[PixelSquish]

@PixelSquish
I'll give it one last try for you.
a. I don't think that dynamic headphones are generally superior to planar ones.
b. I don't think that planar headphones are generally superior to dynamic ones.
c. I think that both technologies are still evolving, having to compete with each other's strong points.
d. Planar design, having made a come-back after decades (but now in a bigger market), is a great opportunity for big profits because the dynamic sector is more saturated, Thus it is obligatory to sell "superiority" and differentiation from dynamic design. One of the most convincing ways for this is extreme pricing and it is effectively used (alas unavoidably taking some dynamic sector prices with it). This is what I don't like, not the technology.

Well then please use better words.

As far as pricing goes, I agree the pricing for pretty much any hobby goes nuts - speakers, watches, car parts, headphones, amps, fashion, bags - anything where you can create niche products. This is not just a headphone thing for sure. It is a consumer capitalism thing - big ticket items equals better quality and are status symbols.

You also have to realize, planars are also more complicated and expensive to produce. It's not JUST hype. It's a more complex design. And there are so so many more dynamic drivers produced than planars, that also reduces costs. There are other factors you are not considering.

 

[jamesjames]

I agree with both of you. All technologies have inherent strengths and weaknesses. It’s the implementation of the technology that’s most important.

But in a very open back configuration, planars definitely have the advantage of being able to create linear bass down to 20hz without roll off. And that’s mostly because they can have such large membranes compared to dynamics.

AND at the same time, you have to deal with the resonances of those large membranes.

Dan Clark does that well, Hifiman does not.

The new ZMF Caldera has very good damping and excellent timbre.

One point which I think is often lost in discussions like this is whether the phones are going to be used to listen to particular kinds of music (or other noises I guess!). As someone who listens to classical music, I'm not much interested in low-frequency extension beyond 40-50 hz. The focus for me is mids and higher frequencies. So, I have no interest in engineering compromises to achieve low-frequency extension (and all transducers involve engineering compromises). I'm aware that the phones I like will be seen by many (most?) as too bright. And yet to me the technology is nicely balanced to give me what I'm looking for - clarity, timbre, delicacy. Phones like the NDH 30 might well be seen by some as perfect for one kind of listening even if not for all.

 

[Hifiearspeakers]

One point which I think is often lost in discussions like this is whether the phones are going to be used to listen to particular kinds of music (or other noises I guess!). As someone who listens to classical music, I'm not much interested in low-frequency extension beyond 40-50 hz. The focus for me is mids and higher frequencies. So, I have no interest in engineering compromises to achieve low-frequency extension (and all transducers involve engineering compromises). I'm aware that the phones I like will be seen by many (most?) as too bright. And yet to me the technology is nicely balanced to give me what I'm looking for - clarity, timbre, delicacy. Phones like the NDH 30 might well be seen by some as perfect for one kind of listening even if not for all.

Absolutely people like and prefer different things. If you like bright headphones that have more of a treble focus, there’s nothing wrong with that.

But other people want a headphone that can reproduce the entire audio spectrum of frequencies from 20hz to 20khz. They may watch movies with their headphones and want to hear that sub bass rumble.

There is no wrong or right, just individual preferences. I’m glad we live at a time where multiple technologies exist and we get so many choices.

What I don’t understand is why some people that love a particular headphone feel the need to bash all others. That makes no sense to me.

 

[jamesjames]

Absolutely people like and prefer different things. If you like bright headphones that have more of a treble focus, there’s nothing wrong with that.

But other people want a headphone that can reproduce the entire audio spectrum of frequencies from 20hz to 20hz. They may watch movies with their headphones and want to hear that sub bass rumble.

There is no wrong or right, just individual preferences. I’m glad we live at a time where multiple technologies exist and we get so many choices.

What I don’t understand is why some people that love a particular headphone feel the need to bash all others. That makes no sense to me.

Agreed. But I do think it's often useful to think about the likely use of the phones when thinking about what might work best.

 

[PixelSquish]

One point which I think is often lost in discussions like this is whether the phones are going to be used to listen to particular kinds of music (or other noises I guess!). As someone who listens to classical music, I'm not much interested in low-frequency extension beyond 40-50 hz. The focus for me is mids and higher frequencies. So, I have no interest in engineering compromises to achieve low-frequency extension (and all transducers involve engineering compromises). I'm aware that the phones I like will be seen by many (most?) as too bright. And yet to me the technology is nicely balanced to give me what I'm looking for - clarity, timbre, delicacy. Phones like the NDH 30 might well be seen by some as perfect for one kind of listening even if not for all.

I don't listen to a lot of classical but when I do it's stuff like the cello suites - so cello solos, or string quartets and similar smaller sized classical pieces.

The LCD-X to me sound better than the NDH-30 or 109Pro for these types of pieces, and also over my T90's. That's what I used for a long time with classical.

I think each headphone of mine has its place, but in no way do I see planars as not the answer for classical. In no way at all. In fact after 7 years in this hobby, they taught me that classical can blow my mind in different ways.

 

[jonathan c]

I don't listen to a lot of classical but when I do…..

[ …. it’s Dos Cellos …. ]

 

[PixelSquish]

[ …. it’s Dos Cellos …. ]

 

[jamesjames]

I don't listen to a lot of classical but when I do it's stuff like the cello suites - so cello solos, or string quartets and similar smaller sized classical pieces.

The LCD-X to me sound better than the NDH-30 or 109Pro for these types of pieces, and also over my T90's. That's what I used for a long time with classical.

I think each headphone of mine has its place, but in no way do I see planars as not the answer for classical. In no way at all. In fact after 7 years in this hobby, they taught me that classical can blow my mind in different ways.

