Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeg
My guess is based on the following two observations: 1) that no improvement in electrostatics beyond the HE90 has occured in >15 years, thus it seems that further development of this technology is unlikely; and 2) that developers of dynamic headphones are still struggling to further the technology (e.g., Sony's replacement of the R10 with the Qualia 010). Thus, if one technology has apparently reached it's limit (i.e., is at a dead end), while the other technology is still struggling to improve on its best dynamic headphones, it seems likely that dynamic headphone technology will progress further, while electrostatic headphone technology will not. At least, that's what I think.
|
I disagree with the bolded part in particular. It takes me a while to get there, but I think I do. Read on.
Mike, this is probably true, but mostly because of headphone marketplace considerations. There have been all sorts of companies that have entered and exited the ribbon/planer/electrostat speaker market during the past 15 years (BTW, each of these types of speaker designs is different but all are similar in the sense that they are nothing like dynamic designs). Precious few of these companies has been able to create enough of a splash to endure the growth pains that are necessary to survive (i.e., they tend not to reach a sales level that will lead to the economy of scales necessary to support their long-run profitability). The high-end audio market is a tough one to compete in for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that a lot of hobbyists who LOVE what they are doing in the hobby can think of nothing more exciting than to do it for a living! Plus the barriors to entry are not significant; for most companies, $50k or less in capital will get them off and running. So the upstart companies keep coming out of the woodwork, and they are ALL thinking they can attract abnormally high profit margins!
So what's my point in all of this? Well, if it's something that I can see (and I'm not saying that I'm 100% "right" but I think what I've described is more or less accurate) then surely Sennheiser can see it! And if their counterpart ribbon/planer/electrostat companies in the speaker world are having a hard time surviving, then why would it be any easier for them to grow in the headphone marketplace? Maybe all of this is implicit in your assumptions, and it something that you just haven't bothered to state. If anything, I would think it would be easier to survive as an electrostat speaker manufacturer because at least they have: 1) a much wider audience of potential audiophile customers, with 2) much more disposable income, than is the case for an electrostat headphone manufacturer. I guess what I'm saying is that, like it or not, most audiophiles think that headphone listening is a joke (at worst) or should be reserved for those situations where it is absolutely necessary (at best). Until head-fi came along (and yes, we will one day rule the entire audiophile universe
) 99% of all of the Audiogon and Audio Asylum types of people wouldn't have given headphones a second thought. Head-fi is growing all of the time and this helps to create a market, but we're still a drop in the bucket.
So (((finally))) what I'm getting at is that Sennheiser and Stax and perhaps a handful of other companies are (in my estimation) fully capable of extending the electrostat headphone horizons well beyond what we know today, but it may not YET make sense for them to invest a huge amount in R&D and product development until there is more solid evidence that it will pay off for them to do so. It's not that it can't be done. You can always build a better mouse trap, but will anybody buy it? I've got no issues with your hoping for $3k or less "giant killer" electrostat headphone entrants, but suggest that you don't hold your breath while you wait.