[zorin]

Can you post a link of your source for this comment? The depth of the music has nothing to do with the shape of the diaphram. Regardless of the type of drivers usef the basic principle is the same. Sound is produced by the vibration of the driver's diaphram.

Depth is just a perception how a driver produces specific sounds relative to each instruments in the scene. Say a cymbal sounds softer than a guitar or vocals create an illusion the drums is behind the guitar. Now it depends on how soft the cymbals relative to the guitar creates the virtual depth. Now if you factor in the left and right channel balance give you the coordinates of an instrument on a virtual soundstage.

I have never read from anywhere the shape of the diaphram influences any aspect of a drivers ability to produce sound.

That is my contention based on reasoning and based on different presentation of the soundspace of headphones of different technologies that I heard. What I heard when listening to planar magnetic technology headphones was a flat two dimensional arrangement of instruments. Planar magnetics have good left to right dimension of soundstage and the height of it but the depth is lacking. And this projection in depth has nothing to do with whether an instrument's sound is projected as soft or as hard. My view is that a gradation in softness of sound, or the lack of it, that results in perceived distance in depth, or the lack of it, cannot be an answer. Or possibly can be one factor, but then it would mean that the planar magnetics cannot project the sound with a variation in 'softness' as you say. If that is so then we are back to square one, the planar magnetics have uniformly inferior projection of three dimensional sound compared to the electrodynamics and there has to be a reason why that is so. The concave surface of a diaphragm of the electromagnetic headphones does not vibrate uniformly across its width, the tension of the membrane close to the inside ring differs from the tension close to the outside and that might provide an answer. Another factor might be that there is also a micro-time delay of the sound waves coming from the inside of the concave shape membrane compared to the waves coming from the outer edge. Somehow either of these two [three ?] phenomena or both of them together cause good projection of 3D soundspace of the electromagnetic drivers/headphones. Compared to an electrodynamic driver the diaphragm of planar magnetic headphones has a flat two dimensional shape, has a uniform tension across its width and height and vibrates evenly. The fact remains that the planar magnetic headphones do not have good three dimensional soundstage. The shape of the diaphragm has to be A reason for this problem, and maybe THE reason. I have not heard electrostatic technology Stax headphones but I read some comments that regardless how good Stax headphones are their projection of soundspace is not great. Stax headphones also have flat two dimensional diaphragm.

 

[eso6686]

what does all this have to do with the roxanne?

 

[ALRAINBOW]

Zorin. I have read your comments and now read this. First off we only hear in two dimensions. Pressure and time, now given there is only two to use our ears and brains must make all the rest that we think we hear up on the spot as we hear it. Some of this is done by the ripples of our outer ears. The rest is done by our brain. So this is one reason why IEM,s will not give you staging as people claim. Next the headphones . The hd800 most likely had the best staging of most any headphone. And sennheiser must of spent a lot of time developing this headphone to have the sound signature and quality it does. Next would be speakers they actually give you real staging both left and right of the speakers. But even they do not give you up and down so only one plain of hearing. Now next drivers as it could be drivers that cause the effect you state . But none of really know how hearing really works, so to make a statement regarding the planers just does not sit with me very well. And given the he6 is one of my faves and the infinity speakers I have are too. I am partial to nay nay to your comments. And next the he6 has some nice sound staging anyway as I have the stax too I still like the he6 better. Sorry but we will have to agree to disagree.

Al

 

[goodvibes]

  That is my contention based on reasoning and based on different presentation of the soundspace of headphones of different technologies that I heard. What I heard when listening to planar magnetic technology headphones was a flat two dimensional arrangement of instruments. Planar magnetics have good left to right dimension of soundstage and the height of it but the depth is lacking. And this projection in depth has nothing to do with whether an instrument's sound is projected as soft or as hard. My view is that a gradation in softness of sound, or the lack of it, that results in perceived distance in depth, or the lack of it, cannot be an answer. Or possibly can be one factor, but then it would mean that the planar magnetics cannot project the sound with a variation in 'softness' as you say. If that is so then we are back to square one, the planar magnetics have uniformly inferior projection of three dimensional sound compared to the electrodynamics and there has to be a reason why that is so. The concave surface of a diaphragm of the electromagnetic headphones does not vibrate uniformly across its width, the tension of the membrane close to the inside ring differs from the tension close to the outside and that might provide an answer. Another factor might be that there is also a micro-time delay of the sound waves coming from the inside of the concave shape membrane compared to the waves coming from the outer edge. Somehow either of these two [three ?] phenomena or both of them together cause good projection of 3D soundspace of the electromagnetic drivers/headphones. Compared to an electrodynamic driver the diaphragm of planar magnetic headphones has a flat two dimensional shape, has a uniform tension across its width and height and vibrates evenly. The fact remains that the planar magnetic headphones do not have good three dimensional soundstage. The shape of the diaphragm has to be A reason for this problem, and maybe THE reason. I have not heard electrostatic technology Stax headphones but I read some comments that regardless how good Stax headphones are their projection of soundspace is not great. Stax headphones also have flat two dimensional diaphragm.

