|
Post by leonski on Jan 30, 2017 19:25:44 GMT -5
|
|
emovac
Emo VIPs
Saeed al-Sahhaf
Posts: 2,456
|
Post by emovac on Feb 3, 2017 3:00:24 GMT -5
I would encourage you to look for a show where lots of high end headphones are present. Fit is important too.
|
|
|
Post by synesis on May 31, 2017 11:28:21 GMT -5
A road less travelled, but a lot of fun.... First of all, I agree with Keith; there's nothing like the holographic experience of good electrostats. I still vividly remember hearing "Yellow Brick Road" on a pair of stats a Nashville studio musician had in his home thirty years ago. They remain my high-water-mark reference standard. As Keith points out, you can get a set of Koss stats for about $600, an incredible sonic bargain viewed from that perspective. The down side of electrostats is you are pretty much regulated to a fixed listening position, with mobility minimized. A couple of years ago, I got interested in headphones as a far more cost effective and versatile way of achieving high end sound for minimal cost. I own, or have owned, several respected headphones, some of which are considered best buys in their peer group, era, or price point. But as with all things audio, I found the law of diminishing returns becomes quickly evident, as well as the proliferation of esoteric BS. Emotiva innately understands this phenomenon, and is very carefully strategic in positioning their products at the point at which cost and benefit cease to be linear, and past which cost (and BS) rises exponentially relative to quality. Since most Emotiva buyers are I think attracted by this core strategy, I thought some here might enjoy a slightly different approach to headphones. I've also found with audio that in many cases past a point there is not necessarily a "correct" solution, but rather application of the most effective mix of inevitable engineering tradeoffs to a specific environment or situation. And largely it becomes simply a matter of personal preference. Not unlike selection of the "best" wine for a given meal. So after listening to a number of headphones in search of some that offered stat's listening experience with portability, I quickly found that I could heard differences, but often just couldn't say which was "better". And I found that there was not necessarily any correlation between cost and quality. And that you often just trade off one priority for another. One headphone solution that offered a similar sonic experience in some ways to electostats, at a very modest cost, while being very portable, are the often-recommended Grado SR80. I began to look at ways of modding them to improve them, and that search led me to discover that companies offer upgrades to the various component parts of headphones in the Grado physical format. You can change the headband, cups, cords, pads, etc. to your own preference. I then discovered a company call Symphones that designs their own drivers for the Grado architecture, and you can upgrade you Grados, or as I did, assemble some from scratch. www.head-fi.org/f/threads/grado-modders-go-magnum.576717/ (My journey there began at about page 230). I found that for about $300 you can build a really good set of headphones with custom cords, custom cups, which rival or exceed the best Grado's at a fraction of the cost of many peer products. I ordered custom cords ($50-100), as well as custom wood cups ($90-150), through Etsy vendors, and ordered the drivers from Symphones (about $100). For the headband, you can either use a set from a used or inexpensive set of Grados. or as I did, you can order a replacement headband for Sony MDR Studio phones for about $30-35. They have the added benefit that they fold up, and also have the words "Studio Monitor" stamped on them, which of course makes the headphone have immediate street cred, panache, and automatically sound better. The hardest thing about assembling the headphones is soldering the cord to the printed circuit board on the drivers which can be tricky unless you have a very low wattage iron. But if thats an issue, one of the Etsy wood cup vendors will actually assemble your phones for you for a nominal charge. Another interesting thing I found was that because the headphones are so close in proximity to your very sensitive hearing, the material in the cup, as well as the geometry and dimension of the cups, can have a profound effect on the sound. There are two schools of thought on this. One is that the cups should represent an inert platform in which to house the drivers. The other recognizes that all materials and structures resonate at some level, and instead of fighting this phenomenon, seeks to find a synergistic solution that optimizes the entire wholistic structure. Including interaction with your head, through changing pads, and or cup geometries. In the same way that guitarists have a preference for the subtlety with which choice of wood and choice of pickups can affect a guitar's sound, I've have enjoyed experimenting -no, playing - with trying different drivers and wood cups to see what effect changing these things has on the sound. I currently have four sets of Grado based phones. One set is the very affordable ($100) and often-overlooked Allessandro Music