I’ve been listening to the Grell OAE1 for several days now, and I find it to be excellent headphone for all types of genres of music. They have generated a fair bit of controversy, with some in the camp that call them a failure, whilst others call them a success and a move forward in the world of headphone development.
Base on the feedback received from the OAE1, Mr. Grell has released an update to the basic design, which is the OAE2. The OAE2 appears to be a refinement of the OAE1 to address some areas to concern with the original.
The following video explains the logic and reasoning behind the design: Different By Design
Listen to the explanations on the video regarding the bass registers when reproducing music. To me, they make sense. The midrange, which a lot of the perceived quality of the music is realized, is flat with these headphones.
There’s a section on the video regarding how music is mastered in the studio. The majority of music is mastered on near field monitors as opposed to headphones. The implications of this are obvious when listening to headphones with drivers directly sitting on ear vice angled coming from the front.
What really caught my attention is the explanations regarding treble playback. Although the measurements show reduced treble, actual listening does not correlate to actual listening. The video then gets into lengthy discussions about HRTF, and the issues associated with the Harman curve. The video presents a strong case for why Mr. Grell went down this path. They also make the case that there is less “listener fatigue” with the headphones, due to treble playback characteristics. I can report that this does indeed seem to be the case. IMHO, the more I listen to the OAE1, the more " correct" it sounds.
I’m very much in the “this doesn’t sound right” camp, as were the rest of us who heard it. But, I want to highlight the live stream we did with Axel Grell and Jermo Koehnke, where they go into additional information on all of this stuff for those who are interested in further discussion:
So, why is there such a disparity of opinions? The Grell videos make sense to me, especially in the explanations regarding treble. I don’t hear any actual drop off in performance. Also, the comment regarding listening fatigue seems genuine.
Could there be this much difference with our HRTF? Or, is it possible that we are pre-conditioned to a set of standards?
The initial reviews from CanJam for the OAE2 are very positive. There are a lot of people on other websites who think the OAE headphones sound very good, better than many conventional headphones. Not sure there is any one right answer here.
Could be a number of variables honestly. But it sounds incredibly weird to most of us, maybe that’s because we aren’t finding the front-biased free field timbre convincing absent the location context that would allow it to be interpreted the way speakers are. Even the most subtle head movement instantly breaks the spell of any spoofing of the sound source location, which is what this FR is deliberately trying to achieve.
But to be clear, for people who have this idea about speakers being something to emulate in headphones, it’s worth trying this headphone. The concept clearly doesn’t work for many of us, but I know of some others who it did work for.
While I’m glad that you find them enjoyable, to me they are a case of three strikes and you’re out.
While they look nice, in terms of comfort (way too much clamp force), fit (not enough extension for my ears), and sound quality they are easily the headphone I most regret purchasing.
As Andrew pointed out, the tuning is just weird, being both bright and dark in certain frequencies, and the bass is very exaggerated and bloated sounding. The drivers have poor resolution, and have high distortion levels per Marv’s measurements on SBAF.
In short, I definitely would not recommend them, and have no interest in trying an OAE-2. I feel like Axel has gone off on a tangent with these, which is a shame given his audio pedigree.
For the record, I had the OAE-1 “Signature” edition, the original launch version from Drop (RIP).
The non signature version of the OAE1 has been modified to address fit issues. They are still tight, but I find the fit no worse than the HD 650.
The HRTF has to be the root cause of this split of opinions. I tried them on a whim, as the Drop price was all the way down to 99.00. I’ve paid that for earpads. Honestly, I didn’t expect much, so I was shocked when I plugged them in to the Topping D900/A900. They (to me) sounded far better than most of the headphones at the 1K price point. I then read and watched the videos that explain the theory behind the design.
The bass is quite prominent, more so than most headphones. I don’t find the bass bloated. When I listen to live classical/jazz, the headphones seem to re-create the venue effects quite well. The midrange is more neutral than many audiophile headphones. The treble is where I really notice differences. The lack of listening fatigue is readily noticeable.
