"bespoke"
per-object motion blur intensifies
59 fps? lock it to 30

The 3D printer plastic parts make these headphones look really cheap.

TheLostSwedeThe 3D printer plastic parts make these headphones look really cheap.

It's one guy who does everything here, so I understand the use of 3D printing (which has been used by far larger companies) here. If it is smooth and polished, maybe it works out well as with the shells used on these: www.techpowerup.com/review/campfire-audio-honeydew-in-ear-monitors/

VSGIt's one guy who does everything here, so I understand the use of 3D printing (which has been used by far larger companies) here. If it is smooth and polished, maybe it works out well as with the shells used on these: www.techpowerup.com/review/campfire-audio-honeydew-in-ear-monitors/

Well, that was the issue, the ones in the picture, looks like something someone printer on a low-end consumer 3D printer, not what you expect on products in this price range.

TheLostSwedeWell, that was the issue, the ones in the picture, looks like something someone printer on a low-end consumer 3D printer, not what you expect on products in this price range.

Yeah I see your point, not sure if it's too late to do anything about it but I can forward feedback to the guy.

wonder how many "high end headphones" the world needs, there are SOOO many brands out there....
now if one of them could bring the price down that would be good

Hi, thanks for the feedback! It really is appreciated - once I get past the initial hit to the ego, I have found most constructive criticism to be helpful down the line, if nothing else in keeping me honest, as well as pointing to ways I may have otherwise overlooked to improve my product.

In this case, I can understand where you are coming from. However there are a couple of points to bear in mind:

a) These are not products made at scale. I usually make 1 - 2 pairs of headphones a month, with all structural parts (other than those in question) made by hand - indeed I used to hand machine the blocks from aluminium, using a screw mechanism to keep the rods in place, until the 3D printer (which I originally got just to make grills for the drivers) opened up new worlds of possibility . Now in an ideal world I would have these parts CNCd in aluminium and I did seriously look into this, however not being in a position to work at scale there is no way to make it economical. The part is more complex to machine than it looks (as it turned out), and knowing that I wasn't going to be able to produce at scale meant that even asking for help with CNC design felt like I was wasting someone's time (because, essentially, I was). I also looked into metal 3D printing but it was hideously expensive so that was immediately way out of the question.

b) It's no real excuse as regards my product as someone else's standards have nothing to do with me, but fwiw there are companies mass producing headphones that use the same injection moulded plastic parts in their $100 cans as in their $2000 cans.

c) I personally like the tactility and honest character of the 3D printed blocks. You are correct - they ARE printed using a cheap consumer printer (set up in my bedroom, on a boat, no less) - but I don't necessarily want to hide that. Let's face it, my headphones aren't an item you would be buying for their mass produced perfection - there are plenty of great sounding headphones out there that do that - but are aimed to appeal to those who appreciate the tactility and character of something handmade. I could get a cheap consumer resin printer that would give me a much better finish (not in my bedroom though, cough cough) but it would still essentially be the same thing, but with a bit less of an honest character, imo.

Now that all being said; these comments give me pause, and do make me think that I should look again at least at how I finish the blocks, it's not beyond the realms of possibility to sand off the 'rough edges' so to speak.

ZoneDymowonder how many "high end headphones" the world needs, there are SOOO many brands out there....
now if one of them could bring the price down that would be good

How much do you want to spend?

The point at which diminishing returns kick in is (imo) surprisingly low. A case in point: I recently had the opportunity to test a bunch of high end (and not so high end) headphones. I tried the Sennheiser HD560S (£170) back to back with the new Focal Clear MG (£1400).

Now, the Focals are some of the best made and looking headphones out there. They really look and feel like a £1400 headphone (I know - that statement can sound ludicrous to the unitiated, and depending on where you stand, really could be ludicrous. But, well, some people spend £270,000 on a watch that tells the time just the same as a £10 Casio, so everything is relative). The Sennheisers, on the other hand, are clearly built to a cost - they are lightweight and plasticky, and I found that they had a bit that stuck out and annoyingly pressed against my pinnae.

However, my first impression (and that's all I really had time for) in terms of sound quality, was that there wasn't the difference that the price would suggest - the Sennheisers did, I would say, 90% of what the Focals could do sound wise, with that 10% (if that really) going to technicalities - more extension in the low end, slightly punchier, marginally more detailed at the top end, slightly better staging. But really all pretty marginal in terms of sound quality.

hylandheadphonesHi, thanks for the feedback! It really is appreciated - once I get past the initial hit to the ego, I have found most constructive criticism to be helpful down the line, if nothing else in keeping me honest, as well as pointing to ways I may have otherwise overlooked to improve my product.