All headphone diaphragms are in piston mode until you reach the the wavelenth of a given frequency thats shorter than it's width. Thats true of every type of diaphragm. Dynamic headphone diaphragms also tend to be fairly flat in construction. More like shallow tweeters with large surrounds instead of the conical shape you're describing. There's a measurements for frequency delay called phase. I think you'll find that planars typically have the best phase curves.
 http://www.innerfidelity.com/headphone-data-sheet-downloads
 
The right Stax model can't be beat in dimensional space regard but others do sound a bit flat. It has nothing to do with being a planar. More to do with execution and tuning. I suspect that the problem is that you prefer something less linear with the mids less prominent. If anything, that's giving your illusion. Your assumptions are likely a rationalization.

 

[VisceriousZERO]

The Roxanne has nothing to do with Planars, back on topic, friends.
 
There seems to be sibilance issues with the Roxannes when they don't fit well. Several of my audiophile friends (who oddly have the same ear shape as me) have tried fitting the Roxanne, have done so comfortably, but report sibilance. I think its a fit issue, but the one friend who owns a JH13 doesn't think there is anything new with the Roxanne except the extension of the lows and highs.

 

[headwhacker]

The Roxanne has nothing to do with Planars, back on topic, friends.

There seems to be sibilance issues with the Roxannes when they don't fit well. Several of my audiophile friends (who oddly have the same ear shape as me) have tried fitting the Roxanne, have done so comfortably, but report sibilance. I think its a fit issue, but the one friend who owns a JH13 doesn't think there is anything new with the Roxanne except the extension of the lows and highs.

if your Roxanne fits a friend's ear comfortably does not mean it's a perfect fit and definitely affects SQ.

The reason I went customs is because of the struggle to get the consistent fit on a universal iem which translate to inconsistent sound. I spend time and effort trying all types of tips which non worked fir me on consistent basis.

I was skeptical on ciems at first given the high price of entry. However, since I got my JH16 I never looked back to uiems. I'm pretty sure with JH16 and Roxanne my iem needs are well covered for a long time.

 

[VisceriousZERO]

if your Roxanne fits a friend's ear comfortably does not mean it's a perfect fit and definitely affects SQ.

The reason I went customs is because of the struggle to get the consistent fit on a universal iem which translate to inconsistent sound. I spend time and effort trying all types of tips which non worked fir me on consistent basis.

I was skeptical on ciems at first given the high price of entry. However, since I got my JH16 I never looked back to uiems. I'm pretty sure with JH16 and Roxanne my iem needs are well covered for a long time.

 
Yeah I don't hear any sibilance when I wear it.

 

[goodvibes]

JH13 is great so that's no slam. Hard to believe there's more low extension but I could see a more delicate top. I don't know if I would prefer a perfectly flat top end. There's a natural rolloff in real space and how most things get mixed in the >9' range. Jerry's got a good ear so I'm sure it's fine but the 13 probably is as well.

 

[jlcichocki]

Yeah I don't hear any sibilance when I wear it.

VZ what DAP are you most happy with when using your Roxanne?

 

[VisceriousZERO]

VZ what DAP are you most happy with when using your Roxanne?

 
AK240 and ZX1.

 

[AnakChan]

   
AK240 and ZX1.

 
Not the HM-901? Are they too warm for the Rox?

 

[bearFNF]

  The Roxanne has nothing to do with Planars, back on topic, friends.
 
There seems to be sibilance issues with the Roxannes when they don't fit well. Several of my audiophile friends (who oddly have the same ear shape as me) have tried fitting the Roxanne, have done so comfortably, but report sibilance. I think its a fit issue, but the one friend who owns a JH13 doesn't think there is anything new with the Roxanne except the extension of the lows and highs.

I heard "issues" with the highs the first time I listened to the demo, When I went back Jerry did some magic to get me a good seal and then I did not here the issue any more.  It sounded like a tizzy sparkle in the highs.  I heard a little of this when I first got my customs but only on certain tracks, but now I do not hear any of it.  Brain burn-in??maybe?? This time however it was more like a sharp pronouncement of the highs, but like I said it went away after a week or so.

 

[sutjahjo]

I am waiting patiently....

 

[JonathanCandel]

I am waiting patiently....

I feel your pain... 9 weeks already since they received my impressions...

 

[45longcolt]

I feel your pain... 9 weeks already since they received my impressions...

 
Right there with you, friends...
 
Has anyone who, like me, ordered CF on BF received their Roxys?
 
And if so, what was your order #? If, indeed, JHA is working in FIFO order. If someone ordered in January and got their CF before I did, that would make me cranky (-er than usual.)