DCA CORINA Announced (New Electrostatic Headphone)

[markanini]

Driver type clearly influences sound. It is literally the driver that is making the sound.

In skilled hands, the differences between various driver tech be accounted for, in the end achieving practically the same FR. Then the remaining differences are THD and sensitivity, where DD wins. Audio journalists bang on about the supposed superiority of exotic driver tech, but does not change the nature of reality.

 

[maverickronin]

The bigger driver of the 'stat is most likely going to interact more with your pinna and enhance the soundstage and imaging.

 

[GaryH]

Nope, that's down to earcup size.

 

[Human Bass]

The whole point of averaging "preference" is the creation of the harman curve. Closer = better.

The Harman curve for in ears has been mediocre at best.

For headphones it has worked much better, but it doesnt mean it is the ultimate FR for every person in every case.

 

[ocinn]

Frequency response and as a function of placement/coupling relative to the ear is responsible for what you hear.

You forgot reflections in earcup/group delay, acoustic phase, and THD.

 

[markanini]

The Harman curve for in ears has been mediocre at best.

For headphones it has worked much better, but it doesnt mean it is the ultimate FR for every person in every case.

The good cases may be few and far between unless as good general target exists, for reference.

 

[Curvature]

You forgot reflections in earcup/group delay, acoustic phase, and THD.

I will challenge you here.

Reflections, phase and group delay are all to do with coupling. Actually other than at the high kHz range there are no reflections as such. The amount of space between the driver and the ear is far smaller than the wavelengths involved, and its only at HF that there's there'a enough distance to have discrete reflections. This causes some of the variations we see in individual HRTFs.

THD is interesting but, other than showing a mechanical issue with the driver, is hardly objectionable. I would of course like it as low as possible to satisfy my audio fetishism.

 

[ocinn]

Reflections, phase and group delay are all to do with coupling. Actually other than at the high kHz range there are no reflections as such. The amount of space between the driver and the ear is far smaller than the wavelengths involved, and its only at HF that there's there'a enough distance to have discrete reflections. This causes some of the variations we see in individual HRTFs.

Our opinions have overlap on the same Venn diagram, I’m just saying that the “eq to the same response and there will be no difference” take is only valid on iems.

What I was talking about is firmly different headphone-to-headphone:

Are you arguing this is inaudible? Because even Amir has commented on the effects.

 

[dfuller]

Worse than Stealth from what we can see here.

Not really. Just "not bass boosted like crazy".

For headphones it has worked much better, but it doesnt mean it is the ultimate FR for every person in every case.

I find it way too sub heavy. Otherwise pretty OK.

 

[Curvature]

Our opinions have overlap on the same Venn diagram, I’m just saying that the “eq to the same response and there will be no difference” take is only valid on iems.

Oh, I'm not saying that at all.

There are elements of the FR that aren't very controllable because of fit and seal at LF and anatomy at HF. Edit: This holds true for IEMs as well.

There's been no study done on GD introduced by headphones as far as I know. If you read Amir's comments he's openly stated that any audibility related comments for GD are a guess. And then I haven't seen any trend between his reports and GD results, or GD results and FR. Although maybe I haven't looked hard enough.

 

[ocinn]

Oh, I'm not saying that at all.

Ah got it. I misunderstood you.

Frequency response and as a function of placement/coupling relative to the ear is responsible for what you hear.

^ I took this to mean FR was literally the only thing that mattered. And was confused because group delay isn’t necessarily shown in FR alone. But I see now with context you were talking to the guy about his driver claim.

 

[paudio]

It's hard to get excited about such expensive cans. They look really cool though.

 

[solderdude]

Why buying an electrostatic headphone if the planar is better and cheaper?

Electrostatic and planar magnetic are both planar.
Planar just means the whole surface is driven and 'flat' as opposed to curved and driven at a specific area only in dynamic drivers.

Electrostatic drivers simply cannot go as loud as magnetics.
Magnetic forces can easily be made much higher in power than electrostatic.
It also is much more difficult to drive electrostatics and they are limited in bias voltage + one runs the risk of sticking to one side and the membrane becoming less conductive over time. Also humidity is a factor.

Electrostatic membranes can, in theory, be lighter in weight as there doesn't have to be a metal trace that can handle power. But too thin means it can stretch sooner and make it stick to one electrode.
Also the max excursion of an electrostatic driver is more limited due to the stator distance which can be significantly larger with magnetics (so more and louder bass with less distortion).

