Meet the Sennheiser HD 820
Jan 9, 2018 at 9:27 AM Post #136 of 498
So? A company spends a finite amount of money on R&D when developing a product. They have to price the product so that even with mediocre sales, they get that investment back. After that, the markup over the raw production costs are pure profit.

The HD800 was released around September of 2009, it seems. It retails for $1,399.95. Its R&D costs have hopefully been recouped by now.

The HD800S was released in January of 2016. It retails for $1,699.95. I doubt it costs anywhere close to $300 more to make than the HD800, and I doubt the additional R&D costs were that substantial. It's more likely that they have been working on the HD820 for a while, and in the process figured out a way to make the HD800 sound better, too. They charged more because it's better than a product that sold for less, so why not.

So now, in the summer of 2018, the HD820 comes out. It retails for $2,399.95, $1,000 more than the HD800. New R&D costs to recover, and likely higher production costs over the HD800, maybe on the order of $50-$100.

They could have kept the price low, using the existing markup over production costs to recoup the additional investment. Unless they massively miscalculated on the HD800... but it was hugely successful, so I highly doubt that.

They are charging more because they think they have a killer product: world class sound in a closed format, making it useful in many more environments. That is a value increase over the HD800/S. And they want to cash in on that. As most businesses would.

Don't delude yourself in thinking that Sennheiser would go broke if they only charged $200 more than they do for the HD800S. People will buy this one who haven't even considered the open versions. They charge more because given $4,000 LCD-4s and Utopias, and $6,000 Susvaras, they can.

At least that's my assumption. I have no more insight into this than any of you do, to be fair.



Of course it's not quite that simple, but it's not always far off. If you have an Ether, you can upgrade it to an Ether Flow or Ether C Flow. The open Ether Flow has bass ports like the closed one, they just don't serve any purpose. They share a lot of components, and the differences are mostly in the cap, bass port, and some tuning. Not surprisingly, both versions sell for the same price.

The LCD-XC retails for $100 more than the LCD-X, probably because the added cup is made from actual wood, which is always costly.



Thanks for that. As far as I am concerned, the HD660S sounds a lot more like what I expected based on the HD650's reputation. Better in every way. I am glad I resisted the temptation to buy the HD6XX. But I've never had one for several hours or even days, maybe I would fall in love with it eventually after discovering some hidden qualities that make it worth losing so much detail.

Says who? You have no idea what their R&D and overhead costs are. You don’t work for them and you’re not an auditor. All this cost speculation being pawned off as fact is getting ridiculous. If you don’t want them, don’t buy them. If you think they’re too pricey, don’t buy them. But people need to stop acting like they have the first clue about their budget and expenses.
 
Last edited:
Jan 9, 2018 at 9:29 AM Post #137 of 498
So? A company spends a finite amount of money on R&D when developing a product. They have to price the product so that even with mediocre sales, they get that investment back. After that, the markup over the raw production costs are pure profit.

The HD800 was released around September of 2009, it seems. It retails for $1,399.95. Its R&D costs have hopefully been recouped by now.

The HD800S was released in January of 2016. It retails for $1,699.95. I doubt it costs anywhere close to $300 more to make than the HD800, and I doubt the additional R&D costs were that substantial. It's more likely that they have been working on the HD820 for a while, and in the process figured out a way to make the HD800 sound better, too. They charged more because it's better than a product that sold for less, so why not.

So now, in the summer of 2018, the HD820 comes out. It retails for $2,399.95, $1,000 more than the HD800. New R&D costs to recover, and likely higher production costs over the HD800, maybe on the order of $50-$100.

They could have kept the price low, using the existing markup over production costs to recoup the additional investment. Unless they massively miscalculated on the HD800... but it was hugely successful, so I highly doubt that.

They are charging more because they think they have a killer product: world class sound in a closed format, making it useful in many more environments. That is a value increase over the HD800/S. And they want to cash in on that. As most businesses would.

Don't delude yourself in thinking that Sennheiser would go broke if they only charged $200 more than they do for the HD800S. People will buy this one who haven't even considered the open versions. They charge more because given $4,000 LCD-4s and Utopias, and $6,000 Susvaras, they can.

At least that's my assumption. I have no more insight into this than any of you do, to be fair.



Of course it's not quite that simple, but it's not always far off. If you have an Ether, you can upgrade it to an Ether Flow or Ether C Flow. The open Ether Flow has bass ports like the closed one, they just don't serve any purpose. They share a lot of components, and the differences are mostly in the cap, bass port, and some tuning. Not surprisingly, both versions sell for the same price.

The LCD-XC retails for $100 more than the LCD-X, probably because the added cup is made from actual wood, which is always costly.



