Tyll Hertsens

Happy Birthday, Steve! Have a ball!

Maybe repost ... but I don't care.

It's weird .... but I don't remember. I think there was some pirate convention, and I was in on the coup somehow. Al had soething to do with it, no doubt. Fucking lawyers. Yes ... Dinny too. Here I am none the less. Thanks to the legal team, evidently.

Nice rig. Thanks for the offer, but I don't think I'll need it. I've been chatting with Doug a bit about getting an amp. And I've got to wait and see how Audeze responds to the article I just wrote.

A billion dollars worth of headphones!? http://www.twice.com/article/480470-Headphones_Makers_Battle_For_Piece_Of_1B_Turf.php

Happy Birthday, old man!

Ha_p_ _irt_d_ay I know you'll be able ti fill in the blanks. Have a good one.

Not economics, per se, but a NY Times article is always noteworthy. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/04/arts/04iht-gear04.html?_r=2&ref=arts

Move along. These aren't the hipsters you're looking for. Really!?

FBI trolling.

I didn't say they don't have any, just saying that it doesn't look like a problem to me, and other dynamic cans have more. Is what you're talking about back EMF, or simply that the amp has to do work? Watts is work even into a resistor. If what you say is true, impedance should vary at different frequencies --- when you get close to resonances inherent in the geometry ect. Even if I agree that there's impedance due to the work being accomplished, the impedance is still flat at 50 Ohms. Back EMF in normal dynamic driver headphones exists more strongly near the driver resonance and shows up on both impedance and phase graphs. I don't hear anyone saying you need a transconductance amplifier to drive planar magnetics, so it seems to me it all really boils down to having a low output impedance and a big enough voltage swing. That's "same as it ever was" AFAIC.

Gotta say I'm not buying the whole back emf thing. It's a 50 ohm headphone that reaches 90dB at 0.24Vrms or 1.21mW to drive to 90dBspl. A Q701 is a 60 Ohm can needing 0.31Vrms to achieve 90dBspl or 1.68mW. Back emf should show up as an electrical phase difference across the driver in AC conditions. The electrical phase response of the LCD-3 is ruler flat, much flatter than the Q701. I looks to me driving the LCD-3 is like driving a 50 Ohm resistor (no back emf); it doesn't look particularly inefficient; the Q701 looks harder to drive. What am I missing here?

About that back EMF: I see very little in the way of electrical signal phase change through the drivers, or impedance changes. How do we know there's a lot of back EMF from planars? Kevin?

Got to get the review of the LCD-3 done. What amps should I use?

Woo hooo! Happy B-Day!

Actooly, I was thinking that the hardness of cultural apoliticocorrectisism is now most apparent in cyberspace postings. IOW, our decent into madness now resides fully in a place that doesn't exist. Liberally liquored and typing from my MacBookPro ... like a boss!

My pleasure, mate.

The thing is, 16/44 is way better than the quality of the shit being produced typically.