version, essentially Grado SR80's tweaked to Allessandro specifications. I also bought three sets of Symphones drivers, as well as the Sony headbands, and identical cords for each. So then the only variable among the three (other than manufacturing tolerances for the drivers) is the type of wood used. I selected cocobolo wood for one set, a dense wood often used to make clarinets and piccolos. Another set uses mahogany, a lighter less dense wood often revered by guitar makers for preserving harmonics. The third set is of rosewood, a little more dense than the mahogany, but not nearly as dense as the cocobolo. I very much enjoy hearing the difference in these headphones. The cocobolo would likely be considered by many to be the most accurate of the bunch, and enjoy a more extended high end, and also low bass on the other end of the spectrum. Sound stage is as though you are on the front row witnessing the performance live. The mahogany have a much more rich and detailed midrange and warmth in the bass, but lose a slight bit of high end extension. Soundstage is such that you are in the middle of the performers rather than observing them. The rosewood offers the best high end of the bunch and excellent overall balance across the spectrum, and delineation between instruments in the mix. Frankly I can't say that any are my favorite, or conversely that I don't enjoy any of them. I often listen and compare the same cuts on each just to get a different perspective on the artists and musicians' work. So, in answer to your $1000 question, perhaps rather than putting all your eggs in one basket, maybe you could consider having a little fun, doing something custom. You could have three or maybe four sets of Grado variants to compare and play with. Or, you could get a set of the Koss stats, and still do a set of custom phones to your preference for portable use. Regardless, try your best to audition as many as possible, and don't overlook the fact that many pro music stores also have many phones on hand where you can hear many good choices. Good luck, and have fun.
|
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 9,941
|
Post by KeithL on May 31, 2017 11:43:35 GMT -5
Excellent suggestion..... And even better because your entire "workshop" can fit on your kitchen table - and be packed up in a travel case. (So it's great for folks who think building their own speakers sounds like fun, but don't have the space, or the tools, for large projects.) I should also note that, for anyone longing to try electrostatic headphones, you'll find lots of them on eBay - in various conditions. You'll also find assorted schematics, rebuild instructions, and even videos about how to rebuild or modify them (just Google the specific model). NOTE, however, that not all electrostatic headphones sound good - there are some serious clunkers. Also note that damaged electrostatics can in fact be virtually irreparable - so do your homework before buying a broken set to resurrect. The old Koss ESP/6 and ESP/9 series are notable because the foam inside actually melts into goo that literally corrodes the circuitry. (The elements apparently usually survive, but rebuilding them can be a challenging project.) Also note that you'll need an energizer (adapter) or special amplifier to power them (that's part of the project) . A road less travelled, but a lot of fun.... First of all, I agree with Keith; there's nothing like the holographic experience of good electrostats. I still vividly remember hearing "Yellow Brick Road" on a pair of stats a Nashville studio musician had in his home thirty years ago. They remain my high-water-mark reference standard. As Keith points out, you can get a set of Koss stats for about $600, an incredible sonic bargain viewed from that perspective. The down side of electrostats is you are pretty much regulated to a fixed listening position, with mobility minimized. A couple of years ago, I got interested in headphones as a far more cost effective and versatile way of achieving high end sound for minimal cost. I own of have owned several respected headphones, some of which are considered best buys in their peer group, era, or price point. But as with all things audio, I found the law of diminishing returns becomes quickly evident, as well as the proliferation of esoteric BS. Emotiva innately understands this phenomenon, and is very carefully strategic in positioning their products at the point at which cost and benefit cease to be linear, and past which cost (and BS) rises exponentially relative to quality. Since most Emotiva buyers are I think attracted by this core strategy, I thought some here might enjoy a slightly different approach to headphones. I've also found with audio that in many cases past a point there is not necessarily a "correct" solution, but rather application of the most effective mix of inevitable engineering tradeoffs to a specific environment or situation. And largely it becomes simply a matter of personal preference. Not unlike selection of the "best" wine for a given meal. So after listening to a number of headphones in search of some that offered stat's listening experience with portability, I quickly found that I could heard differences, but