In this case, I can understand where you are coming from. However there are a couple of points to bear in mind:

a) These are not products made at scale. I usually make 1 - 2 pairs of headphones a month, with all structural parts (other than those in question) made by hand - indeed I used to hand machine the blocks from aluminium, using a screw mechanism to keep the rods in place, until the 3D printer (which I originally got just to make grills for the drivers) opened up new worlds of possibility . Now in an ideal world I would have these parts CNCd in aluminium and I did seriously look into this, however not being in a position to work at scale there is no way to make it economical. The part is more complex to machine than it looks (as it turned out), and knowing that I wasn't going to be able to produce at scale meant that even asking for help with CNC design felt like I was wasting someone's time (because, essentially, I was). I also looked into metal 3D printing but it was hideously expensive so that was immediately way out of the question.

b) It's no real excuse as regards my product as someone else's standards have nothing to do with me, but fwiw there are companies mass producing headphones that use the same injection moulded plastic parts in their $100 cans as in their $2000 cans.

c) I personally like the tactility and honest character of the 3D printed blocks. You are correct - they ARE printed using a cheap consumer printer (set up in my bedroom, on a boat, no less) - but I don't necessarily want to hide that. Let's face it, my headphones aren't an item you would be buying for their mass produced perfection - there are plenty of great sounding headphones out there that do that - but are aimed to appeal to those who appreciate the tactility and character of something handmade. I could get a cheap consumer resin printer that would give me a much better finish (not in my bedroom though, cough cough) but it would still essentially be the same thing, but with a bit less of an honest character, imo.

Now that all being said; these comments give me pause, and do make me think that I should look again at least at how I finish the blocks, it's not beyond the realms of possibility to sand off the 'rough edges' so to speak.

Thanks for joining in and sharing your thoughts, it does help provide more context. Having a fancy resin printer here, I can say that it does result in better quality prints but I don't think it would be worth it for 1-2 pairs a month of headphones when that's not as critical a component. I would go with the sanding idea myself.

hylandheadphonesHi, thanks for the feedback! It really is appreciated - once I get past the initial hit to the ego, I have found most constructive criticism to be helpful down the line, if nothing else in keeping me honest, as well as pointing to ways I may have otherwise overlooked to improve my product.

In this case, I can understand where you are coming from. However there are a couple of points to bear in mind:

a) These are not products made at scale. I usually make 1 - 2 pairs of headphones a month, with all structural parts (other than those in question) made by hand - indeed I used to hand machine the blocks from aluminium, using a screw mechanism to keep the rods in place, until the 3D printer (which I originally got just to make grills for the drivers) opened up new worlds of possibility . Now in an ideal world I would have these parts CNCd in aluminium and I did seriously look into this, however not being in a position to work at scale there is no way to make it economical. The part is more complex to machine than it looks (as it turned out), and knowing that I wasn't going to be able to produce at scale meant that even asking for help with CNC design felt like I was wasting someone's time (because, essentially, I was). I also looked into metal 3D printing but it was hideously expensive so that was immediately way out of the question.

b) It's no real excuse as regards my product as someone else's standards have nothing to do with me, but fwiw there are companies mass producing headphones that use the same injection moulded plastic parts in their $100 cans as in their $2000 cans.

c) I personally like the tactility and honest character of the 3D printed blocks. You are correct - they ARE printed using a cheap consumer printer (set up in my bedroom, on a boat, no less) - but I don't necessarily want to hide that. Let's face it, my headphones aren't an item you would be buying for their mass produced perfection - there are plenty of great sounding headphones out there that do that - but are aimed to appeal to those who appreciate the tactility and character of something handmade. I could get a cheap consumer resin printer that would give me a much better finish (not in my bedroom though, cough cough) but it would still essentially be the same thing, but with a bit less of an honest character, imo.

Now that all being said; these comments give me pause, and do make me think that I should look again at least at how I finish the blocks, it's not beyond the realms of possibility to sand off the 'rough edges' so to speak.


How much do you want to spend?

The point at which diminishing returns kick in is (imo) surprisingly low. A case in point: I recently had the opportunity to test a bunch of high end (and not so high end) headphones. I tried the Sennheiser HD560S (£170) back to back with the new Focal Clear MG (£1400).