I agree it's great to find phones that just seem right for the music.

 

[indigogo]

I am really very glad that everyone has reconciled and found a tolerant compromise)
Summing up this powerful and controversial discussion : each phone - has its own music, each technology - has its own wallet)))))

 

[headstef]

...As far as pricing goes, I agree the pricing for pretty much any hobby goes nuts - speakers, watches, car parts, headphones, amps, fashion, bags - anything where you can create niche products. This is not just a headphone thing for sure. It is a consumer capitalism thing - big ticket items equals better quality and are status symbols.

You also have to realize, planars are also more complicated and expensive to produce. It's not JUST hype. It's a more complex design. And there are so so many more dynamic drivers produced than planars, that also reduces costs. There are other factors you are not considering.

I am not at all in the mood to spoil a nice hobby or my participation here with pointless or even artificial arguments (no one should be). More so since the above lines practically show an unexpected agreement.
I value every good headphone that is not heavily overpriced, I even value some overpriced ones for their sonic virtues. The NDH 30 is not the only highly capable headphone.
Also, if I consider that some expensive headphones are lacking (or not) accuracy and/or musicality this has to do with my own standards and demands only. They can be close to perfection for others. But no one should be over-sensitive for one's loved planars or dynamics.
Happy listening, happy posting!

 

[Mike F]

One point which I think is often lost in discussions like this is whether the phones are going to be used to listen to particular kinds of music (or other noises I guess!). As someone who listens to classical music, I'm not much interested in low-frequency extension beyond 40-50 hz. The focus for me is mids and higher frequencies. So, I have no interest in engineering compromises to achieve low-frequency extension (and all transducers involve engineering compromises). I'm aware that the phones I like will be seen by many (most?) as too bright. And yet to me the technology is nicely balanced to give me what I'm looking for - clarity, timbre, delicacy. Phones like the NDH 30 might well be seen by some as perfect for one kind of listening even if not for all.

For me, the thing about the NDH 30 is that it, as far as it seems possible with any transducer, doesn’t favour any one kind of music or presentation. Ultimately of course, like any headphone or monitor, it has its limitations. It surely will not extend flat to 20Hz like many plannars, but for the reproduction of most music it gives as neutral and detailed a presentation as I’ve heard. I’m not nearly as much of a headphone expert as many here, but all I can say is that the NDH 30 sounds far closer to my ATC100ASL monitors (which don’t extend flat to 20Hz either!) than anything else I’ve heard.

I think it’s also worth reiterating that they were designed for sound engineers as a practical substitute for near field monitors for mixing and mastering. The sonic demands and design goals of such a headphone can be very different from a high end audiophile headphone which was designed for music listening pleasure. In the first scenario any colouration of the sound is undesirable, but in the second it can be very much desired. Then the customer is free to choose which particular presentation and colouration they prefer based on genre and personal preference.

 

[indigogo]

To be fair, my investor's - musical equipment is a passion and a hobby, as are many of you here. He had a lot of very expensive equipment including several top planars and electrostats at the most indecently expensive cost.
When the NDH 30 appeared, we took the time to compare it with these planars and electrostats and came to the mutual conclusion that it is urgent to sell all these planars and electrostats before their prices have fallen significantly.

The test involved two total fanatical audiophiles and myself. One of them is a very high level musician. The main conclusions were:

1. NDH 30 - give the most accurate and musical sound that touches the senses and deep soul strings)
2. NDH 30 - reproduce any musical genre and style at the highest level. There is no need to have multiple headphones for different music genres.
3. None of the headphones on this planet can give such an accurate, open and at the same time such a deeply sensual sound.
4. The price for top planars and electrostats is artificially increased by about 3 to 5 times compared to the sound they give.
5. After listening to the NDH 30 once with a truly high-quality source, there is no longer any desire and sense to listen to other headphones. At least this is relevant for those who like to listen to music and not drool on "modern and advanced technologies")))

Not enough to say that these two crazy and devoted audiophiles were shocked and of course extreme surprised. I was ready for such a sharp turn - so I was fine, don't worry) I had to urgently give them sedatives and tell them that everything will be fine and so that they can control themselves)))

There is a lot more to write - but it's pointless for those who are blinded by advertising and technical details and not by sound and music))) And most importantly - they don't want to face the truth)))

 

[bagwell359]

The sonic demands and design goals of such a headphone can be very different from a high end audiophile headphone which was designed for music listening pleasure. In the first scenario any colouration of the sound is undesirable, but in the second it can be very much desired. Then the customer is free to choose which particular presentation and colouration they prefer based on genre and personal preference.

Seems like you are saying there is a strict boundary between accuracy and pleasure. There is not. They do overlap. “Fun” and “V” shaped headphones some of which are highly priced might bring pleasure to some, but that doesn’t make them “audiophile” in any way I understand the term. Others who are only familiar with recorded music often promote headphones as accurate that sound like a clouder of scared kittens playing out of tune violins.

 

[Mike F]

Seems like you are saying there is a strict boundary between accuracy and pleasure. There is not. They do overlap. “Fun” and “V” shaped headphones some of which are highly priced might bring pleasure to some, but that doesn’t make them “audiophile” in any way I understand the term. Others who are only familiar with recorded music often promote headphones as accurate that sound like a clouder of scared kittens playing out of tune violins.

Absolutely not. I have already said that the thing which makes the NDH 30 special in my opinion is that manages to be very accurate and musically engaging at the same time. Not something which many headphones can do!

 

[indigogo]

For brevity - all headphones are interchangeable, except NDH 30)
yet...let's see what happens next...are there any brave and not greedy manufacturers to do better and cheaper?))))