often just couldn't say which was "better". And I found that there was not necessarily any correlation between cost and quality. And that you often just trade off one priority for another. One headphone solution that offered a similar sonic experience in some ways to electostats, at a very modest cost, while being very portable, are the often-recommended Grado SR80. I began to look at ways of modding them to improve them, and that search led me to discover that companies offer upgrades to the various component parts of headphones in the Grado physical format. You can change the headband, cups, cords, pads, etc. to your own preference. I then discovered a company call Symphones that designs their own drivers for the Grado architecture, and you can upgrade you Grados, or as I did, assemble some from scratch. I found that for about $300 you can build a really good set of headphones with custom cords, custom cups, which rival or exceed the best Grado's at a fraction of the cost of many peer products. I ordered custom cords ($50-100), as well as custom wood cups ($90-150), through Etsy vendors, and ordered the drivers from Symphones (about $100). For the headband, you can either use a set from a used or inexpensive set of Grados. or as I did, you can order a replacement headband for Sony MDR Studio phones for about $30-35. They have the added benefit that they fold up, and also have the words "Studio Monitor" stamped on them, which of course makes the headphone have immediate street cred, panache, and automatically sound better. The hardest thing about assembling the headphones is soldering the cord to the printed circuit board on the drivers which can be tricky unless you have a very low wattage iron. But if thats an issue, one of the Etsy wood cup vendors will actually assemble your phones for you for a nominal charge. Another interesting thing I found was that because the headphones are so close in proximity to your very sensitive hearing, the material in the cup, as well as the geometry and dimension of the cups, can have a profound effect on the sound. There are two schools of thought on this. One is that the cups should represent an inert platform in which to house the drivers. The other recognizes that all materials and structures resonate at some level, and instead of fighting this phenomenon, seeks to find a synergistic solution that optimizes the entire wholistic structure. Including interaction with your head, through changing pads, and or cup geometries. In the same way that guitarists have a preference for the subtlety with which choice of wood and choice of pickups can affect a guitar's sound, I've have enjoyed experimenting -no, playing - with trying different drivers and wood cups to see what effect changing these things has on the sound. I currently have four sets of Grado based phones. One set is the very affordable ($100) and often-overlooked Allessandro Music version, essentially Grado SR80's tweaked to Allessandro specifications. I also bought three sets of Symphones drivers, as well as the Sony headbands, and identical cords for each. So then the only variable among the three (other than manufacturing tolerances for the drivers) is the type of wood used. I selected cocobolo wood for one set, a dense wood often used to make clarinets and piccolos. Another set uses mahogany, a lighter less dense wood often revered by guitar makers for preserving harmonics. The third set is of rosewood, a little more dense than the mahogany, but not nearly as dense as the cocobolo. I very much enjoy hearing the difference in these headphones. The cocobolo would likely be considered by many to be the most accurate of the bunch, and enjoy a more extended high end, and also low bass on the other end of the spectrum. Sound stage is as though you are on the front row witnessing the performance live. The mahogany have a much more rich and detailed midrange and warmth in the bass, but lose a slight bit of high end extension. Soundstage is such that you are in the middle of the performers rather than observing them. The rosewood offers the best high end of the bunch and excellent overall balance across the spectrum, and delineation between instruments in the mix. Frankly I can't say that any are my favorite, or conversely that I don't enjoy any of them. I often listen and compare the same cuts on each just to get a different perspective on the artists and musicians' work. So, in answer to your $1000 question, perhaps rather than putting all your eggs in one basket, maybe you could consider having a little fun, doing something custom. You could have three or maybe four sets of Grado variants to compare and play with. Or, you could get a set of the Koss stats, and still do a set of custom phones to your preference for portable use. Regardless, try your best to audition as many as possible, and don't overlook the fact that many pro music stores also have many phones on hand where you can hear many good choices. Good luck, and have fun.
|
|
|
Post by synesis on Jun 1, 2017 1:43:50 GMT -5
KeithL:
Have you happened to hear the Mitchell & Johnson MJ2 hybrid electrostaz headphones at any of the events you have attended? If so, how do they compare to the true electrostats?
