Its not ideal to make the thinnest membrane possible. They just throw that spec out there because it seems impressive. Several manufacturers including Sennheiser have experimented with thinner membranes than this but it starts to degrade sound quality in various ways if you go to far. They’ve been able to make membranes 1/10 that thick for 20+ years is just has no use as far as electrostatic headphones are concerned with the way they currently build them.

As I noted, his Disqus profile seems to have been created just for that purpose, rather than for ordinary discussion here. Most people don’t seem to pick up on those things. Remember when I reviewed the $1500 AKG K812, and one person created a new Disqus profile just to say “This was the most useless review ever….”?? I like to think positively about everyone, but I’d suggest that they be real, and participate in the discussions.

Keep it cool guys. Big brother is watching 😉

I see. If I worship the wrong god, then I won’t go to the same heaven as you. Actually, that’s a good thing.

No one is denying your experience, nor your opinion. But the definition of “price fixing” is not a matter of opinion.

You can keep using the term incorrectly. There’s no law against ignorance.

I know all about those official definitions. I also know about the Warren Report and other official stories. I also sold computers and electronics retail in L.A. and Beverly Hills, for years. Hewlett Packard was my top supplier. They were scum then and still are. You call it what you want, but I’ll stick to my experience, which I’ll be happy to share with any customers here. Take the small vendors and mfrs. here – God bless ’em, but the big guys -no. I’ve purchased and reviewed 150 headphones, and lots more. I know how bad it gets at the top.

https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-antitrust-laws/dealings-competitors/price-fixing

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resale_price_maintenance

“We” are not throwing the term around, I am. And frankly, I’m not impressed with your euphemisms. Now let’s find out exactly what those relationships are, and then I will tell you what I think of them. Until then, I’m just speculating, like any interested customer who is shopping for “best price”.

Edit: Mr. Kinnear’s Disqus account has a grand total of 3 comments.

Dale, I am just trying to clarify the language. What you have described (manufacturer prohibiting sellers from cutting price) is resale price maintenance, not price fixing. This is easily verified.

“Price fixing” sounds more ominous, probably because it is illegal in the US. But that is not what Sennheiser is doing, so we shouldn’t throw the term around.

Well, I can’t argue the technicalities of price-fixing versus resale price maintenance for this particular limited-edition product. I’d say that a corporation like Sennheiser who makes a limited-edition product like the Orpheus for retail sale is price-fixing if they allow a dealer to sell it, but prevent the dealer from cutting the price. I’d probably have to know more about those reseller arrangements before firming up my opinion.

Dale, in economics the term “price fixing” refers to cases in which sellers collude to keep their prices in line with each other — to avoid competition. For a one-of-a-kind product like the Orpheus, there is no such phenomenon.

The term you are looking for is, I believe, “resale price maintenance.”

This isn’t the first time someone talked about the “ultra, super-ultra thin” membrane of their drivers (and how does it pump out the bass without tearing?), so if that’s a valuable feature, then it should trickle down. They did some special encasement for the tubes here, but that likely will always be expensive unless someone can mass produce it. The isolation and shielding of the components is expensive, unless someone can mass produce it. Tight QC so each unit sounds and measures the same is expensive, unless someone can mass produce it AND they state that as a guarantee/selling point. That last point is crucial – so many flagships are all over the place in inconsistency. Beyer has made very consistent headphones sometimes. It’s sorely needed today.

We’ll have to wait and see :/

I will only say it’s too expensive if I can talk someone into a discount. We used to sell computers – IBM, HP, others – up to 30-35 percent off in West LA and Beverly Hills in the 1980’s, so if someone will sell me an Orpheus for 30 percent off, that saves $16.5k USD. Pretty impressive, eh? But sad to say, these things are made to be price-controlled, so since price-fixing** is not a customer/consumer-friendly policy, we are better off not playing their game.

**Today we have euphemisms for bad words like price-fixing, but still it’s the same deal.

There’s a saying that your “never meet your heros” and for some of us, me included, that may just be the closest thing to the truth regard Orpheus. I’m really glad tech like this exists because in years to come you may find derivatives of the Orpheus on other more affordable headphones and systems-in fact it’s an inevitability. But as far those folks who complain top-tier anything being to expensive, they remind me of my dad; if the price doesn’t meet with his own fantastical rationalization – it’s too expensive.

If I bought it I would go into hibernation, then after a few months I would emerge and say “Turn down that light, it’s killing me”.

And you would get used to its sound. And what’s next then? 🙂

Thank you!

You should see Head-fi, some are going crazy about the Orpheus price. I think they’re just sad they can’t afford it. I don’t see where the problem is, I can’t buy it either but people driving Lamborghinis probably can. This just isn’t for the normal mortals. So Super Fi or Hyper Fi sounds good.