Audeze CRBN - Electrostatic Headphone - Official Thread

Headphones Official Headphone Model Discussion
, ,
101

With either the CRBN or the SR-009S, the differences between the BHSE and the Carbon are really pretty subtle.

I would give the Carbon the nod for overall bass performance, as well as having more impact/slam, and an edge in raw transient performance (speed/rise-time/slew-rate). I would give the edge to the BHSE on mid-range tonal density and stage.

But, again, the differences are very small. I am not at all sure I’d notice if I didn’t have them available to compare back-to-back and was listening level-matched and blind. And even then I’m not sure how much of that is just down to expectation biases, since I’ve not done a proper level-matched blind comparison.

So small, in fact, that if I had to choose between one or the other (i.e. I couldn’t keep both) I’d be making the choice based on factors other than sound. The Carbon is smaller, is ready to use (and at its best) faster than the BHSE, seems to have more power*, and can be left on without worrying about tube life (though I wouldn’t leave either running unattended as they both run hot). The BHSE is a work of art, and has that lovely tube-glow, as well as three inputs instead of one.

I would think if one really didn’t like one, on sonic grounds, they probably wouldn’t like the other much better, and might be better served with a KGST or something from Stax or Woo.

*Not much of a factor here; both units given a nominal 4V balanced input are running under their half-volume marks at listening levels that you can’t safely sustain for long. Even off a single-ended input there’s plenty of room left on the dial.

6 Likes
102

Heading into Day 4:

By which I mean I’ve had three full days with the CRBN now and am entering the fourth. I’ve got over 50 hours of listening with them in during that time. During which I have experienced absolutely no physical fatigue, nor any listening fatigue.

I did a several hour session while wearing my “coding glasses” (coding is the only thing I sometimes wear glasses for), which have relatively thick frames - and I had no issue getting and keeping a proper seal while doing so. I just plopped the CRBN on, and they were fine.

Now … it is after about this much listening time that I tend to start becoming aware of any subtle “warts” with a headphone (since major issues are readily apparent much quicker - and I’ve found none of those). If/when present, stuff that might have been a fleeting observation or occurrence initially will have become irritating or something that’s heading that way and I’m progressively more aware of …

So far?

Nothing.

Even deliberately trying to find issues, using various torture-tracks trying to excite/exaggerate something, so far they’ve just been a delight.

The closest thing to a “negative” I can come up with is in regards to stage depth. Which I don’t care very much about on headphones (and only the SR1a and MySphere do a proper job of anyway), and isn’t a problem - it’s just a closer presentation that some (not all) cans render.

It’s been song after song, album after album, sitting, enthralled; hour after hour … no awareness of time, nor much of anything else, and no desire to stop.

I am even more enamored with the CRBN now than I was after my first day with them.

A Few High-Level Specific Comparisons:

I have spent some more time, in between just enjoying these things, doing some more directed comparisons. I’ll summarize a few of these; more detailed accounts will have to wait a bit as I am enjoying listening too much to fanny about with taking the appropriate pictures, notes and writing things up.

I ran up convolution filters to have the CRBN follow the Harman curve. I am not a big fan of this, but I wanted to see how they took to it since others are. Despite the unnatural tonality and the negative effects that has on the presence of actual instruments in orchestral works, the CRBN took this EQ extremely well. I’ll be very surprised if anything but the HE-1 hits the Harman curve and still plays this cleanly.

Some bass comparisons with the LCD-4. I had the LCD-4 running Audeze’s EQ presets from Roon (and via Reveal+). No issue at all bring the CRBNs bass and sub-bass up to the same levels. Still perfectly clean. Comparable impact and slam. But the CRBN were more articulate, taut and tuneful here while hitting just as hard.

Switching to the AB-1266 Phi TC and the Susvara and some bold church organ music … the Abyss placed first for the lowest register, but are tonally wonky, a bit peaky and a little rough above that vs. the CRBN. The Susvara are not really great competition here (for me) due to their relative lack of extreme low-end grunt/presence and slam, though they comfortably bested the Abyss on overall tonality and smoothness.