|
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 9,941
|
Post by KeithL on Jun 1, 2017 10:02:39 GMT -5
No, I haven't heard them...... It's an interesting concept... but I do wonder about the implementation. Here are my thoughts - ( not based on having heard them)..... 1) Their technology is actually what is normally referred to as "electret" (which just means a permanently charged electrostatic device that doesn't require an energizer). While they don't require an energizer, most electrets still require a rather high signal voltage (several hundred volts) - and so still need a booster transformer or amplifier. I'm not quite clear on whether these have a tiny booster transformer inside (certainly possible), or whether they have a very (unusually) sensitive electret element. (Note that both of those would be fine, I'm just curious.) 2) While many electrostatic headphones are VERY flat (the Koss ESP/950's claim response down to 8 Hz), many people seem to find them to be "bass shy" - because they don't boom. By using a dynamic transducer for the bass, these guys would seem to have solved that "issue".... although I wonder if they've sacrificed the sound of the bass you get from a true electrostatic. (While electrostatics never seem to have especially powerful bass, they tend to have an astonishing amount of detail, even in the bass, which is one of the things I like about them.) I would guess these would appeal to folks who "like electrostatics but would like more bass". 3) To me, it seems that they've chosen a relatively high crossover point (4k). Specifically, it puts the major parts of the frequency range occupied by VOICE into the range of the dynamic driver. Since the sound of vocals is one of the things I especially like about electrostatics, I would have preferred if voices were handled by the electrostatic parts. (I would have preferred a crossover down around a few hundred Hz; more like an electrostatic headphone with a dynamic subwoofer. I would describe these as "a two-way headphone with an electrostatic tweeter", which is not the same as "an electrostatic headphone".) 4) One of the biggest benefits of electrostatic headphones is that the entire frequency range is handled by a single driver. This ELIMINATES the complexity of a crossover, and worries about integrating two drivers to work well together. (This is something you get with electrostatic headphones in specific; most electrostatic speakers require multiple different panels and a crossover.) Their solution DOES NOT have this advantage... It uses two drivers, of dissimilar technologies, and which require a crossover, which complicates matters considerably. In short, these seem more like a good pair of two-way headphones with a good tweeter.... But I wouldn't really classify them as "electrostatic headphones" - since they lack many of the benefits (and drawbacks) of "true electrostats". (However, they may sound very good, and are most certainly worth a listen...... but I would ABSOLUTELY want to hear a pair before committing to buying them.) KeithL: Have you happened to hear the Mitchell & Johnson MJ2 hybrid electrostaz headphones at any of the events you have attended? If so, how do they compare to the true electrostats?
|
|
|
Post by jh4db536 on Jun 1, 2017 10:19:30 GMT -5
Would you say the flatness and lack of boom in electrostats is a lack of decay? (instant decay)
Most of the good electrostatic headphone amplifiers are DIY because it's so niche. I.e. T2, kgsshv variants. Or maybe the "famous" el34 based blue Hawaii amp which is also made commercially.
On dynamics, the used hd800 is a very good value and can easily be had for <1000 new. If you're into details and "headphone staging".