I take measurements with headphones with large grains of salt. I’ve seen way too many differences with them to take them as gospel. I certainly understand and respect the differences of opinions with ANY headphone, the OAE1 included. To me, they sound more natural than many other headphones. I don’t notice distortion at normal listening levels.
In summary, it has to be the HRTF that caues this divergence of opinions. It seems to work for some, but not others.
I agree but in theory, and from Axel Grell’s comments, a frontal driver should be less HRTF sensitive not more so right? Because it is actually reflecting off of the pinnae similar to how a speaker would rather than bypassing the pinnae like a normal headphone. Yet the opposite seems to be happening. Also the OAE1 is designed to be very low acoustic impedance, which should also make them less sensitive to individual anatomy.
I am one of the people that likes the OAE1, but only for certain tracks and genres. It’s great for electronica for instance, but full spectrum music like metal sounds congested and unnatural to me. I actually like the bass response too. Comfort however is unacceptably low. There’s too much clamp (I actually completely removed the tension bar), the pads are too stiff, and the cups don’t extend far enough. All of this combines to me keeping the OAE1 but only using them as a sort of curiosity. Something I dust off once in awhile, listen to a few electronica tracks, and then hang back onto the wall.
PS: Billie Eilish - Lunch is amazeballs on these. Everyone that demos them with it says “Wow!” at some point.
So with headphones, the sound doesn’t bypass the pinna - certainly with over ear headphones the pinna is fully impacting the sound. Moreover, a frontal driver wouldn’t necessarily be less sensitive to HRTF differences. That’s more about positional consistency and mechanical design.
But I also don’t think differences in how the OAE1 is perceived is necessarily down to HRTF differences, rather I think it’s down to two things:
Non-HRTF related HpTF variation, so headphone behavior variation depending on how the driver sits relative to the ear. It could be a stable FR in situ or more consistent, but I don’t have enough data on other heads to verify that, but at least on my head it was extremely variable depending on how I wore the headphone.
Psychoacoustic interpretation. This is the most likely explanation IMO. Some people are not put off by the unnatural timbre of a front-biased sound field in what is essentially directionless listening condition, and others are. Grell even mentioned something similar, where typical headphone users may be having more trouble with it, while speaker people are able to more easily be captured by the illusion, and therefore don’t perceive the timbre as unnatural.
Did a internet search on over ear headphones, and this was the summary that was returned:
" The sound from over-ear headphones is not inherently unnatural, but some listeners perceive it as such due to differences in audio delivery compared to speakers.
Soundstage and Spatial Perception : Unlike speakers, which project sound into a room where it reflects off surfaces and reaches both ears with natural blending, over-ear headphones deliver sound directly into each ear. This creates a more isolated, precise stereo image, which can feel “in the head” or disconnected, especially for music recorded with stereo panning. This effect is often described as unnatural by those used to speaker listening.
Technical Factors : The lack of room acoustics and natural sound reflections means the spatial cues are different. Some users report a “hole-in-the-stage” phenomenon or instruments feeling too spread apart. This is why audio engineers and audiophiles sometimes use crossfeed — a processing technique that blends a small portion of the left channel into the right and vice versa — to mimic the natural crossover heard with speakers.
Personal Preference and Use Case : Many find over-ear headphones more immersive and detailed, especially for critical listening, studio work, or when focused on subtle nuances in music. Others, particularly those accustomed to speaker systems, may find the sound too clinical or artificial. The perception of unnaturalness is subjective and depends on listening habits, expectations, and the quality of the headphones.
In summary, while the sound from over-ear headphones is technically accurate and high-fidelity, its direct, isolated delivery can feel unnatural to some listeners compared to the spatial experience of speakers."
So, perhaps it is a background reference issue? Although I truly enjoy headphones, I’ve never thought them to sound overly natural. Maybe that’s why they don’t sound off to me?
It depends on the headphones haha. But yeah could be. There’s another possibility that not everyone is focused on tone color to the same degree. Maybe other characteristics are leading a preference. It’s hard to know, we’re only listening out our own two ears.
