Fit and Comfort

Seen above is the Nectar HiveX on a mannequin head that I bought recently to better show how headphones would look on the human head. Note that it's slightly under average sized, so account for the discrepancies accordingly. As with all headphones, getting a good fit and seal is crucial, so make sure to properly use the pivot points and height adjustability of the headband and ear cups. In this case, the multitude of swivel and cup rotation options make for an extremely customizable fit for basically anyone. The large and deep ear pads are also very comfortable in use, and prevent your ears from hitting the inside of the cups too. This is crucial for reasons we'll get to shortly, but overall I'd rate the HiveX as easily among the more comfortable headphones tested to date. The massive suspension band combined with the average clamping force work well in letting you forget that these weigh ~380 g without the cable. Not the heaviest by any means and this is where the 3D printed resin parts come in handy, but not a lightweight either. The side profile taken with and without the sponge insert also should give you a better idea of what to expect. Overall, especially given these being e-stats, you are not really going to use them in a public environment anyway, so the semi-open nature with the sponge insert and the fully open-back mode without isn't a big deal for passive isolation anyway. It's still best enjoyed in a quiet environment though.

Audio Performance

Audio Hardware

Electrostatic (e-stat) drivers are effectively a brand new category of headphone drivers when compared to the dynamic (moving coil) and planar magnetic units we've seen before on TechPowerUp. Please refer to the equivalent section here to get a better idea of how these headphones work. The Nectar HiveX doesn't go with carbon nanotubes for the transducer and instead has a more traditional metal coating over the diaphragm itself. This also means the balance of surface charge carriers and the diaphragm tension is of utmost importance, not only for the bass response but also the e-stat sticking phenomenon that gets a specific section in the FAQs page here. The takeaway here is the Nectar HiveX allows for the diaphragm to move back and forth more so than usual and this help with bass extension while running the risk of the diaphragm sticking to the stators. Follow the basic principles of placing the headphones over your ears before connecting them to the amplifier and then it should be all good. The deliberately controlled tension throughout means that the HiveX is slightly more power hungry than your typical e-stat set, but the absence of impedance and sensitivity numbers in addition to e-stat amplifiers and energizers not always mentioning their own output parameters means it's not an easily quantifiable metric. What I can say is that the HiveX does require more power compared to typical STAX sets outside of the new SR-X9000, and the HIFIMAN Jade II/Shangri-La Jr. also are more easily driven than the HiveX. You need to go to the Audeze CRBN and Shangri-La Sr. to get a better approximation of the HiveX's needs, but again, I can't assume many people have experience with any of these.

Suffice to say then that Nectar Sound mentions the HiveX gets plenty loud for most users, even off the STAX SRM-D10 portable energizer, and I had no problems running it off my Headamp BHSE or even the HIFIMAN Shangri-La Jr. amplifier that's also here. The SRM-D10 costs ~$950 whereas the BHSE in my specific configuration runs a cool $8k so there's clearly a big range here, and you would certainly hope the HiveX won't be held back by the BHSE at least. The issue is that the HiveX is one of the more affordable e-stat headphones on the market today, and customers typically looking at it are on a stricter budget than most. It's almost a given though that you will have to spend more on the amplifier/energizer than the headphones in this case though, and I appreciate Nectar Sound helping out by talking more about amplifiers here. Indeed, this is also where the Nectar Agave e-stat amplifier comes in and you could purchase it or build it yourself to be guaranteed the HiveX won't be held back by the chain.

Frequency Response Measurements and Listening

I will mention that I have a general preference for a warm-neutral signature, emphasizing a slightly elevated bass and smooth treble range, with detailed mids and good tonal separation. I also generally prefer instrumental music over vocals, with favored genres including jazz and classical music. My testing was done with the headphones powered off the Headamp BHSE on stock Mullard EL34 tubes as well as upgraded Psvane EL34C red label tubes that I felt helped with bass extension further, which in turn was connected to the iFi Pro iDSD Signature DAC hooked up to my PC. The headphones themselves were placed on the same test setup as used for my other headphone reviews, as seen in the equivalent section of this review.


