Midgetguy
Headphoneus Supremus
Oh crap, my headphone stand didn't mention ANYTHING about being compatible with this headphone! I may have to buy this
ORA GrapheneQ - The world's first Graphene driver headphone
- Thread starter AlwaysForward
- Start date
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2014
- Posts
- 2,123
- Likes
- 1,421
Yes @SmallPersonGuy, it should be a perfect fit for your new Oras! When you buy it tell me how it is ok?Oh crap, my headphone stand didn't mention ANYTHING about being compatible with this headphone! I may have to buy this
Link to new Project update posted Dec. 30th.
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/ora-the-world-s-first-graphene-headphones#/updates/all
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/ora-the-world-s-first-graphene-headphones#/updates/all
Roll
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- May 18, 2008
- Posts
- 274
- Likes
- 176
Oh crap, my headphone stand didn't mention ANYTHING about being compatible with this headphone! I may have to buy this
Also pick these up:
DURAGADGET Novelty Brown Bear 2-Way 3.5 mm Kids Headphone Splitter for The Ora GrapheneQ
https://www.amazon.com/DURAGADGET-N...qid=1546520446&sr=8-3&keywords=DURAGADGET+ora
and might as well:
DURAGADGET High Capacity Universal Power Bank in Bright Red for The Ora GrapheneQ
https://www.amazon.com/DURAGADGET-C...qid=1546520599&sr=8-4&keywords=DURAGADGET+ora
Midgetguy
Headphoneus Supremus
Okay, that headphone splitter is a bit much for me; I didn't buy 2 sets of the GQ because I wasn't going to put 2 of them on my head so that splitter is completely useless if the only thing compatible is the GQ. Good news though everyone: I looked at my current headphone stands and even though they never said anything about being compatible with the GQ headphones, they're probably going to work because the GQs are shaped like headphones. Good thing Ora did that cuz if they made their headphones shaped like bananas, I don't know if I'd be able to use my current headphone stand.
FireDragon76
New Head-Fier
There are newer headphone materials and drivers out there, but big companies tend to play it safe. I got some Electrostatz headphones about a week ago and they were a deal at $21 dollars. They are much more neutral in the treble, not sharp or sibilant as low-end dynamic drivers tend to be when they try to be "detailed".
Newer driver technologies could be a boon to consumers if they manage to deliver better sound at a cheaper price. Having great audio quality is no good if few people can buy them. They've had electrostatic and planarmagnetic headphones for years, but they aren't typically mass-marketed.
Newer driver technologies could be a boon to consumers if they manage to deliver better sound at a cheaper price. Having great audio quality is no good if few people can buy them. They've had electrostatic and planarmagnetic headphones for years, but they aren't typically mass-marketed.
Last edited:
Midgetguy
Headphoneus Supremus
The other problem is that I don't know if those technologies have matured enough yet (well, at least the Electrostatz). Electrostatz came out years ago and I still hear a lot of mixed opinions on them. Planars too, but to a lesser extent. The thing about both those technologies is that the materials tech isn't an issue nor do I even think they're the cause of the pricing you see for some of it.
Having great sound quality tends to come at a price. Companies don't have cheap planars not only because they're a little tougher to make than dynamics, but because of the time investment to tune it right. Honestly, it's the same situation as all the dynamic driver headphones out there; the more expensive stuff is often the price they are because they're tuned better, made to sound better, and created with a respect for the music that will eventually come out of those headphones. China makes the manufacturing a lot cheaper, sure, but you know why a lot of stuff that's cheap out there get that tag of "you get what you pay for; cheap product = crap sound"? Any yahoo can buy the cheap mass-manufactured base materials, slap it all into enclosures and a headband, and sell it. It'll produce sound and that's about all it can claim to do. The expensive part comes into play when there are people investing time into tuning it to sound good; driver angles, driver materials research, enclosure construction with regards to both durability and acoustic design. All of that costs money. The cheap stuff: I always see things said about them along the lines of "sounds okay, fell apart after 3 weeks" or "sounds like crap, should've expected that from such a cheap product" or "built pretty well for what I paid, but sounds horrible". There's always going to be a compromise, but the cheaper it is, the higher the ratio of compromise. The middle game is squarely where the ratio tends to be the best it can be. It all pretty much works like good ol' college lifestyle triangle:
Except in this case, your three things are Price, Build Quality, and Audio Fidelity
Midgetguy
Headphoneus Supremus
How many more things do we have to chuck into that chart? Because I don't like the "comfort" of Grados.And then there are Grados
Slater
Headphoneus Supremus
Does anyone have a photo of the back side of the Ora grapheneQ driver? I swear I’ve seen one in one of their updates somewhere. Thanks!
Midgetguy
Headphoneus Supremus
Lovely! Speaking of which, are we getting a new update in about week or so? Inching closer to the finish line....
I do!
pila405
500+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2008
- Posts
- 911
- Likes
- 41
Well, the line seems to get a bit further from us once more. I hope they deliver at least high quality product. (Which measures well also)
pila405
500+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2008
- Posts
- 911
- Likes
- 41
Do you have any information about the production diaphragms?
I do!
What is the FoM (figure of merit) you achieved with the production GrapheneQ used in the diaphragms?
And what is the normalized frequency of first bending mode relative to mylar you achieved in the production GrapheneQ diaphragms?
(I see now that in previous comment you wrote that it's between 3.6 and 4.2, depending on frequency, but on your site it still states "4.72 - 7.65")
Last edited:
robert-eric
Member of the Trade: ORA Sound
Hey Pila, good question! The version of GrapheneQ we are using in the headphones is not the most cutting-edge version of the material but it has been thoroughly tested for environmental stability and lifespan. Even though it is not the stiffest material we have, it is still very impressive. Internally, we refer to it as “aGQ”. It is 43GPa @ 20kHz with a density of 1.6g/cm^3. That puts the speed of sound in the material at 5184m/s (speed of sound in air is 343m/s). In order to calculate the first bending mode, we use √(E/∂^3) or speed-of-sound/density. This is the same formula for the first bending mode of a flat disk. aGQ comes in at 3.240, more than three times higher than PET (1.057) and almost double aluminum (1.746).
It is also worth pointing out that the damping factor in aGQ is extremely high. The loss factor in aGQ is 0.066. This is 30 times more damping than Aluminum (0.002) and double the damping of PET (0.035).
Cheers!
Users who are viewing this thread