|
|
|
Post by synesis on Jun 1, 2017 22:13:30 GMT -5
No, I haven't heard them...... It's an interesting concept... but I do wonder about the implementation. Here are my thoughts - ( not based on having heard them)..... 1) Their technology is actually what is normally referred to as "electret" (which just means a permanently charged electrostatic device that doesn't require an energizer). While they don't require an energizer, most electrets still require a rather high signal voltage (several hundred volts) - and so still need a booster transformer or amplifier. I'm not quite clear on whether these have a tiny booster transformer inside (certainly possible), or whether they have a very (unusually) sensitive electret element. (Note that both of those would be fine, I'm just curious.) 2) While many electrostatic headphones are VERY flat (the Koss ESP/950's claim response down to 8 Hz), many people seem to find them to be "bass shy" - because they don't boom. By using a dynamic transducer for the bass, these guys would seem to have solved that "issue".... although I wonder if they've sacrificed the sound of the bass you get from a true electrostatic. (While electrostatics never seem to have especially powerful bass, they tend to have an astonishing amount of detail, even in the bass, which is one of the things I like about them.) I would guess these would appeal to folks who "like electrostatics but would like more bass". 3) To me, it seems that they've chosen a relatively high crossover point (4k). Specifically, it puts the major parts of the frequency range occupied by VOICE into the range of the dynamic driver. Since the sound of vocals is one of the things I especially like about electrostatics, I would have preferred if voices were handled by the electrostatic parts. (I would have preferred a crossover down around a few hundred Hz; more like an electrostatic headphone with a dynamic subwoofer. I would describe these as "a two-way headphone with an electrostatic tweeter", which is not the same as "an electrostatic headphone".) 4) One of the biggest benefits of electrostatic headphones is that the entire frequency range is handled by a single driver. This ELIMINATES the complexity of a crossover, and worries about integrating two drivers to work well together. (This is something you get with electrostatic headphones in specific; most electrostatic speakers require multiple different panels and a crossover.) Their solution DOES NOT have this advantage... It uses two drivers, of dissimilar technologies, and which require a crossover, which complicates matters considerably. In short, these seem more like a good pair of two-way headphones with a good tweeter.... But I wouldn't really classify them as "electrostatic headphones" - since they lack many of the benefits (and drawbacks) of "true electrostats". (However, they may sound very good, and are most certainly worth a listen...... but I would ABSOLUTELY want to hear a pair before committing to buying them.) KeithL: Have you happened to hear the Mitchell & Johnson MJ2 hybrid electrostaz headphones at any of the events you have attended? If so, how do they compare to the true electrostats? Thanks KeithL. True. You can have the best concept going but execution makes all the difference. I think Emotiva seems to fundamentally understand that a relatively simple design, excellently implemented and executed is worth more than hype and frills. Comments on your comments.... 1) The modules used in these headphones I have seen on their website do indeed apparently have a small transformer. 2) I think what many identify as phat bass is actually distortion and harmonics of the fundamental frequencies. Clean distortion free bass is something that actually appeals to me, why I have investigated Rhythmik audio and Velodyne subs, dual opposed subs, and generally prefer larger driver subs that don't have to move as much to accomplish the same work as smaller subs. 3)I too was concerned about the crossover frequency which will certainly affect the upper timbre of voices, and have a crossover within the sensitive midrange frequencies. Clarity in the midrange is an aspect of electrostatics that I would highly value. 4)The most difficult thing to accomplish with design is to achieve elegant simplicity. So one driver across all octaves is a decided advantage (again if will executed). I also wonder if the linearity of the drivers would be the same at various volumes. Not being able to audition them is a definite drawback. The primary advantage I see in these headphones is to possibly give at least a partial spectrum experience similar to electrostats, and the fact that they have a significant portability advantage. Sounds like for me though, I'd be better off to put the money toward a true electrostat. Just need to find a deal.... Thanks for your valued input on the matter.
|
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 9,941
|
Post by KeithL on Jun 2, 2017 9:18:30 GMT -5