Now, the Focals are some of the best made and looking headphones out there. They really look and feel like a £1400 headphone (I know - that statement can sound ludicrous to the unitiated, and depending on where you stand, really could be ludicrous. But, well, some people spend £270,000 on a watch that tells the time just the same as a £10 Casio, so everything is relative). The Sennheisers, on the other hand, are clearly built to a cost - they are lightweight and plasticky, and I found that they had a bit that stuck out and annoyingly pressed against my pinnae.

However, my first impression (and that's all I really had time for) in terms of sound quality, was that there wasn't the difference that the price would suggest - the Sennheisers did, I would say, 90% of what the Focals could do sound wise, with that 10% (if that really) going to technicalities - more extension in the low end, slightly punchier, marginally more detailed at the top end, slightly better staging. But really all pretty marginal in terms of sound quality.

The issue isn't the fact that they're 3D printed, it's the way they look considering the asking price. There are nice looking 3D printed items, but at least in the pictures above, the parts look like something that have either been printed with too low "resolution" so to say, to try and save time printing them, or having been printed using a printer that isn't capable of higher quality, or alternatively, haven't been properly finished after having been printed. Maybe it's just the picture that makes them look rougher than they are?

Plastic can look great and it can look like the cheapest possible crap. The choice of material is only part of this, as even the same material can look quite different depending on several factors like colour, the quality of the injection moulding company, or 3D printer or CNC machine, as well as finishing touches. I've been involved in quite a few product developments and had hand made mockups look better than the final production units, simply because of the limitations of injection moulding.

Even though I don't have any plans of buying your headphones, I was just surprised to see such an unpolished part when you're asking for £650+ for your products. Even though it might be printed on a consumer 3D printer, there are several ways to improve the overall finish that aren't going to cost you a fortune. Maybe that's not the look you're going for, but that would be impossible to know from reading the news post.

Anyhow, good luck with it all, it seems like a lot of work is going into making the products since each unit is made by hand.

Are these identical (save for the enclosure type)? If yes, I had no idea a closed back could add this much to the cost.

Unrelated, but I went from closed to open backs about a couple of years ago. I still can't decide which I like better.

TheLostSwedeThe issue isn't the fact that they're 3D printed, it's the way they look considering the asking price. There are nice looking 3D printed items, but at least in the pictures above, the parts look like something that have either been printed with too low "resolution" so to say, to try and save time printing them, or having been printed using a printer that isn't capable of higher quality, or alternatively, haven't been properly finished after having been printed. Maybe it's just the picture that makes them look rougher than they are?

Plastic can look great and it can look like the cheapest possible crap. The choice of material is only part of this, as even the same material can look quite different depending on several factors like colour, the quality of the injection moulding company, or 3D printer or CNC machine, as well as finishing touches. I've been involved in quite a few product developments and had hand made mockups look better than the final production units, simply because of the limitations of injection moulding.

Even though I don't have any plans of buying your headphones, I was just surprised to see such an unpolished part when you're asking for £650+ for your products. Even though it might be printed on a consumer 3D printer, there are several ways to improve the overall finish that aren't going to cost you a fortune. Maybe that's not the look you're going for, but that would be impossible to know from reading the news post.

Anyhow, good luck with it all, it seems like a lot of work is going into making the products since each unit is made by hand.

Lighten up, you can't see those parts with the cans on your ears :P

On a more serious note, my AKG cans are perfectly fine looking, yet have developed an annoying squeak when you move them (even slightly) on the head. That is something I would avoid if possible. Subpar looks, I can live with.

bugLighten up, you can't see those parts with the cans on your ears :p

Work related damage. I always strive for perfection when making things for my clients.

TheLostSwedeWork related damage. I always strive for perfection when making things for my clients.

You see this is why, once I've gotten over the initial ego damage, I genuinely welcome criticism.

But putting stuff out there can be nerve wracking haha.

bugAre these identical (save for the enclosure type)? If yes, I had no idea a closed back could add this much to the cost.

Unrelated, but I went from closed to open backs about a couple of years ago. I still can't decide which I like better.


Lighten up, you can't see those parts with the cans on your ears :p

On a more serious note, my AKG cans are perfectly fine looking, yet have developed an annoying squeak when you move them (even slightly) on the head. That is something I would avoid if possible. Subpar looks, I can live with.