As per usual, you can find my headphone frequency response measurements on VSG.squig.link, along with all the earphone measurements. Scroll to the bottom and choose different targets there, including two from Harman Kardon, developed after years of R&D. The Harman 2018 over-ear target in particular is a reference curve many headphone makers aim for now, but I find it too bass-boosted. As such, I am opting for the Harman 2018 curve with the bass target from the Harman 2013 curve, which is what is referred to as the "Harman Combined" target. Before we get talking about the sound signature of the Nectar HiveX, I want to briefly discuss the channel balance achieved here. You will notice how the left and right channels are pretty much identical throughout the test regime of 20 Hz to 20 kHz and the tiny deviations at 1.3 kHz and the resonance peak at ~6 kHz are not really audible in person. Nectar Sound says this was a randomly selected unit that got tested using the miniDSP EARS on the same artificial ear and same ear pad (flatter profile Brainwavz) purely to test for driver matching and expected tonality. The factory measurements—or should I say garage measurements—are otherwise best taken with a grain of salt for any inference of tonality and I did not even bother asking for them.


Nectar Sound acknowledges as much and instead focuses on relative comparisons, which is the correct way to go about it on the miniDSP EARS. You can read more about his approach towards the overall sound signature of the HiveX and my own impressions generally agree with his assessments here. Seen above are average measurements across both channels both with the sponge insert and without. The primary differences between the two are mostly in how they render some vocals with the sponge insert arguably my preferred tuning despite the broader, but less drastic, tuck in the mids similar to the HIFIMAN house sound, to present a larger sense of space. Removing the sponge inserts makes for a grander soundstage but it comes off slightly too open, in that some of the imaging prowess of the HiveX drivers gets lost. It's certainly an interesting option to try out, but between the overall preferences for the configuration with the sponge insert as well as the potential to get dust (or worse) on the drivers with the insert removed, I'd rather keep things as-is.

The biggest takeaway with the Nectar HiveX in its default state for me is that the Audeze CRBN isn't the only e-stat headphones with proper bass! Nectar Sound does this not by going fancy with increased electron charge carriers courtesy CNTs suspended in the diaphragm, but rather by a careful control over the diaphragm coating and tension, in addition to the space allowed for it to move back and forth between the stators. This does mean that the HiveX can be more prone to the aforementioned sticking phenomena but also I never experienced it unless I was pressing inwards. This is where the ear pads attachment mechanism being improved would help further, since the current one, at least one this review sample, never gave me the full assurance of it being completely aligned. I kept pushing in on one side for the first few hours of use and experiencing the diaphragm sticking to a stator followed by immediate and highly noticeable bass drop-off before realizing things would be fine if I just let them be. It's placebo in this case, but knowing and having a better ear pad attachment mechanism would certainly solve an issue I wasn't expecting out of the HiveX.

So now we've addressed the channel balance, the effect of the sponge insert, as well as how the pads can influence the sticking phenomenon and effective bass response directly or indirectly. If you have all these variables under control and have a source that isn't holding back the Nectar HiveX, then congratulations because you have one of the best headphones possible for the money. Not only does the HiveX present excellent bass extension all the way down to 20 Hz and under, you get tightly controlled bass that is fast and accurate. The leading edges of drums and even electronic music hit harder here than I expected although it's still going to lack for slam compared to a well-designed dynamic driver set. I personally think the mid-bass is the strong point here. Bass guitars and snares in particular are represented very well, to where I actually have a hard time deciding whether or not the CRBN does it better. I'd give the edge to the CRBN still purely for bass detail but also the HiveX is easier on the ears without needing to go loud as with the CRBN. The transition over to the mids is quite smooth and is slightly warm here owing to the dip coming up. This presents vocals favorably but perhaps can alienate instruments slightly if you have a complex rock music track featuring male vocals in particular—think Motörhead to get the idea.