I was pretty sure they would need a transformer. I'm sure one of the reasons they pushed the crossover up so high was simply that it's much easier to make that sort of device work at higher frequencies. You can get away with a smaller driver with less surface area; it also reduces the size transformer you need... so a really tiny transformer can do an excellent job if you don't ask it to go below a few kHz. Their crossover frequency is so high that I suspect the tweeter may not have much to do with voice at all - at least not with anything you'd notice. As far as voice goes, I would really consider theirs to be a dynamic headphone with an electret tweeter. Unfortunately, while they may in fact be nice headphones, they seem to have avoided most of what gives electrostatics their character. Real electrostatics have perfect simplicity... and ridiculously low distortion... (And $500 isn't all that cheap either. People used to consider their high price to be one of the major faults of electrostatic headphones, but there are some awfully expensive dynamic phones out there lately .) And you're absolutely right about the bass.... What people tend to hear as "phat bass" is usually either a lot of distortion in the bass, or a significant bump in bass response, or both. With the Koss ESP/950's the bass doesn't sound like there's a lot of it, but, when it's there, you'd almost swear you can feel the soles of your feet vibrating. Electrostatics tend to be very flat, and NOT have significant signal compression or distortion, even at very high listening levels. (Some manufacturers actually RATE the THD on them.) They remain perfectly clean sounding, even when playing very loudly. (They never sound as if they're playing loudly; you only notice you've turned them up a bit too high when you take them off and the world seems quieter than usual .) As you've noticed, I'm sort of a fan of the Koss ESP/950s....... so I'll tell you a few more things about them in particular....... 1) They are very light and very comfortable - although they tend to feel like they might fall off your head (they don't) - and they're bulky. (They feel sort of like wearing a pair of light plastic boxes with a headband.) 2) Construction is almost entirely plastic - and they FEEL very flimsy - they FEEL cheap (but they don't seem to break often) 3) They DO come with a lifetime warranty 4) Koss parts are cheap (Stax gets $125 for an extension cord; Koss charges $25; the earpads are REALLY flimsy, but they cost $5 a pair to replace) 5) The Koss ESP/950 come as a set with an amplifier.... not a transformer, an actual electrostatic headphone driver amplifier. The amplifier runs off either AC wall power or a battery pack. The amplifier FEELS like an awful cheap piece of plastic junk, but it WORKS very well 6) Price. With something like a Stax electrostatic headphone, you have to buy an adapter or amplifier separately - which can cost a LOT ($500 to $1000 and UP.) The Koss ESP/950s come with the amplifier - as part of the price (so you don't have to buy anything else to use them). In fact, since they have their own headphone amp, you connect them to the LINE OUT on your source device. They list for $999, but occasionally go on sale around the holidays for as little as $600 Headphones vary even more widely than speakers in terms of how they sound... and how comfortable they are. Even different models from the same company vary widely... and, with some models, even different versions of the same model can be quite different. If you're spending that much, it would be REALLY good to find some way to audition a few different ones before investing in one. Otherwise, I heartily recommend the Koss ESP/950's. No, I haven't heard them...... It's an interesting concept... but I do wonder about the implementation. Here are my thoughts - ( not based on having heard them)..... 1) Their technology is actually what is normally referred to as "electret" (which just means a permanently charged electrostatic device that doesn't require an energizer). While they don't require an energizer, most electrets still require a rather high signal voltage (several hundred volts) - and so still need a booster transformer or amplifier. I'm not quite clear on whether these have a tiny booster transformer inside (certainly possible), or whether they have a very (unusually) sensitive electret element. (Note that both of those would be fine, I'm just curious.) 2) While many electrostatic headphones are VERY flat (the Koss ESP/950's claim response down to 8 Hz), many people seem to find them to be "bass shy" - because they don't boom. By using a dynamic transducer for the bass, these guys would seem to have solved that "issue".... although I wonder if they've sacrificed the sound of the bass you get from a true electrostatic. (While electrostatics never seem to have especially powerful bass, they tend to have an astonishing amount of detail, even in the bass, which is one of the things I like about them.) I would guess these would appeal to folks who "like electrostatics but would like more bass". 3) To me, it seems that they've chosen a relatively high crossover point (4k). Specifically, it puts the major parts of the frequency range occupied by VOICE into the range of the dynamic driver. Since the sound of vocals is one of the things I especially like about electrostatics, I would have preferred if voices were handled by the electrostatic parts. (I would have preferred a crossover down around a few hundred Hz; more like an electrostatic headphone with a dynamic subwoofer. I would describe these as "a two-way headphone with an electrostatic tweeter", which is not the same as "an electrostatic headphone".) 