[IPodPJ]

Quote:

Sounds great, but that depends on how much it's going to cost, if the price deference isn't that much, might as well get the Smyth Realiser, which is truly amazing and worth every dime in my opinion.

 
It's going to be built into amplifiers and computers so those are your only costs.  They may release a software plug- in for it at some point and I'm sure someone will hack the chipset and create a software version plug-in for Foobar with the same algorithms.  Not sure if they plan on releasing a stand-alone box but if they do I couldn't imagine it costing more than a few hundred.  Its first inception though will likely be surround receivers and laptop computers.
 
http://m.yahoo.com/w/legobpengine/finance/news/conexant-introduces-dolby-headphone-decoder-140000647.html?.intl=us&.lang=en-us
 
http://www.dolby.com/us/en/consumer/technology/home-theater/dolby-headphone.html

 

[arnaud]

Completely out of topic but from what I've seen about the new dolby headphone, apart from the fancy name (which I am sure will lure many), it does not appear to be anymore than your typical generic virtualisation, just with a few more customization settings. As such, people claiming this is just as good as the realiser either 1) didn't figure out how to leverage its true potential, 2) didn't need a proper virtualization in the first place and can be happy with any basic tool, 3) have some motivation to say this (for instance someone who is going to sell dolby gear).
 
Or it could be that dolby has cracked the law of physics in regards to human perception of 3D. yeah, that's probably it .

 

[SoupRKnowva]

I hadnt heard about an upgrade to dolby headphone, what i had heard something about was a similar tech coming from DTS that was shown off at CES

 

[arnaud]

Yes indeed, it wasn't dolby but headphone-x from dts. Regardless, this is still generic virtualization so of course better than nothing but ain't going to be remotely close to a custom filter like a (properly setup) realiser. For dolby, isn't the announcement about integrating the same old tech to some mass produced chips that will then make their way to more receivers?

 

[grokit]

I've got an older pure optical (toslink in/out) dolby headphone virtualizer module somewhere, indeed the technology is nothing special. I'm pretty sure it's a JVC; I remember that I was hoping for something much better.

 

[MightyChimp]

Anyone know how long the LCD3 driver lasts before failure? Presumably the diaphragm gets fatigued to failure / lack of precision over time. 

 

[Radio_head]

I have not seen any meaningful correlation between passage of time and drivers failing.  I've had 5 pairs including my current set and not a single one has died (well, one I never bothered opening).  Some are DOA, some die later.  Most (fingers crossed) don't die at all.

 

[IPodPJ]

Quote:

Yes indeed, it wasn't dolby but headphone-x from dts. Regardless, this is still generic virtualization so of course better than nothing but ain't going to be remotely close to a custom filter like a (properly setup) realiser. For dolby, isn't the announcement about integrating the same old tech to some mass produced chips that will then make their way to more receivers?

 
Don't know why I thought it was Dolby then.  But now that I looked up my bookmark you are indeed correct, it was DTS Headphone-X.  Dolby had some updates to their software in January 2013 so I guess I got them confused.  The Headphone-X does sound promising for movies though.  Apparently when they turned the speakers off people had no idea the sound was actually coming from the headphones.  Who knows what cheap pair they were using --- imagine a good pair like the LCD3!
 
This would also make listening to 5.1, 7.1, or 11.1 channel audio through headphones enjoyable.  There are a lot of albums out there, including those by Porcupine Tree and Steven Wilson that have been award-winning 5.1 Blu-Ray recordings which many of us can't listen to because we only have 2-channel systems.  This would be a welcome addition, if it does work as well as it's supposed to.

 

[MightyChimp]

Quote:

I have not seen any meaningful correlation between passage of time and drivers failing.  I've had 5 pairs including my current set and not a single one has died (well, one I never bothered opening).  Some are DOA, some die later.  Most (fingers crossed) don't die at all.

Stressing / straining a membrane for millions of cycles seems like it would intuitively lead to fatigue (the membrane loosening), and potentially failure. 

 

[Radio_head]

Certainly possible.  Hasn't happened to me yet, and I bought my first pair right away.
 
What I meant by "passage of time" was "a given passage of time" (or a rough time frame).

 

[Maxvla]

Stressing / straining a membrane for millions of cycles seems like it would intuitively lead to fatigue (the membrane loosening), and potentially failure. 

Tell that to vintage Stax and orthos that have been around since the 60s and 70s that still work fine.

 

[MightyChimp]

Quote:

Tell that to vintage Stax and orthos that have been around since the 60s and 70s that still work fine.

That's useful to know. That's exactly what I was asking.

 

[Saraguie]

Quote:

Anyone know how long the LCD3 driver lasts before failure? Presumably the diaphragm gets fatigued to failure / lack of precision over time. 

Better last forever, I custom ordered my casket so I can be laid to rest wearing them!
Hey anyone know what amp that will drive them with the longest battery life?

 

[Maxvla]

Better last forever, I custom ordered my casket so I can be laid to rest wearing them!
Hey anyone know what amp that will drive them with the longest battery life?:tongue_smile:

Thermal generator and your favorite regular amp. They would just need to dig a 'bit' deeper to get at the energy.

 

[CanDude]

Quote:

Hey anyone know what amp that will drive them with the longest battery life?

 
Bakoon HPA-21 will drive LCD-3 for seven hours, dig a big hole in your wallet and put a big smile on your face!