Why is older audio/headphones better then new technology headphones?

[kool bubba ice]

When I was a noob I always though new is better, but with audio and dynamic headphones it seems to be in reverse.

The most revered headphones seem to be from the mid 70's to 2004. Did companies take more risks in the early days? No short cuts? Should a headphone company with current technology and advanced engineering create a headphone that runs circles around the PS-1s bass..HP1,etc. Were people smarter back then? Fewer limitations? More imaginative?

 

[m0ofassa]

this is confusing. it was my impression that the older revered headphones were mostly electrostats (which is because it's only a small market). For dynamic headphones I was under the impression taht it was a niche collectors market.
As for audio- I think the way in which it was recorded is very much a part of the sound. There is a lot of analog distortion which adds a lot of warmth to the sound imho where as modern recordings (which may be digital) are segmented (the actual audio) and seem slightly colder. Arguably, musicians have gotten worse (i.e. the mainstream back in the 40s was all about playing hot, where as the mainstream now is about being cool).

 

[kbug]

Excuse me here. But what are electrostat phones? HD600,K701,etc are dynamic phones, right? I see that term frequently but don't know what it referres to.

 

[lucky]

Not everyone cherishes old phones. I've got little interest in trying out vintage gear when there are so many interesting things in production.

 

[m0ofassa]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kbug /img/forum/go_quote.gif Excuse me here. But what are electrostat phones? HD600,K701,etc are dynamic phones, right? I see that term frequently but don't know what it referres to.

try some searching. dynamic headphones have a moving coil and electrostats dont work off the same amplifiers as dynamics (as far as I know). Electrostatic works via induction and fluctuation of a metal plate.
my $0.02. However, my dollar is weak, so it's probably only worth 0.01$
EDIT: you'll know when you are buying an electrostat because most of them go for 20 000 US dollars

 

[mbd2884]

Quote:

Originally Posted by m0ofassa /img/forum/go_quote.gif my $0.02. However, my dollar is weak, so it's probably only worth 0.01$

Best thing I've read today!

 

[m0ofassa]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mbd2884 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Best thing I've read today!

i wish the national bank was as apologetic about my wallet as headfi

 

[krmathis]

Its not hard to see that headphone vendors put more into it some years back, compared to these days.
* Sony -> MDR-10 and Qualia 010 vs. MDR-F1.
* Sennheiser -> HE90 and HE60 vs. HD650 (ok, the HD800 is coming).
* Grado -> HP1000, PS1 vs. GS1000.
* AKG -> K1000 vs. K701/702.
* Audio Technica -> L3000 vs. ATH-DWL5000.

Guess it was a way to make a statement, that they were able to make high quality products like their competitors. They now have a reputation and hence probably don't find it needed to have these top-end products.
Luckily some vendors still "believe" and not everyone of us prefer vintage 'phones over new/current ones.

 

[milkweg]

It's like that with speakers too. I just came to the conclusion yesterday that I do not like all these aluminum and titanium tweeters they have been using because they sound too bright and a bit harsh to me. The speaker I found out I really liked in the high end used an old school soft dome textile tweeter.

 

[Uncle Erik]

Real advances in audio only come along every so often, much less frequently than marketing departments would prefer. That's why new lines are rolled out every year, the press cheers, fanboys proclaim it the best ever, and nothing really changes.

Audio is the fashion industry with electronics.

If you can pull away from the trends and what the cool people are wearing, you can set yourself up with great stuff at bargain prices. Rolling your own gets you out of the fashion trends, as well.

 

[wnmnkh]

Relatively, fewer people have old phones.

Fewer the people. fewer the talk and expose.

See? Those phones probably also have flaws which may make them nothing special compared to present's top ones (HD650, D5000/7000, DX1000, etc) but because very few people have them, such flaws are not being talked about often here.

Then people assume that those phones do not have flaws, thus they think those old ones are better ones.

Which is not true at all.

 

[Duggeh]

Until a ribbon headphone is forthcoming, the HD800 is the closest thing to "new" tech in a headphone on a fundamental level. Even if it is still a moving coil.

 

[zergslayer69]

I'd say nostalgia. =p

 

[billybob_jcv]

I think "surround" (multichannel) technology in headphones is a possibility for continuing technology improvements. It seems to be gaining some popularity with the video game crowd, but as HD audio/video expands, I could see it possibly making it into headphiledom. I know there are times when I'm watching a high-def video in my bedroom and I wish I had 'phones that would give me the effects I get from our main home theater system and still be usable for high-quality personal music.

 

[milkweg]

Most gamers do not recommend 5.1 headphones and say to stick with good 2 channel headphones. 5.1 is not needed to get surround sound effects with headphones.