4) One of the biggest benefits of electrostatic headphones is that the entire frequency range is handled by a single driver. This ELIMINATES the complexity of a crossover, and worries about integrating two drivers to work well together. (This is something you get with electrostatic headphones in specific; most electrostatic speakers require multiple different panels and a crossover.) Their solution DOES NOT have this advantage... It uses two drivers, of dissimilar technologies, and which require a crossover, which complicates matters considerably. In short, these seem more like a good pair of two-way headphones with a good tweeter.... But I wouldn't really classify them as "electrostatic headphones" - since they lack many of the benefits (and drawbacks) of "true electrostats". (However, they may sound very good, and are most certainly worth a listen...... but I would ABSOLUTELY want to hear a pair before committing to buying them.) Thanks KeithL. True. You can have the best concept going but execution makes all the difference. I think Emotiva seems to fundamentally understand that a relatively simple design, excellently implemented and executed is worth more than hype and frills. Comments on your comments.... 1) The modules used in these headphones I have seen on their website do indeed apparently have a small transformer. 2) I think what many identify as phat bass is actually distortion and harmonics of the fundamental frequencies. Clean distortion free bass is something that actually appeals to me, why I have investigated Rhythmik audio and Velodyne subs, dual opposed subs, and generally prefer larger driver subs that don't have to move as much to accomplish the same work as smaller subs. 3)I too was concerned about the crossover frequency which will certainly affect the upper timbre of voices, and have a crossover within the sensitive midrange frequencies. Clarity in the midrange is an aspect of electrostatics that I would highly value. 4)The most difficult thing to accomplish with design is to achieve elegant simplicity. So one driver across all octaves is a decided advantage (again if will executed). I also wonder if the linearity of the drivers would be the same at various volumes. Not being able to audition them is a definite drawback. The primary advantage I see in these headphones is to possibly give at least a partial spectrum experience similar to electrostats, and the fact that they have a significant portability advantage. Sounds like for me though, I'd be better off to put the money toward a true electrostat. Just need to find a deal.... Thanks for your valued input on the matter.
|
|
|
Post by synesis on Jun 2, 2017 11:40:15 GMT -5
I was pretty sure they would need a transformer. I'm sure one of the reasons they pushed the crossover up so high was simply that it's much easier to make that sort of device work at higher frequencies. You can get away with a smaller driver with less surface area; it also reduces the size transformer you need... so a really tiny transformer can do an excellent job if you don't ask it to go below a few kHz. Their crossover frequency is so high that I suspect the tweeter may not have much to do with voice at all - at least not with anything you'd notice. As far as voice goes, I would really consider theirs to be a dynamic headphone with an electret tweeter. Unfortunately, while they may in fact be nice headphones, they seem to have avoided most of what gives electrostatics their character. Real electrostatics have perfect simplicity... and ridiculously low distortion... (And $500 isn't all that cheap either. People used to consider their high price to be one of the major faults of electrostatic headphones, but there are some awfully expensive dynamic phones out there lately .) And you're absolutely right about the bass.... What people tend to hear as "phat bass" is usually either a lot of distortion in the bass, or a significant bump in bass response, or both. With the Koss ESP/950's the bass doesn't sound like there's a lot of it, but, when it's there, you'd almost swear you can feel the soles of your feet vibrating. Electrostatics tend to be very flat, and NOT have significant signal compression or distortion, even at very high listening levels. (Some manufacturers actually RATE the THD on them.) They remain perfectly clean sounding, even when playing very loudly. (They never sound as if they're playing loudly; you only notice you've turned them up a bit too high when you take them off and the world seems quieter than usual .) As you've noticed, I'm sort of a fan of the Koss ESP/950s....... so I'll tell you a few more things about them in particular....... 1) They are very light and very comfortable - although they tend to feel like they might fall off your head (they don't) - and they're bulky. (They feel sort of like wearing a pair of light plastic boxes with a headband.) 