[davidhunternyc]

So according to this chart, magnesium is slightly more expensive than aluminum?

 

[SleepyOne]

Yup, much more, but to use magnesium one has to use the alloy form of it (the formula is a kept secret of course). Reason magnesium is very unstable & burn like hell! As we do not know what the alloy is so all I can do is quote the price of magnesium.

As can be seen, cost of metal itself isn't too high - aluminum is clearly not gold*. A lot of the cost will have to come from the manufacturing process.


*http://goldprice.org/charts/gold_3d_b_o_USD.png

 

[davidhunternyc]

I wonder, then, what would be the average cost of making a headphone out of magnesium alloy would be compared to other materials? Ultrasone's new Edition 8 uses beryllium and it is still cheaper than the HD800. Somehow I believe that whatever the cost of these metals, it is easily absorbed into the retail price of the headphones.

 

[SleepyOne]

Agreed. I guess it is harder (thus more cost) to deal with metal. I am not sure as I have no manufacturing experience. Whichever way, it is small in comparison to price.

 

[Canman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by davidhunternyc /img/forum/go_quote.gif Yes, John Grado chose to use aluminum instead of plastic for his reference PS1000 headphone. Are there any engineers here who would argue with this?

Once you bring in comparisons its all about perceived value. Even though the Grado PS-1000 uses aluminum and wood, its perceived value is less to me than the Sennheiser HD800. This is because of the rehashed 1970's industrial design, especially the foam pads. Also the hardware (round rods with plastic cap) and plastic connector blocks cheapens the overall package. Yes, the materials might be more organic than the HD800 but it doesn't offer anything new in terms of design. It may sound fantastic and have fancy materials but I still think the design of the PS-1000 stinks.

 

[Netminder]

I think they look pretty sexy....however....all I can do is look because the next time I will have 1400 for headphones will be in about 8 years when I get out of school

 

[davidhunternyc]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Canman /img/forum/go_quote.gif Once you bring in comparisons its all about perceived value. Even though the Grado PS-1000 uses aluminum and wood, its perceived value is less to me than the Sennheiser HD800. This is because of the rehashed 1970's industrial design, especially the foam pads. Also the hardware (round rods with plastic cap) and plastic connector blocks cheapens the overall package. Yes, the materials might be more organic than the HD800 but it doesn't offer anything new in terms of design. It may sound fantastic and have fancy materials but I still think the design of the PS-1000 stinks.

I agree with you to a great extent and I'm glad you brought up the PS1000 into the fold of this discussion. I agree that the perceived value of the PS1000 is less than the HD800 also, however it is difficult to say, not having heard both of these headphones. I too believe that the industrial design of the PS1000 has a definite retro feel to them but then I think of the HP1000 which, in my book, is the most beautiful headphone ever made. With the extreme simplicity and the lines of the HP1000, I ask myself, "how does one improve the spoon?" You just can't, it is that perfect. I think to a great extent all of Grado's headphones follow this same design philosophy, even the PS1000. I do not have a problem with this at all but I do have a problem with the PS1000's execution of this ideal, just as you do. The foam pads can definitely be improved upon, and being an artist, I have been working with foam in my work for over 10 years now, and I know there are far better options out there than what is being used. The biggest culprit to me that extends to all the highest end Grado's, is the use of the plastic blocks that you have mentioned. Those blocks really needed to be made out of metal on the PS1000, period. For the price that Grado is charging there is no need to go into the spare parts bins to finish off these headphones. As much as l dislike the plastic in the HD800, at least Sennheiser didn't resort to this tactic. I also really love the RS1's and wish that the blocks on those would have been made from wood. No more cheap plastic on high-end headphones. Have I made this point before?

