CRBN is the best I own, but there are a lot of contenders for best electrostatic headphone (let alone best headphone overall) and I think it boils down to personal taste when you get to the very top-level of ToTL headphones.
Chain synergy as well. Sometimes a great can just doesnt like your chain. For example the D8000 Pro is an astonishing headphone that I love but it absolutely sounds like ass on my forge (my main amp for basically everything else). Visa versa I thought the Soli P sounded garbage on my 13R but amazing enough on forge I could put them in my top 2 cans preference wise.
Does anyone have a method tp determine AMP demand (relative power required) when using Electro's. For example, with dynamic and planar headphones I look at the Impedance. Not sure what to look at with Electrostatic Cans. Some manufacturers list Capacitance, but some don't? I was able to find Capacitance own the Crbn and the VOCE, but not on the Shangri-la Jr.'s. Does a higher Capacitance indicate the headphones will need more power?
On my BHSE the CRBN and jr seem to have the same power requirements. Actually the Vocé is very close as well. The 009s needs about 2 steps less on the volume control for equal level. But I have never seen actual measurements either.
CRBN is the best I own, but there are a lot of contenders for best electrostatic headphone (let alone best headphone overall) and I think it boils down to personal taste when you get to the very top-level of ToTL headphones.
What EQ are you using. I've got Carbon, Susvara, LVD5 and some others and would love to do and A/B with and without EQ. Here are some on my non electrostatic. I keep them in a different location because of the cables.
I'm sure when you EQ the LCD-5 with Resolves or Chronos EQ they are on par with CRBN. Yes LCD-5 tonality is in stock form not very good but with EQ damn good!
CRBN aside, the challenge for me when it comes to this, is literally any headphone can improve to a users listening after EQ. Once you EQ there just is no baseline. It can be as good as my imagination and personal ability to EQ is. I don't EQ any of my headphones for this reason, and I don't knock people that do, but I could never compare an EQ'd version of a headphone to anything else, just doesn't make sense to me.
Out of the box, the LCD-5 is just not as good as the other TOTL headphones out there. But I will agree that it's mainly based on it's uneven, darker tonality.. that and the condensed soundstage, which EQ can't fix. However, I do see that people do really enjoy it after EQ, so again no knock against that at all. I just don't think you can fairly compare headphones after you've done that.
On my BHSE the CRBN and jr seem to have the same power requirements. Actually the Vocé is very close as well. The 009s needs about 2 steps less on the volume control for equal level. But I have never seen actual measurements either.
I reached out to Hifiman and Audeze and asked the same question. Maybe they will answer. I just got my Shangri-La Jr today. Waiting on the Stax 9000 - I don't have the 009's. Just got into electro last year - so waiting for the new Stax.
CRBN aside, the challenge for me when it comes to this, is literally any headphone can improve to a users listening after EQ. Once you EQ there just is no baseline. It can be as good as my imagination and personal ability to EQ is. I don't EQ any of my headphones for this reason, and I don't knock people that do, but I could never compare an EQ'd version of a headphone to anything else, just doesn't make sense to me.
Out of the box, the LCD-5 is just not as good as the other TOTL headphones out there. But I will agree that it's mainly based on it's uneven, darker tonality. I do see that people do really enjoy it after EQ, so again no knock against that at all. I just don't think you can fairly compare headphones after you've done that.
CRBN aside, the challenge for me when it comes to this, is literally any headphone can improve to a users listening after EQ. Once you EQ there just is no baseline. It can be as good as my imagination and personal ability to EQ is. I don't EQ any of my headphones for this reason, and I don't knock people that do, but I could never compare an EQ'd version of a headphone to anything else, just doesn't make sense to me.
Out of the box, the LCD-5 is just not as good as the other TOTL headphones out there. But I will agree that it's mainly based on it's uneven, darker tonality. I do see that people do really enjoy it after EQ, so again no knock against that at all. I just don't think you can fairly compare headphones after you've done that.
Fact is that some headphones tend to distort after EQ but because of the amazing technicalities that's not the case with the LCD-5.
My HD820 distort a bit after EQ to Harman Target.
What you cannot EQ is punchiness. Failed to EQ my SR009 even with +10dB low shelf it don't have more punch. LCD-5 has the punch in stock tonality. From the readings here CRBN has good punch for an e Stat but not like the LCD-5.
You're right that you cannot compare EQd headphone to not EQd. Sense makes only compare to the same target.
That of course depends entirely where one is coming from. Some people have a BHSE or KGSSHV-carbon level e-stats amp already, and (arguably) wouldn't need to also step up on the amp to fully appreciate the CRBN or X9000.
But for someone who has no amps in the upper tier, e-stats or normal, there's certain more good choices at lower price points for conventional headphone amps than you can find for top-notch e-stat-drivers. New or used.
What EQ are you using. I've got Carbon, Susvara, LVD5 and some others and would love to do and A/B with and without EQ. Here are some on my non electrostatic. I keep them in a different location because of the cables.
Comparing the CRBN to the VOCE or the Shangri-la Jr, I have found the CRBN suffer much more from STAX Distortion (Farts) when the headphone moves a bit on my head. I spoke with Audeze about this and they claim its a necessary evil to get more bottom end out of the headphones. has anyone else experienced this?
The Voce is also prone the driver sticking (farts). If I try to chew or drink something I get the zip sound on the Voce. The CRBN more so if I move them or reseat them on my head. The JR doesn't seem to do it much.
The Voce is also prone the driver sticking (farts). If I try to chew or drink something I get the zip sound on the Voce. The CRBN more so if I move them or reseat them on my head. The JR doesn't seem to do it much.
I'm sure when you EQ the LCD-5 with Resolves or Chronos EQ they are on par with CRBN. Yes LCD-5 tonality is in stock form not very good but with EQ damn good!
If that is directed to me, then no. Although I did not use much EQ for my comparison, I normally use something close to Resolve's EQ with the LCD-5, so I'm very familiar with that sound. I like the LCD-5 better with EQ than without, but it does not put the LCD-5 on an even par with the CRBN. I don't think EQ would change the comparison I posted much, except in the treble (which I noted in the post). BTW, the CRBN also improves with EQ.
Interesting takes as I believe Resolve stated he didn't find anything the CRBN did better than LCD5 when EQ'd and prefers it over CRBN, but then again I don't think he tested with the same gear as everyone else here.
Interesting takes as I believe Resolve stated he didn't find anything the CRBN did better than LCD5 when EQ'd and prefers it over CRBN, but then again I don't think he tested with the same gear as everyone else here.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
![20230302_215055[1].jpg](https://cdn.head-fi.org/a/12001428.jpg)