Thanks for that. As far as I am concerned, the HD660S sounds a lot more like what I expected based on the HD650's reputation. Better in every way. I am glad I resisted the temptation to buy the HD6XX. But I've never had one for several hours or even days, maybe I would fall in love with it eventually after discovering some hidden qualities that make it worth losing so much detail.

Good points. I think the inclusion of the balance cable is a key reason why the HD800S cost $300 more. It costs more than that if you buy that cable by itself. We still have a lot to learn about the HD820 including how it sounds. Hopefully it will be a pleasant surprise and make the cost easier to justify. By the way I heard Hifiman's $6000 Susvara at RMAF 2017 and thought the $3000 HE1000 v2 sounded better with same amp same music. I heard the HD800S on their new Senn amp and it seemed at the same level as the HE1000 v2. I really see no justification for what Hifiman is charging for the Susvara. Senn is still keeping things reasonable by comparison. The HD820 will sell at its new price if it performs. And if it sounds as good as the HD800S and is a closed back that truly isolates then I would call it a bargain. We will see.
 
Jan 9, 2018 at 9:32 AM Post #138 of 498
The open Ether Flow has bass ports like the closed one, they just don't serve any purpose. They share a lot of components, and the differences are mostly in the cap, bass port, and some tuning

In this "some tuning" there is a world of engineering. :wink:
 
Last edited:
Jan 9, 2018 at 9:33 AM Post #139 of 498
Almost $2500? That’s a ridiculous price! Also, it’s closed back. I don’t think sennheiser is going to have their most expensive phone be a closed back. I would expect an open back HD1000 if I were you.

They already have an HD1000

2366872.jpg
 
Jan 9, 2018 at 9:48 AM Post #140 of 498
They are charging more because they think they have a killer product: world class sound in a closed format, making it useful in many more environments. That is a value increase over the HD800/S. And they want to cash in on that. As most businesses would.

Don't delude yourself in thinking that Sennheiser would go broke if they only charged $200 more than they do for the HD800S. People will buy this one who haven't even considered the open versions. They charge more because given $4,000 LCD-4s and Utopias, and $6,000 Susvaras, they can.

Hear hear.

You might however underestimate the amount of R&D that went into this:

Of course it's not quite that simple, but it's not always far off. If you have an Ether, you can upgrade it to an Ether Flow or Ether C Flow. The open Ether Flow has bass ports like the closed one, they just don't serve any purpose. They share a lot of components, and the differences are mostly in the cap, bass port, and some tuning. Not surprisingly, both versions sell for the same price.

This really is a mute argument. I think that the closed version is always the most challenging to make. Closed design has to conquer far more unwanted physical side-effects.
Seems to me that Dan (Mrspeakers) created the closed versions first, did the big junk of "closed design problems R&D" prior to making an open version of the headphone. The only thing you prove here is that it's not too hard to make a good open headphone starting from a closed design. R&D for the closed design problems might have rendered a ton of useful data, plus there's far less physical limits to overcome. To keep the costs down, why not share more elements of the chassis, like bass ports that don't serve any purpose as you say (or might they?) - they also don't negatively affect the sound, so no harm in keeping designs more alike. Designing a cup that minimalises reflections is a hell of a task. Making an open version is quite a breath of fresh air: remove the cup and basically almost all your reflections are gone at once.

This tells nothing about a transition in the other direction. A design without bass ports suddenly needs those, suddenly there are those nasty reflections and resonances plaguing the sound... these challenges are still unsolved.

So I'm rather inclined to say:
Making an open headphone from a closed design is basically just removing the cup (yeah, over simplified: and compensating the lost seal hence bass,...): true.
Making a closed headphone from an open design is just putting a cup on it? Not in the least bit true.
 
Jan 9, 2018 at 9:49 AM Post #141 of 498
So, with all of this talk of pricing, take into consideration that Sennheiser does NOT get the entire amount. Retail markup can be up to 100% especially on high end audio, probably hovering around 40-60%. Take into account R&D {salaries, equipment, facilities, etc} , raw materials, build, distribution, advertising, warranty plus what happens in the retail side.
It's up to Sennheiser to price these, at a retail level such that expenses are covered while making some profit balanced off with market demand and what the market will bear.
it's up to us as consumers to decide the value proposition to us. If it doesn't work for us from a value or financial perspective, stop complaining and move on.

I, for one will be following these closely but will probably not hit the value/affordability mark for me. I've spent too much money putting my current system together and it works. It's just fun watching this marketplace explosion. Wishing Sennheiser success with the HD820.
Enjoy the music!!
 
