and interpretations. 

4. This market is relatively small, compared to others like smartphones, computers, tablets, etc. This means that aside from the small companies, the big guys aren't quite interested in high end. It's easier to sell overpriced, but still affordable headphones like Beats.

I am sure I can find a lot more reasons, but you can see the consequences for yourselves. 

Besides this, I've recently read an interesting post in Purrin's dac comparison thread. I also hate when people say about DACS that the DAC chips used are not important and only the implementation matters. There are a lot of usages of the DAC chips besides audio in other industries. Some have considerable better precision ( for example the ones used in aerospace engineering ), but they said that they are too good for audio use, so nobody used them. Another case when this market is not taken seriously.

this! this hobby in general is overpriced with everything being commonly sold at 50% or more markup.

there is no real concrete objective benchmark to measure the performance of headphones and other components, so prices are subject to whatever whims of the manufactor. there is also no real correlation between price and performance from my experience.

the sonic differences between different dacs and even more expensive dacs are honestly so subtle i'm surprised that there is even a market for such stuff.

the biggest thing that contributes to the huge price inflation is that a lot of audiophiles are just complete suckers and believe almost any marketing claim regardless of what science says and no one in this hobby is interested in blind direct comparisons for evaluating objective performance differences. a company can release a sticker than you stick onto your cable and tell you it'll improve the sound and people here would believe it & get offended if you try to tell them otherwise. it's quite hilarious honestly

 

[bfreedma]

Well, this is Summit-FI.

I don't understand the frustration over the cost of Halo products. A lot of the R&D costs for low production/high cost Halo's end up in the vendors next run of products in their retail lines. There's nothing to be gained by stressing over things I can't afford or which are bad investments for me. If someone else wants to spend $50k on headphones and can do it while keeping the rest of their priorities funded, good for them.

The problem in HiFi is that some of it is extremely overpriced. 
 
Some of the reasons for that:
 
1. Small companies invest important sums for them in R&D  and pay a lot on the production process. No huge company like Samsung for example entered seriously on this market, and if they do, they will go to point no 2 and increase the price accordingly. Had hopes for Asus for example, but I've seen they approached the same strategy with their latest products (essence 3 for example). R&D is more expensive and harder for smaller companies with smaller budgets.
 
2. It is seen as a deluxe market where people are willing to pay big bucks to get what they want.
 
3. There isn't a clear sense on which product is better like in video cards for example. There are a lot of subjective opinions and interpretations. 
 
4. This market is relatively small, compared to others like smartphones, computers, tablets, etc. This means that aside from the small companies, the big guys aren't quite interested in high end. It's easier to sell overpriced, but still affordable headphones like Beats.
 
I am sure I can find a lot more reasons, but you can see the consequences for yourselves. 
 
Besides this, I've recently read an interesting post in Purrin's dac comparison thread. I also hate when people say about DACS that the DAC chips used are not important and only the implementation matters. There are a lot of usages of the DAC chips besides audio in other industries. Some have considerable better precision ( for example the ones used in aerospace engineering ), but they said that they are too good for audio use, so nobody used them. Another case when this market is not taken seriously.

I agree with all four of your points.

But don't they describe any market? IMO, we've been lucky it's taken this long for ultra high cost/small volume products to appear. Every other form of home audio reproduction has plenty of overpriced gear of questionable audible value.

I'm not defending it - it seemed just inevitable with the headphone market growing so rapidly.