Pop and country music in general fare much better courtesy nice instrument separation and spot-on imaging in a wide cone around the ears, as well as the central channel up front. On the other hand, I would not say the HiveX is extremely resolving and the drivers are technically competent without being suddenly flagship-class either. This is noticeable with classical music in particular, where fundamental tones of pianos clash with harmonics of guitars and then violins/string instruments get harder to pick out clearly. The set isn't overly bright or fatiguing by itself and yet the ear gain could be higher in comparison to the 6 kHz peak which is not an artifact here. This is a personal thing though and all I can say is the HiveX isn't as good for acoustic jazz or piano music, and complex orchestral tracks can be a hit or miss despite the decent presence in the treble region. I would have also liked some more air here in the higher frequencies because this is where e-stats tend to differentiate themselves from planar and dynamic driver headphones most. Harps don't get the hang time they deserve and cymbals/triangles don't resonate as strongly either. These are nitpicks admittedly, but there is clearly room for improvement. Timbre is another section that I can show this off as a textbook example of how e-stats represent various instrument classes differently from dynamic driver sets in particular. It's different, not bad, and yet there will be the occasional confusion if you are going from hearing guitar strings sounding as you expect them to going slightly metallic and twangy on the HiveX.


Here are a few other electrostatic headphones I've tested recently compared to the Nectar HiveX with the frequency response measurements normalized at 500 Hz, including the $4500 Audeze CRBN and the $4000 HIFIMAN Shangri-La Jr. I also have the Shangri-La Sr here but that's nearly two orders of magnitude off in price, wheres these other two are closer to one order higher. Needless to say then that I have nothing here in my possession that competes directly in pricing with the Nectar HiveX and yet I thought there is certainly enough here to talk about it. The CRBN is the closest in tonality as previously mentioned and I'd say it is basically a bigger and better HiveX in terms of build quality, driver design, and overall bass-first emphasis. It's also more resolving, but has a darker tuning to where the drawbacks are felt more too. The Shangri-La Jr is the best tuned e-stat in my possession although it's on the weak side for bass and only really gets in the consideration for its excellent vocals and instruments reproduction, especially for orchestral music. If anything, the Shangri-La Jr makes for a wonderful pairing with the HiveX given their individual strengths and weaknesses. I will also mention that I had a good amount of time with some STAX earspeakers too, including some vintage Omega units as well as newer SR-L700MKII, SR-007MK2, the SR-009S, and the new flagship SR-X9000. Neither of them are at my place to get a review or even measurements unfortunately, so I can only tell you that the X9000 is absolutely fantastic and a true contender for greatest headphones of all time, whereas the HiveX holds its own against the rest. I can see the L700 with EQ potentially besting the HiveX when it comes to value for money and also soundstage, but it's hard to say without private time with it.


By now you'd have realized the HiveX certainly costs under $1000 and at this point it also faces competition from other dynamic driver and planar magnetic headphones. Knowing also that e-stats tend to also suffer from an added cost for the amplifier that costs more compared to traditional sources when like-for-like, it's also appropriate to compare the HiveX against slightly more expensive planars too with the same 500 Hz normalization done, including the excellent Audeze LCD-X at $1200, the impressive (w/slight modifications) HarmonicDyne G200 at $700, and the recently released HIFIMAN Ananda Stealth at $699. The LCD-X and G200 are heavier but also more technically competent when it comes purely to detail retrieval and how they handle transients in the mids, and I'd say the HiveX can be justified over the LCD-X for someone who isn't willing to EQ and/or wants a comfortable set for hours on end. The G200 is tougher to compare in the default state that requires new pads for comfort and tuning shifts, so it's more of the same argument except things are much tighter here also owing to the excellent build quality and accessories. It's actually the Ananda Stealth that is the closest comparison here given similar build and weight and very similar tuning too. I'd give the HiveX the edge because it doesn't actually get that bright or sibilant and presents bass so much better too. The overall presentation is also more natural on the HiveX compared to most other headphones on the market, purely because there isn't much in the way between the transducer and your ears here, and you also get a more open sound as a result.