The CRBN was a hair behind the Abyss on the lowest notes in terms of level and viscerality, well ahead on everything else, but a slight bass shelf brought them on par in that region. And vs. the Susvara, the CRBN are as good or better in every respect, but especially in terms of their low-end performance, presence and impact (and that’s without any EQ on the CRBN at all).

Some more comparison-time with the SR-009S, and I have to say I think the CRBN are cleaner and a hair more resolving, have usefully better extension and impact. They are also “drier” than the SR-009S. That slight sense of “sweetness” I mentioned with the SR-009S is still there and not present with the CRBN. It’s most notable in the mids. I don’t think the CRBN are actually “dry” or “clinical”, but they don’t really romanticize the music the way the SR-009S sometimes do.

Now, put the CRBN on the BHSE and the SR-009S on the Carbon and there’s less in it (“sweetness” wise); I could really only tell with some specific female vocal tracks that really seem to play to the “sweetness” of the SR-009S.

Back to just the CRBN … bass might be a hair rounder off the BHSE, vs. slightly more impactful and a tad more extended with the Carbon. Could all be in my imagination though; proper blind tests there are at least a week away.

As things sit:

Right now, the CRBN are looking like strong candidates to wind up as my favorite circumaural headphone, regardless of technology or price.

Caveats there; I’ve not heard the LCD-5, nor the DCA Stealth or the Meze Elite. Though I will say I very much doubt the two latter models are going to sway me.

And I’m not including the HE90/HEV90 setup nor the HE-1. I do think the CRBN are more accurate and impactful than the HE90/HEV90, and the HE-1 I’ve not spent enough time with (and follows the Harman curve more than I’d like) to be sure about.

Beyond that …

The face-off for “my favorite headphones” currently comes down to CRBN vs. SR1a.

Tonally, I definitely prefer the CRBN. The SR1a beats them (and everything else) on depth-wise spatialization. I suspect the CRBN are somewhat cleaner. Jury is out on detail/resolution. Bass and, especially, sub-bass clearly favor the Audeze unit.

21 Likes
103

Nice impressions. Very intriguing can.

Just for my own clarification: you are using these mostly without the convolution filters? That’s my read anyway.

1 Like
104

Your read is correct.

I’m not using any convolution filters or other EQ with my general CRBN listening.

I did build and use convolution filters to see how well they’d take EQ for matching the Harman curve, and also used some EQ with them for specific “how close to the LCD-4’s bass can I get them”.

But that was all.

So far I like the CRBN best un-EQ’d and with no other filtering or DSP; but if someone else wanted to use them and elevate their bass response further, they’ll take it like a champ.

2 Likes
105

if someone else wanted to use them and elevate their bass response further, they’ll take it like a champ.

pls stop I just bought the LCD-5, LOL.

5 Likes
106

Uh oh.

  • CRBN: Better tonality, better bass, and maybe cleaner
  • SR1a: Better spatialization of depth, which you do not care much about

Seems like CRBN has the edge heading toward the finish line. (I say “uh oh” since I have the SR1a and don’t want to find myself shelling out more money for a totally different setup.)

I am looking forward to the review. If by chance you will have thoughts about how the CRBN compares to the SR1a both on less than top of the line equipment (e.g. the JotR for the SR1a’s), I would very appreciate seeing them in the review. Do the CRBNs, in short, need expensive equipment to beat (if that’s the case) the SR1a, or does it also beat them when both are fed via cheaper equipment?

Thanks as always for all your insights!

3 Likes
107

It’s important to put this in context.

Depth-wise spatialization is generally the least important factor for me with regards to headphone listening; largely because almost all of them are incapable of doing it.

In Seattle, it was a more important factor because at my waterfront place, where I spent most of my time, my ability to run my speaker rig properly was limited. Which is one of the reasons that the SR1a got so much listening time (other than it being generally excellent in almost all other regards).

Here, I can run speakers 24/7 so not only am I using headphones less (excepting the listening spurts as I’ve been changing my setup), but if I care about image depth and actual front-to-back positioning for a given piece I just listen to it on my speakers.

Just because I may wind up preferring the CRBN overall (which is not to say I’ll necessarily prefer it for everything I listen to, or every mood/type of listening I do) doesn’t mean anyone else. has to. So no reason to change your setup unless you try the CRBN and find you prefer it overall.