Another difference is that the stators of an electrostatic driver have smaller 'holes' to let the sound pass where the 'slits' can be bigger.

Planar magnetics, however, can also be made with single sided magnets, a stat has to be balanced.
The stators of an electrostatic driver can be much thinner as magnets always form a sort of 'tunnel' where stats have small holes.

 

[tifune]

Electrostatic and planar magnetic are both planar.
Planar just means the whole surface is driven and 'flat' as opposed to curved and driven at a specific area only in dynamic drivers.

Electrostatic drivers simply cannot go as loud as magnetics.
Magnetic forces can easily be made much higher in power than electrostatic.
It also is much more difficult to drive electrostatics and they are limited in bias voltage + one runs the risk of sticking to one side and the membrane becoming less conductive over time. Also humidity is a factor.

Electrostatic membranes can, in theory, be lighter in weight as there doesn't have to be a metal trace that can handle power. But too thin means it can stretch sooner and make it stick to one electrode.
Also the max excursion of an electrostatic driver is more limited due to the stator distance which can be significantly larger with magnetics (so more and louder bass with less distortion).

Another difference is that the stators of an electrostatic driver have smaller 'holes' to let the sound pass where the 'slits' can be bigger.

Planar magnetics, however, can also be made with single sided magnets, a stat has to be balanced.
The stators of an electrostatic driver can be much thinner as magnets always form a sort of 'tunnel' where stats have small holes.

All that said, what are the advantages of electrostats? Unless I missed it in this thread, so far the only solid answer I've gotten is "bragging rights"

 

[someguyontheinternet]

Old and/or more exotic technologies are also simply interesting to some people. Boils down to something in the same category as "bragging rights" though.

There are currently no indications that driver type has any significant impact. The same type of claims are also made with multi-driver IEMs. There are a lot of speculations that certain driver types induce some kind of difference in sound at specific frequencies.
However there was an IEM which had a setup with 3 types of drivers and many reviewers claimed to be able to clearly discern the "driver timbre" of those at different frequencies. Someone did a detailed breakdown of the IEM later and showed that essentially only one driver was actually producing sound with the other two having output muted to extremely low (likely inaudible) levels.

Marketing is a powerful tool. Unfortunately it also aids in spreading misinformation.

 

[solderdude]

All that said, what are the advantages of electrostats? Unless I missed it in this thread, so far the only solid answer I've gotten is "bragging rights"

There are none really. Yet... some people swear by them.
I have electrostatic speakers and they are great.
I heard the HE1 and Sonoma and they sounded great.
Heard some Stax and they sounded fine but not better than some other great headphones.

Some of their 'positive traits' that people think these headphones have are all obvious from FR deviations that some prefer.
It is just another way of building transducers... a more expensive one at that.
The latter part is the bragging rites but they do sound nice in general (so do a lot of other headphones) and you can have something that operates on another principle if that floats the boat.

 

[maverickronin]

Got a chance to hear this yesterday and it didn't have the soundstage advantage I was expecting.

On the one hand, the flat bass is a better stock tuning if you're ussing crossfeed (which you should be).

On the other hand 'stats are finicky, fragile, and need special amps.

Probably better to just stick with the Expanse.

 

[bearcatsandor]

On the other hand 'stats are finicky, fragile, and need special amps.

Probably better to just stick with the Expanse.

Truth. The amp cost adds a lot to the price from what I've seen. I have yet to see an electrostatic amp that meets the price/performance of my Topping D70/E70 stack.

 

[isostasy]

Got a chance to hear this yesterday and it didn't have the soundstage advantage I was expecting.

On the one hand, the flat bass is a better stock tuning if you're ussing crossfeed (which you should be).

On the other hand 'stats are finicky, fragile, and need special amps.

Probably better to just stick with the Expanse.

r.e. flat bass being better for crossfeed, why is this?

 

[maverickronin]

r.e. flat bass being better for crossfeed, why is this?

Basic crossfeed blends the the left and right channels being mono or close to it lower frequencies and increasing channel separation at higher frequencies. The bass is usually in phase between both channels so it sums and gives it's own bass boost. Depending on crossfeed implementation and phase relation that could be up 6dB boost on top of the Harman curve, which was developed without crossfeed.