[bobnfrances]

I know it's very subjective, but I was wondering if anyone could briefly explain the sound quality between electrostatic headphones and planar drive headphones (if there is any).
 
Also, why are the Stax SR-009 headphones so expensive?   Is it the build quality or sound quality, or what?
 
Thanks

 

[milezone]

Electrostatic technology is cheap however it's also hard to implement well. In short, by being the lightest diaphragm material and a true dipole they are faster than any other technology and thus can render more detail than any other transducer. I haven't heard them but I assume Stax went to great lengths to achieve a very level response with the 009's. These factors combined make them better than anything else available and thus they are able to charge a lot of money.

 

[Maxvla]

Little quibble.. stats are planar drivers. Orthodynamic is what you mean for the other. Both are planar. One uses magnetism, one electric charge.

Stats are hard to build. Stax builds their drivers in a clean room, for instance. They take a long time to build so output is low quantity. The SR-009 has some of the best build quality you'll find, short of a Patek.

In my experience stats will win on transparency and speed, just about every time. Bass is often originally seen as a weakness, and while it can still sound sort of 'off' once you acclimate to it, it's not bad at all. Treble tends to be smooth and ultra clear, though harshness can occur on cheaper models. Orthos tend to have a thicker quality to them giving them smooth sweet sound that is still quite fast, but not at stat level. They are rarely harsh and have excellent midrange (in most models). Some of the more popular recent orthos are tilted towards the bass, where they have elevated volume to go with their excellent punch.

These are just general comments. Models will vary and impressions of those models vary still further.

 

[TMRaven]

Quote:

Little quibble.. stats are planar drivers. Orthodynamic is what you mean for the other. Both are planar. One uses magnetism, one electric charge.
 

 
Tyll does not agree with you.  Not about the both being planar thing, but about Orthodynamic being what they should be called.

 

[Maxvla]

I don't see how that is possible. Both use a planar diaphragm. Perhaps you misunderstood his words? He's not the type to make a mistake like that.

 

[TMRaven]

Sorry if I edited while you were making that post.

 

[Maxvla]

Hm. Semantics then, what does he call them then?

 

[TMRaven]

It is all semantics, everybody know what everybody means when they say planar or orthodynamic anyways.
 
From his article:
 

 
 
 
 
 
Anyways, I've never heard an electrostat, I wish I could eventually.  

 

[wuwhere]

They are really called Planar Magnetic headphones.
 
http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/how-planar-magnetic-headphones-work
 
http://www.headphone.com/pages/orthodynamic-planar-magnetic

 

[milezone]

True. On that same note -- semantics -- dynamic vs electrostatic isn't an accurate comparison. It would be electrostatic vs electrodynamic. A planar magnetic phone is just an  (electro)dynamic phone with a planar transducer. Flat is better. Electrostatic, better still.

 

[Currawong]

Quote:

 
Also, why are the Stax SR-009 headphones so expensive?   

Each individual pair costs a considerable amount to make. Stax is a small company of 13 people who make each pair by hand. Also, given that the market for headphones with such technology is small, combined with the difficulties of manufacture, they aren't likely to become a mass-production item that might cause the price to lower.
 
Planar (orthodynamic) headphones do come somewhat closer to the presentation of 'stats, but it is hard to describe something that has a presentation somewhat different to normal headphones.

 

[milezone]

See this video to illustrate the difference between planar and conventional speakers. In this instance, these are planar magnetics and the design is very unique and a bit of an evolution from older designs. Really interesting and informative video/technology: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wakOqQTJn2U. Electrostats are similar however instead of a magnetic "voice coil" adhered to the driver, there is an electronically conductive coating.

 

[Tyll Hertsens]

PLanar magnetic drivers have a problem, which is that the magnetic assembly around the driver is fairly large relative to the thinner stators of electro-statics. In my opinion, this creates some problems in the highs which causes them to be a little less resolving than estats.
 
But the magnetic grip on the diaphragm is a much stronger force than estats which give the PM cans an advantage in delivering tight, impactive bass.
 
Generally: PM=warm and punchy. Estats=airy and resolving.
 
Generally.

 

[brat]

Quote:

I know it's very subjective, but I was wondering if anyone could briefly explain the sound quality between electrostatic headphones and planar drive headphones (if there is any).

The difference in two words: speed and clarity. Electrostats are much (almost lifelike) faster than any other headphones. They have clarity unobtainable by the other headphones. Maybe only HD800 have similar to electrostats speed and clarity but they're not planar
Of course electrostats have disadvantages. Most of them lack bass slam and dynamic range.
planars are... planars. Not so different from dynamic headphones.

 

[wuwhere]

Electrostatic hps also need a unique amp or an energizer and depending on your view could be a disadvantage also. Electrostatic amps are not inexpensive. One can't just plug electrostatic hps on your receiver's hp out.