No, the cup design is a lot more involved for the closed back - it's more expensive because of a) the R&D that went into making a closed back that works well and b) the sheer pain in the arse of making each. Fwiw I prefer the sound of the open back, and they don't get as warm. But the closed get more head time for practical reasons.

hylandheadphonesYou see this is why, once I've gotten over the initial ego damage, I genuinely welcome criticism.

But putting stuff out there can be nerve wracking haha.

If you ever get to the point of needing something injection moulded, let me know, I know a very good company here in Taiwan.
Doesn't make sense for a couple of units a month though.

TheLostSwedeIf you ever get to the point of needing something injection moulded, let me know, I know a very good company here in Taiwan.
Doesn't make sense for a couple of units a month though.

Thank you. Definitely keeping things small for the foreseeable (I like it that way) but who knows what the future holds?

lol the audifascism will never die :D

Hmmm. Exposed threads on the yoke screws. thats a problem. also will probably loosen and fall apart over time. Fine tooth screws and wood Don't go together well. A couple cheap stainless steel or aluminum sleeves to cover the threads and an inset nut on the inside of the cup would be smart. The leather looks like it was cut with cheap scissors. Build yourself a template and cut with a razor. That 3d printed plastic is rough... to say the least. They need some fine tuning in design. Not being a mean. Just stating what i see. :)

Reeves81xHmmm. Exposed threads on the yoke screws. thats a problem. also will probably loosen and fall apart over time. Fine tooth screws and wood Don't go together well. A couple cheap stainless steel or aluminum sleeves to cover the threads and an inset nut on the inside of the cup would be smart. The leather looks like it was cut with cheap scissors. Build yourself a template and cut with a razor. That 3d printed plastic is rough... to say the least. They need some serious fine tuning in design. Not being a mean. Just stating what i see. :)

Over 5 years or so and over 100 pairs of headphones, no reports of problems regarding wear and tear of wood due to screws yet. And I do encourage customers to get in touch if they have any problems (an advantage of being so small) and my pairs get treated pretty roughly by and large (as I am always able to repair if necessary and want to be the first to know of any weaknesses in build) and overall they have proven quite hardy. My cable guy is also not a fan of the exposed threads so it is something I am looking into to improve.

Comments regarding details otherwise duly noted

Thank you.

My son, who knows his headphones, sneered dismissively at these bespoke units and said that they look cheap. He wouldn't touch them with a barge pole? There is no pleasing some folk.

When pressed for specifics he (my son) doesn't like the wood.

It is too thick, he then showed me some high-end headphones as an example of what you should be aiming to emulate.

Me personally, I think the metalwork looks like you did it in a shed.

This is provided as constructive criticism.

Tardian

TardianMy son, who knows his headphones, sneered dismissively at these bespoke units and said that they look cheap. He wouldn't touch them with a barge pole? There is no pleasing some folk.

When pressed for specifics he (my son) doesn't like the wood.

It is too thick, he then showed me some high-end headphones as an example of what you should be aiming to emulate.

Me personally, I think the metalwork looks like you did it in a shed.

This is provided as constructive criticism.

Tardian

FYI ear cup material thickness for closed-back headphones is contingent on a lot of things. For example, look at the HiFiMan HE-R10 that is extremely thick and round in this regard. This allows for good soundstage with enough space inside to allow resonances while still being closed and sealed.

The metal is probably indeed made in a shed, but the actual wood thickness is not really something that is an issue based on the photos provided.

VSGFYI ear cup material thickness for closed-back headphones is contingent on a lot of things. For example, look at the HiFiMan HE-R10 that is extremely thick and round in this regard. This allows for good soundstage with enough space inside to allow resonances while still being closed and sealed.

The metal is probably indeed made in a shed, but the actual wood thickness is not really something that is an issue based on the photos provided.

The HiFiMan HE-R10 $5,499.00 USD looks exquisitely manufactured. However, I wouldn't be seen dead in public wearing them. They aren't cool either in looks or design:

The HiFiMAN HE-R10 are meant to be spiritual successors to the much-acclaimed Sony MDR-R10, produced between 1989 and the end of the ’90s. HiFiMAN saw that the patent for the Sony MDR-R10’s earcups had expired, so took the opportunity to launch their own twist on them: thus were born the HE-R10, which are offered in dynamic and planar variants.
www.soundphilereview.com/headphones/hifiman-he-r10p-review-11652/

extremely thick and round ... it takes all types, but I am not on that team.

