[gigit]

So all I've heard so far are dynamic headphones, and have only heard of how electrostats sound, and was wondering if some of the things I have heard about them are true or not...
Possible Electrostatic phone myths:
1. Dynamic headphones can deliver more "speaker-like impact" than electrostatic headphones
2. Dynamic phones can't deliver as "good" of sound (for lack of a better word), but have more of a "realistic feel"
3. ummm I had more but forgot...
These are just things I have heard/read once or twice, but as I have never actually been able to hear some electrostatic headphones for myself, I have no opinion... Any imput would be helpful

 

[bahamaman]

I think you're correct in your first assumption. The consensus (and my opinion) is that electrostatics aren't capable of that visceral "kick in the stomach" that some (though not all) dynamic headphones can produce.

Whether 'stats sound as "good" as dynamic headphones is just too subjective to say. On the issue of realism, I don't believe that dynamics have a monopoly. Quite the contrary, at least imho.

 

[gigit]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bahamaman I think you're correct in your first assumption. The consensus (and my opinion) is that electrostatics aren't capable of that visceral "kick in the stomach" that some (though not all) dynamic headphones can produce. Whether 'stats sound as "good" as dynamic headphones is just too subjective to say. On the issue of realism, I don't believe that dynamics have a monopoly. Quite the contrary, at least imho.

Thanks for your imput, these aren't really MY assumptions, it is only what I have heard... hopefully I will soon be able to have an actual opinon some day soon... if i can ever get my hands on some electrostatic headphones (the money to buy them may be more of a realistic goal)

 

[Meyvn]

So says hi-fi history (and older cans I've listened to), for the longest time, dynamic headphones hadn't "caught up" with electrostats in producing detail; electrostatic transducers have an inherent advantage in that department because they operate via a very, very thin layer of mylar, and move extremely quickly because of the two stators, one on each side. Dynamic headphones only have force being applied from one side. It's somewhat akin to sitting on one side of a see saw as one person. Weighting it down is pretty easy, but moving it back up would require a lot more jumping on your part unless someone is sitting on the other side. However, many feel (myself included) that dynamics have mostly caught up in this department. Having heard the K1000 and the Omega II side by side, both on solid state, I don't feel I'm missing anything there from the K1000's dynamic driver. The Omega IIs are probably a better technical performer as far as a neutral frequency response is concerned, and of course they're still a bit faster, but I definitely prefer the K1000s to the Omega IIs from what I've heard of both cans, even if I feel the SR-007 is technically superior in a few aspects. I have not heard the HE90, though, nor have I heard the older Stax electrostats. From what I know about how they work, I'd say that currently the best headphones on earth are electrostats, but I think this is a matter of happenstance and design ingenuity rather than dynamic technology still being behind on the times.

 

[Carl]

Electrostatic headphones sound like electrostatic speakers. Dynamic headphones sound like dynamic speakers. Armature headphones sound like armatures. That's just technology.

Dynamic headphones can deliver as good sound, and electrostatic headphones can deliver as good feeling, it just more difficult on the designer to achieve it. The designers tend to emphisise each technology's strengths, rather than overcome it's weaknesses.

There's a lot of rather dubious comments made about the sound of electrostatics, so don't believe everything you read. Just buy a cheap lower end model, listen to it for a while, and if it's not your thing then sell it.