Jan 9, 2018 at 9:52 AM Post #142 of 498
Jan 9, 2018 at 9:58 AM Post #143 of 498
Of course it's not quite that simple, but it's not always far off. If you have an Ether, you can upgrade it to an Ether Flow or Ether C Flow. The open Ether Flow has bass ports like the closed one, they just don't serve any purpose. They share a lot of components, and the differences are mostly in the cap, bass port, and some tuning. Not surprisingly, both versions sell for the same price.

The LCD-XC retails for $100 more than the LCD-X, probably because the added cup is made from actual wood, which is always costly.

I don't know if it has something to do with way planar magnetic drivers work vs electrodynamic drivers, but doesn't that seem to happen more often with planars than with dynamics? That differences between a closed and open variant are minimal because it's a little easier to tune the same driver for the differences between open and closed? I'm thinking in particular of the Fostex T20/T40/T50 RP series.
 
Jan 9, 2018 at 10:00 AM Post #144 of 498
I've never seen a pair of Stax that look this good -- they're usually extraordinarily hideous and look like they belong in a garage. :beerchug:

Yes, I know, only the sound matters.... but if I were going to pay on the order of $2,500 for headphones, I really would want them to look gorgeous, too, and I strongly suspect these will also sound pretty darn good to boot.

I guess we'll find out when people get a chance to listen to them.
If you wanna pay that price just because it "looks good" you're not me.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Jan 9, 2018 at 10:05 AM Post #145 of 498
If you wanna pay that price just because it "looks good" you're not me.

LOL, well given that I said that "... if I were going to pay on the order of $2,500 for headphones, I really would want them to look gorgeous, too," that, "too" being quite an important word there.... no, I wouldn't want to pay that price "just because" it looks good, heavens, no.

In fact, quite the opposite, what I'm saying is that in addition to sounding ridiculously fabulous to my ears, yes, I do expect them to look grand, too, at that price. :D

That being said, I'm not likely to pay that price for any headphones, no matter how good they sound or look, because I'm just not at the point where I pay that much for headphones.
 
Jan 9, 2018 at 10:10 AM Post #147 of 498
I think it feels good listening to ugly headphones that cost a lot.:) Man, these suckers are ugly, but they sound good.
 
Last edited:
Jan 9, 2018 at 10:12 AM Post #148 of 498
One of the reasons I don't use the 800 more is how open they are. Not because of how they leak sound, but mostly because of how the slightest noise in the room will be audible in low volume segments. A cooling fan, a car outside, someone watching TV in another room... it gets in the way.

If the 820 manage to pull off the exact same sense of space in a closed format, with no [bidirectional] leak, then I'll definitely feel very tempted to go for it. Especially if in the process they manage to get punchy low-frequencies and detailed-but-silky highs. I doubt all this can be achieved simultaneously, or there would be no reason to have the 800/800S. Then again, those are 9 year old tech (not even counting the S resonator as an R&D improvement)
 
Last edited:
Jan 9, 2018 at 10:15 AM Post #149 of 498
I seriously doubt Sennheiser will go anywhere near Fostex-grade bass. It’s just not in their DNA. I doubt they’d even push it to ZMF Atticus levels, and that’s not near Fostex levels either. Only talking quantity and slam, not quality, which is a completely different story. I’m yet to find a headphone that can give you quality bass with Fostex quantity - not even the highly regarded Atticus, which I own, can do it.

I read this whole thread and loved feeling the curiosity abound in it. That’s all this hobby is about, finding out about the unknown. I guess that Sennheiser could have addressed the closed flagship concept years ago? But why now?

Are these priced the way they are cuz they deliver the goods? Fostex closed headphones produced a character of bass that has never been achieved with Sennheiser products, at least in my experience.

The HD820 will allow folks to have a flagship level of performance in places where closed headphones excel; where noise either going out or coming in is an issue.

I have always thought closed headphones had a character. Normally that character was a little more heft in the bass and lower mids. But I can’t imagine Sennheiser making a “fun” non-reference set of headphones and charging that kind of price?

My gut instinct says these are going to excel at rock and EDM, .........also this is the most interesting headphone I’ve seen in about 6 years. Can’t wait for the reviews!
 
Last edited:
Jan 9, 2018 at 11:03 AM Post #150 of 498
You like those? Great to hear, and yes of course we will! We enjoy writing them. We will think of some of our own questions and answer them quickly (like pad material, it’s good stuff), but we welcome questions from the community too! Those take longer to answer sometimes, and we will try to answer as many as we can, but it’s a great collaboration and our project managers follow them too.

Definitely - the official product descriptions are often a bit "mainstream" compared to what a lot of enthusiasts here at Head-Fi are looking for :) This format where you have some self made questions and additionally ones from the community is ideal. Stuff like the HDV 820 maximum power output at different levels for example was really interesting. Looking forward to hearing the HD 820 next summer!
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top