 

[madmax7]

 

[Canman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by davidhunternyc /img/forum/go_quote.gif I agree with you to a great extent and I'm glad you brought up the PS1000 into the fold of this discussion. I agree that the perceived value of the PS1000 is less than the HD800 also, however it is difficult to say, not having heard both of these headphones. I too believe that the industrial design of the PS1000 has a definite retro feel to them but then I think of the HP1000 which, in my book, is the most beautiful headphone ever made. With the extreme simplicity and the lines of the HP1000, I ask myself, "how does one improve the spoon?" You just can't, it is that perfect. I think to a great extent all of Grado's headphones follow this same design philosophy, even the PS1000. I do not have a problem with this at all but I do have a problem with the PS1000's execution of this ideal, just as you do. The foam pads can definitely be improved upon, and being an artist, I have been working with foam in my work for over 10 years now, and I know there are far better options out there than what is being used. The biggest culprit to me that extends to all the highest end Grado's, is the use of the plastic blocks that you have mentioned. Those blocks really needed to be made out of metal on the PS1000, period. For the price that Grado is charging there is no need to go into the spare parts bins to finish off these headphones. As much as l dislike the plastic in the HD800, at least Sennheiser didn't resort to this tactic. I also really love the RS1's and wish that the blocks on those would have been made from wood. No more cheap plastic on high-end headphones. Have I made this point before?

Agreed. The HP-1000 is a pure form follows function design and it remains the finest execution of Grado design. With a simple design the smaller details become more important. If I am paying $1,400 or $1,700 for a headphone I want a well executed design. I am not against plastic, as long as it is good quality. But the parts bin approach to the Grado PS-1000 is very disappointing to me considering it is not only $700 more than the GS-1000, it is the most expensive Grado headphone ever sold.

 

[davidhunternyc]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Canman /img/forum/go_quote.gif Agreed. The HP-1000 is a pure form follows function design and it remains the finest execution of Grado design. With a simple design the smaller details become more important. If I am paying $1,400 or $1,700 for a headphone I want a well executed design. I am not against plastic, as long as it is good quality. But the parts bin approach to the Grado PS-1000 is very disappointing to me considering it is not only $700 more than the GS-1000, it is the most expensive Grado headphone ever sold.

I put in "bold" the part of your comment which I take issue with. As far as I am concerned, there isn't such a thing as high-end plastic. Exotic, high-end, whatever, these terms in conjunction with the material, plastic or polymer, is an oxymoron. It doesn't exist. Plastic is plastic ( perhaps bakelite would be a justified high-end material but this is a separate issue to our discussion). With that said, it is so nice to meet a kindrid spirit of the HP1000. I often think that this headphone is heads-and-shoulders above those people who have the ability to appreciate the design of headphones on this forum. Damn, the HP1000 is ground-zero of headphone design. Period.

 

[tourmaline]

Good quality plastic can last for ages, and as strong as metal.

 

[Benaiir]

I thought all that mattered was the sound. I guess I was wrong.

 

[sunneebear]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Benaiir /img/forum/go_quote.gif I thought all that mattered was the sound. I guess I was wrong.

Of course.
Then after some research you find out that the high tech plastic you just dished out $1400 for only cost $14 to produce. I know this is beating the dead horse again but if the issue was never raised about high tech Leona then no one would really care. It would just be the sound. Like the UE10/11. We all know it doesn't cost that much to make but we accept to pay for the sound we like. If in the beginning UE said that they use a proprietary high tech polymer that just happens to look like cheap-ass acrylic, I think that there would be a long thread like this also.

 

[Epicfailman]

Quick question. If plastic is the best material for these headphones in terms of sound as some people are claiming...why don't they make flutes or other musical instruments out of plastic. Plastic does not have "special" qualities that makes it better than some kind of metal. Senn just used it to lower the cost.

 

[John Willett]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Epicfailman /img/forum/go_quote.gif Quick question. If plastic is the best material for these headphones in terms of sound as some people are claiming...why don't they make flutes or other musical instruments out of plastic. Plastic does not have "special" qualities that makes it better than some kind of metal. Senn just used it to lower the cost.

What utter rubbish!

Headphones should be inert to enable the diaphragm to freely move and reproduce accurately the soundwaves being fed to it. The materials should not alter the sound.

In total contrast, a musical instrument has to resonate, the materials are chosen *because* they resonate as they have to vibrate in sympathy with the air / strings to produce the sound.