I’m not getting rid of my SR1a.

The SR1a is always going to be less expensive than the CRBN.

$4,200 gets you out the door with the SR1a and dedicated, and very good, DAC/amp combination as well as the headphones. $3,500 will get you the SR1a and the ability to amp-roll it to your hearts content, with totally appropriate amplifiers starting at $700 (and options I’ve not personally tested below that even).

In both cases, those sums won’t even buy you JUST the CRBN headphones.

I’ve not tried the CRBN on anything but either high-power amp/energizers (Chord Ultima 5/iFi Pro iESL) or flagship dedicated amplifiers (BHSE, Carbon) yet. That will change later this week …

A newly-local friend of mine is a huge electrostatic collector, and has what might be a complete collection of the Stax energizers/amplifiers, as well as a bunch of others (including, I believe, both the HiFiMan Shangri-La systems - I know he has both the Jr. and Sr. headphones). So when we get together I’ll be able to do some testing of the CRBN with stuff that runs from about $1,000 or so (less used) on up.

As it stands, just comparing where the volume dial on my BHSE, Carbon and what it takes to drive the CRBN well out of the Pro iESL vs. my SR-007MK2 and SR-009S, I am a little skeptical that the CRBN are going to perform to their best dynamically or in terms of speed (and likely in terms of volume, for those that listen louder) on the less-expensive amplifier options. Whether that’s actually the case, and how big a delta there might be, we’ll have to see. But it is something I am planning on doing comparisons with.

10 Likes
108

I’m very happy for you @Torq! Perhaps end game does actually exist. :slight_smile:

2 Likes
109

It might.

I tend not to think in those quite those terms, though. I look at it more as reaching a point of longer-term system stability. Which doesn’t preclude exploring other things, but does mean that the vast majority of one’s listening time is spent on a consistent chain.

Prior to deciding to re-explore electrostatics, my primary chain hadn’t changed in years …

My primary DAC hasn’t changed in 4 years. My primary headphone amplifier hasn’t changed in 3.5 years. And my primary headphones are both pushing 3 years.

I’ve tried a LOT of other gear during that time, but none of it has replaced those items in that time. Hasn’t even really dented how much listening time those four core pieces have received.

It’s a nice thought though …

3 Likes
110

I solved that problem in a different way.

While listening to $20 iem’s on my phone I pretend it’s a Dave/M-Scaler, Blue Hawaii and glow-in-the-dark Rad-0’s.

Never underestimate the power of denial.

7 Likes
111

Actually I think there’s some truth to this. When you go to the theatre and you watch a play, the actors are over accentuating their movements, their voices over emphasise, the lighting is set to create mood so that you in the audience have a suspension of disbelief. If a play is bad or the acting is bad, you see it for what it is but if it all comes together you suspend your awareness of artificiality and become immersed. The same at the movies where all you’re seeing is a flat screen with light bouncing off it. If the film is good you don’t see the myriad of heads in front of you, you suspend your awareness of the artificiality of the situation and your body will lurch during jarring action on the screen, you’ll laugh or cry at nothing but reflected light. What we really should want is an audio system which allows us to suspend disbelief so that the music performance transcends the limitations of the cumulative imperfections from recording through mixing through mastering through playback. I know it’s ironic that I write this while being interested in $4000+ headphones but I’ve had that experience of suspension of disbelief at times with even very inexpensive equipment.

3 Likes
112

I focused my last 8 hours or so listening doing some listening with the iFi Pro iESL. I tried this powered by both a Chord Ultima 5 and an Étude, a Bakoon AMP-13R (on loan; not mine) and finally a quick test using the RAAL HSA-1b’s speaker outputs.

First, Power …

Both Chord amplifiers have more than ample power to drive the CRBN well via the Pro iESL and the end result is excellent.

The Bakoon has enough juice, also, though with quieter pieces and consumer-level DAC outputs there was not a ton of “room” left on the volume dial.

The HSA-1b is just not quite powerful enough here unless you cat run it at 0 dB input attenuation and feed it from a DAC with pro-level outputs. And even then, quiet pieces, or a louder listening level, puts it at the end of its volume range.