2) Construction is almost entirely plastic - and they FEEL very flimsy - they FEEL cheap (but they don't seem to break often) 3) They DO come with a lifetime warranty 4) Koss parts are cheap (Stax gets $125 for an extension cord; Koss charges $25; the earpads are REALLY flimsy, but they cost $5 a pair to replace) 5) The Koss ESP/950 come as a set with an amplifier.... not a transformer, an actual electrostatic headphone driver amplifier. The amplifier runs off either AC wall power or a battery pack. The amplifier FEELS like an awful cheap piece of plastic junk, but it WORKS very well 6) Price. With something like a Stax electrostatic headphone, you have to buy an adapter or amplifier separately - which can cost a LOT ($500 to $1000 and UP.) The Koss ESP/950s come with the amplifier - as part of the price (so you don't have to buy anything else to use them). In fact, since they have their own headphone amp, you connect them to the LINE OUT on your source device. They list for $999, but occasionally go on sale around the holidays for as little as $600 Headphones vary even more widely than speakers in terms of how they sound... and how comfortable they are. Even different models from the same company vary widely... and, with some models, even different versions of the same model can be quite different. If you're spending that much, it would be REALLY good to find some way to audition a few different ones before investing in one. Otherwise, I heartily recommend the Koss ESP/950's. Thanks KeithL. True. You can have the best concept going but execution makes all the difference. I think Emotiva seems to fundamentally understand that a relatively simple design, excellently implemented and executed is worth more than hype and frills. Comments on your comments.... 1) The modules used in these headphones I have seen on their website do indeed apparently have a small transformer. 2) I think what many identify as phat bass is actually distortion and harmonics of the fundamental frequencies. Clean distortion free bass is something that actually appeals to me, why I have investigated Rhythmik audio and Velodyne subs, dual opposed subs, and generally prefer larger driver subs that don't have to move as much to accomplish the same work as smaller subs. 3)I too was concerned about the crossover frequency which will certainly affect the upper timbre of voices, and have a crossover within the sensitive midrange frequencies. Clarity in the midrange is an aspect of electrostatics that I would highly value. 4)The most difficult thing to accomplish with design is to achieve elegant simplicity. So one driver across all octaves is a decided advantage (again if will executed). I also wonder if the linearity of the drivers would be the same at various volumes. Not being able to audition them is a definite drawback. The primary advantage I see in these headphones is to possibly give at least a partial spectrum experience similar to electrostats, and the fact that they have a significant portability advantage. Sounds like for me though, I'd be better off to put the money toward a true electrostat. Just need to find a deal.... Thanks for your valued input on the matter. "Electrostatics tend to be very flat, and NOT have significant signal compression or distortion, even at very high listening levels. (Some manufacturers actually RATE the THD on them.) They remain perfectly clean sounding, even when playing very loudly. (They never sound as if they're playing loudly; you only notice you've turned them up a bit too high when you take them off and the world seems quieter than usual .)" This is the aspect of electrostatics I remember most, even after hearing them over thirty years ago. Another thread here asks about what is the most memorable audio experience you had that hooked you as an audiophile. The experience I had listening to the electrostats was definitely one of mine. My brother and I painted houses in the summers in college, and we painted a house for Tommy Tow, Bobby Goldsboro's bassist at the time (also with B.B. King and James Brown). He and I started talking audio while we were on a break, and Tow invited us in to hear his system. I don't remember unfortunately what brand the electrostats were, just that they cost over a thousand dollars even in those days. He played Elton John's Yellow Brick Road, starting with "The b**** is Back" and then, " Saturday Night's Alright for Fighting". Being a musician used to playing live venues, he was accustomed to loud volumes, and fired them up and handed them to me. They were way louder than I listened to Koss Pro 4A's at the time (and not a volume I have ever listened to for long regardless) but as you describe, there was no distortion, top to bottom. But as loud as they were, they almost didn't seem loud, because all the distortion cues that normally are there to let you know that a driver is reaching its limits, or that an amp is clipping, weren't there. The resulting clean, pure, audio experience I can only describe as holographic, or transcendent, where it seemed that the audio event was hardwired directly to my brain. For a time I was within the original musical event. So, that experience would become a watermark with which to measure future audio systems. Thanks for reviewing the advantages of the Koss ESP/950's. It seems the electrostatic route is more within reach than I thought. I'll keep an eye out for a best deal. I'll definitely add the Koss to my list of must have audio purchases, and maybe come full circle. Unless, of course, Emotiva decides to manufacture some electrostats.. ....
|
|
|
Post by synesis on Jun 6, 2017 23:07:35 GMT -5
...but seriously folks, .... I have wondered if the Heil technology used in the Emotiva tweeters in a larger diaphragm could be adapted to headphones.
KeithL, what are the design considerations and restrictions that would be encountered with that approach?
|
|
|
Post by kewlmunky on Jun 7, 2017 7:25:18 GMT -5
...but seriously folks, .... I have wondered if the Heil technology used in the Emotiva tweeters in a larger diaphragm could be adapted to headphones. KeithL, what are the design considerations and restrictions that would be encountered with that approach? Second this!
|
|