[cel4145]

Oh, the perils of analogies and metaphors.

Nuances? lol... In a general sense, a clone just means something that is similar or identical to something else. In a more specific sense, it refers to something that is copied from another -- another company, in this context. The fact that these various companies who rebrand and market the headphones happen to use the same manufacturer is irrelevant. What matters is that they are all marketing a headphone that is similar or identical, and is therefore a clone. Very few people care about these nuances, and the simple fact is, 99.9% of the people who talk about these headphones refer to them as clones.

Yes. The specifics of a definition are important. By definition, a clone is derived from an original, a copy. These headphones are not copies; they are all made by the same OEM and are the same headphone. I don't know how many times someone has to say this for you to understand it. A rebranded product like these headphones is the same product only with different labeling. Once again, how someone in marketing can't understand the significance of this difference between rebranded and cloned products--or not care--is beyond me. I can't help you.

 

[Music Alchemist]

Yes. The specifics of a definition are important. By definition, a clone is derived from an original, a copy. These headphones are not copies; they are all made by the same OEM and are the same headphone. I don't know how many times someone has to say this for you to understand it. A rebranded product like these headphones is the same product only with different labeling. Once again, how someone in marketing can't understand the significance of this difference between rebranded and cloned products--or not care--is beyond me. I can't help you.

 
There is one original design, and then the other headphones that came after it are derived from that design, then marketed by various other companies, making them clones, because of the marketing done after the fact. It's not difficult to understand.
 
And I do marketing to make money. I don't care about details I don't even use to make money.
 
I also don't care about these headphones. I think the sound quality is mediocre. lol

 

[cel4145]

There is one original design, and then the other headphones that came after it are derived from that design, then marketed by various other companies, making them clones, because of the marketing done after the fact. It's not difficult to understand.

Or you could simply call them rebranded products--use the best choice word--without watering down the meaning of what a cloned product is.

 

[Music Alchemist]

Or you could simply call them rebranded products--use the best choice word--without watering down the meaning of what a cloned product is.

 
I do not deny that they are rebranded.
 
I'm curious, though...what would qualify them as being clones, in your opinion?

 

[cel4145]

I do not deny that they are rebranded.

I'm curious, though...what would qualify them as being clones, in your opinion?

If you have to ask this question, then you need to reread the discussion because you have not been trying to understand what I have said. If some part of the definition of clone I have provided--more than once--doesn't make sense to you, then ask about that part. There's no reason for me to restate it yet again.

 

[Music Alchemist]

If you have to ask this question, then you need to reread the discussion because you have not been trying to understand what I have said. If some part of the definition of clone I have provided--more than once--doesn't make sense to you, then ask about that part. There's no reason for me to restate it yet again.

 
Fine. Here is my definition of clone, in the context:
 
A product marketed by one company that is very similar or identical to one marketed by another company.
 
So my definition is much broader than yours. It does not specify who manufactures the product, since many companies use the same company for manufacturing, and I do not consider this to be relevant.

 

[Music Alchemist]

Here is another example: website templates.
 
One company creates a template. Dozens of other companies license and use the template. Sometimes it is the same; sometimes it is modified. In all cases, it is a clone.

 

[Music Alchemist]

To further illustrate my point: the headphones may all be manufactured by one company (Are they even? Is this verified?), but they are manufactured for other companies, and to their own specifications. In marketing, the manufacturer isn't so relevant. What matters is the company doing the marketing.

 

[alphaproject]

Wow....this thread took on new life...simply by not talking about the headphones.
 
You guys should all just agree to disagree and be done with it.
 
My point was the Fisher cans are expensive, the clones of them are not....and the Takstar Pro 80/HSR 1000 sound better in my opinion.
 
The HSR is basically a closed 2050 from what I've heard from experienced reviewers. They certainly look like it as well.
 
You said they were clones of Beyers DT 880 ..... ???  How can that be true with different ear cup design.
 
To me clone means, one "design" then everything is based off of that.
 
So same driver and cup design. Cords, cushion, headpband might differ, but essentially it's a somewhat clone/ripoff... not in a bad way but a cheap way. (For the consumer)
 
Fact is... I like my HSR 1000 far better than my DT 770. If that is because they are based on the DT 880 as you say....then yea...it's a step up from the 770.
 
I get there is a manufacturer in China who makes all the headphones. (Well these at least) If they come from the same plant, then yea I consider them clones.
 
Just because they have different names, means nothing to me. I'll buy the cheapest one and consider myself lucky.
 
Like the NVX on the website is $179, LOL.... WHY.... It's virtually the same as the HM5.... makes no sense to me.

 

[Music Alchemist]

Like the NVX on the website is $179, LOL.... WHY.... It's virtually the same as the HM5.... makes no sense to me.

 
I got the NVX XPT100 for 100 bucks from Sonic Electronix / Amazon. It's sometimes available for even lower. Official product websites often list the MSRP, which isn't what it typically sells for.
 
To the OP: I preferred the Focal Spirit Professional, Sony MDR-7506, and Audio-Technica ATH-M40x over the XPT100. (Just mentioning studio monitor headphones.)

 

[alphaproject]

Sony MDR-7506 - for those I couldn't wear them longer then 5 minutes. Had to sell them.
Ended up getting the Senn HD280 Pro. Now those work....but are so beat up. Plus after getting used to these
HSR 1000 everything sounds muddy.
 
I like the way the HD598 fit / sounded but I don't want an open headphone.
 
Someone stated they were like Stax do they fit the exact same by any chance?
 
There were a pair of Sony's I wanted from the mid 1990's that were so comfy and I just had no idea what they were. They sounded great from what I recall and had a lot of bass. I'm betting they weren't cheap though as they were hooked up to listening stations at this CD store.

 

[Music Alchemist]

  Sony MDR-7506 - for those I couldn't wear them longer then 5 minutes. Had to sell them.

 
I can wear my 7506 all day with no discomfort. Guess I'm lucky!
 
The Focal Spirit Professional is on another level of sound quality, and many say the ear pads are too small for them, but they fit me perfectly.

 

[alphaproject]

I think there was a Sony a tad larger than the 7506. I might have been able to wear those.
 
I'm thinking V6 . It's been years so I can't recall exactly.

 

[Music Alchemist]

  I think there was a Sony a tad larger than the 7506. I might have been able to wear those.
 
I'm thinking V6 . It's been years so I can't recall exactly.

 
The 7506 is practically a clone (gasp! oh no...better not spark another debate) of the V6, so it was probably another model.
 
If you can describe what it looked like, I may be able to tell you which one it was.

 

[cel4145]

The 7506 is practically a clone (gasp! oh no...better not spark another debate) of the V6, so it was probably another model.

If you can describe what it looked like, I may be able to tell you which one it was.

There's no need. Sony took the V6 and rebranded it to fit their professional line. The only physical change is to how the headphones are wired, which apparently make some small measurable difference in sound quality. The fit is identical. Otherwise, the difference is just more marketer BS, err labeling.