If you are chasing a good soundstage then you have open-back headphones.

Closed-back headphones tend to have:

• The bass has more meat and impact than in open-back headphones.
• Good isolation characteristics help here too, especially if you work in a noisy office.
• Users who travel a lot will find many benefits in superior isolation and additional active noise cancellation.

Source: My son

We feel if you are paying top dollar for headphones then they should be superior to:

Sennheiser HD 820 Closed-Back Headphones.

Hi-Fi

Tardian & Son

Lucky for you the other son wasn't home.

However, if money is no object then get:

Sennheiser HE 1

or better.

Unfortunately the HD820 is widely regarded as one of Sennheiser's worst headphones because it actually didn't do as marketed, which is compete favorably with the HD800(s) in sound resolution and soundstage, so that's not a very good example. I get what you are saying, just that there are different reasons to go with wood (even different materials have an impact) and associated thickness.

VSGUnfortunately the HD820 is widely regarded as one of Sennheiser's worst headphones because it actually didn't do as marketed, which is compete favorably with the HD800(s) in sound resolution and soundstage, so that's not a very good example. I get what you are saying, just that there are different reasons to go with wood (even different materials have an impact) and associated thickness.

By whom?

Verdict
If you must have closed-back headphones and can stretch to the HD 820s,s you won’t be disappointed. They’re comfortable and obviously engineered to last.
Most of all they’re hugely talented and rarely sound less than entertaining, almost regardless of source material. Highly recommended.
Scores

• Sound 5
• Build 5
• Comfort 5

www.whathifi.com/au/reviews/sennheiser-hd-820

and

Sennheiser HD820 vs. HD800S Review
When the Sennheiser HD820 was announced, we at the store were pretty intrigued. Could Sennheiser capture the HD800S series sound in a closed-back design? Could this be the headphone that finally delivers a reference level, open back experience in a fully sealed, noise isolating design?
We can confidently say that as far as this particular aspect of the HD820 goes, this design works, and it works well. The HD820 is the most open-sounding closed headphone that we have heard, with very little of the typical enclosed sound that a closed headphone typically exhibits. In fact, when wearing the HD820 you could almost be fooled into believing you are listening to an open headphone. The HD820 delivers a wide, expansive soundstage, though it’s still not quite as wide as the HD800S.
The HD820 changes a few things about the HD800’s sound. Firstly, there is more bass, long considered an advantage with closed-back designs. The bass on the HD820 is punchier and digs deeper, though there is little bleed into the mid-bass. Sennheiser reportedly concentrated on ensuring that the increase in bass response did not come with a muddying of the mid-bass range. The result is clean and visceral, and this is something that both I and Eric appreciated immensely. The change in the bass response immediately makes it my favourite out of the HD800/800S/820 triplet, and Eric (who also owns a Sony MDR-Z1) has similar praise for the way the bass adds some fun colour to the sound.
Personally speaking, this is the only headphone in the three that I genuinely quite enjoy listening to, though I still would prefer a bit more absolute slam in the bass and sweeter, richer vocals. And to me the HD820 is more of an easy long term listen than some other closed back flagships, like the Fostex TH900 and the Sony MDR-Z1, which both have treble responses that strike me as fatiguing after a few minutes. But Eric and I both agree, the HD820 is more of a side-grade than an upgrade to the HD800S formula.
https://www.minidisc.com.au/blog/hd820vs800s.html

Should you have said IMNSHO? I know for certain my family never has had a humble opinion!

Tardian

The meek will inherit the world ... if that is OK with you?

TardianBy whom?

and

Should have said IMNSHO? I know for certain my family never has a humble opinion!

Tardian

The meek will inherit the world ... if that is OK with you?

By actual customers, including myself who promptly sold it? By actual established reviewers who did objective measurements such as Resolve, Amir, Crinacle(two samples, two different frequency responses)?Anyway this is getting out of topic now for this thread about a completely different product :)

VSGBy actual customers, including myself who promptly sold it? By actual established reviewers who did objective measurements such as Resolve, Amir, Crinacle(two samples, two different frequency responses)?Anyway this is getting out of topic now for this thread about a completely different product :)

Really quick response. I note it does not contain my last-second edits. :)

I had to take the dog for a walk.

I feel like these should come with a vinyl or 8 track player. :laugh: Nice retro look even with the plastic 3D printing.