So, power-wise, I’d say you want >= 20W into 8Ω to not have level-issues if you’re feeding the Pro iESL off a speaker amplifier. Something like a Schiit Aegir or Vidar would do nicely here (the Vidar is really overkill, power-wise).

It would be interesting to try the Pro iESL fed off the new Pro iCAN Signature, but I am not going to buy one to do that (even if the full iFi Pro stack would be a neat second rig - it’s not something I actually need). If I come across one I can borrow I’ll happily give it a try, however.

Sound …

The first thing to say is that the CRBN remain amazing when driven by the “lowly” Pro iESL. And they would still be sitting in pole position for what I consider to be the best circumaural headphone I’ve heard, given that the Pro iESL is being well-driven.

Wish I had a Mjolnir-Audio SRD-1 on hand to test with/compare the Pro iESL too.

This bodes well for testing with some of the other Stax and Mjolnir-Audio amplifiers/energizers (that have less power than the Carbon or BHSE) that I will get some time with in the next day or two.

While not quite on the same level as the Carbon or the BHSE, the Pro iESL gives a very good account of both itself and the CRBN. I wouldn’t hesitate to use it, even longer term, if I didn’t have/couldn’t get/didn’t want a dedicated electrostatic amplifier.

The speaker amp/energizer combination is also interesting for those that might want to run an SR1a and/or another hard to drive headphone (Susvara, HE6, Abyss), since it readily permits that from a single amp - which is pretty cost effective.

Other thoughts …

Going back to just general thoughts on the CRBN, the more I listen with them the more I feel they are the best circumaural headphones I’ve heard and think they’re just going to overtake the SR1a as my overall favorite headphone (again not including HE90/HEV90 or HE-1).

Actually, technically, I’d say preference-wise they have overtaken the SR1a in my rig … so its more of a question of whether they retain that position with more listening or not (only time will tell on that front).

18 Likes
113

This part intrigues me. If CRBN really does equal or best Susvara & 1266 's bass, plus all the technical advantages that electrostatics have, that makes it a real contender for the best headphone in the world.

6 Likes
114

Cleaner, faster, tighter and more tuneful bass (i.e. overall bass quality) than the Abyss, but you need to EQ the CRBN to get to the same level/quantity … and Abyss remains more visceral.

No EQ needed for CRBN to best Susvara’s bass, period.

7 Likes
115

Thank you for all this, @Torq. Just a truly enjoyable read.

116

Going back to the comment “contender for the best headphone in the world” …

That’s always going to depend on the listener, as well as, to a lesser extent, the chain it is used in.

Only way to know for sure for any individual is to try them. But for me, the Abyss and Susvara would be the wrong points of comparison for “best in the world” anyway. Depending on how “best” was defined, of course.

1 Like
117

I totally agree that “best” is a tricky term that is always subjective, but I think what I really meant by “best” was “most technically proficient from one end of the frequency spectrum to the other”. When we start talking about summit-fi flagships (i.e. Susvara, 1266, Utopia, lcd-5, CRBN, HE-1, etc) I think that’s really the barometer we use to judge them on a global scale.

1 Like
118

It’s a nice idea, but you then have to come to consensus on what constitutes “technical proficiency”, and do so across a number of performance aspects/measures.

I’ll not hold my breath on that, as I doubt you could get ten randomly selected headphone listeners to agree on what frequency response (which varies significantly across the six headphones you used as an example) was the correct one to use in defining “technical proficiency”, let alone any of a number of other parameters.

4 Likes
119

If that ideal existed, you’d see the summit-fi headphones all start to sound alike, and it simply isn’t true, the 1266 and Susvara are radically different headphones, and who’s to say they are better than the MySphere or Raal, which again sound very different.

3 Likes
120

Fine: If CRBN really does equal or best Susvara & 1266 's bass, plus all the technical advantages that electrostatics have, that makes it a r̶e̶a̶l̶ ̶c̶o̶n̶t̶e̶n̶d̶e̶r̶ ̶f̶o̶r̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶b̶e̶s̶t̶ headphone i̶n̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶w̶o̶r̶l̶d̶.

4 Likes