Stereophile
New member
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2013
- Messages
- 442
- Thread Author
- #1
<p><img class="story_image" src="http://www.stereophile.com/images/888jecklin.promo_.jpg" /></p> These are some of the most lusciously transparent-sounding headphones we've ever put on our ears, but we doubt that they will every enjoy much commercial success, for a couple of reasons.
<p>
First, and probably foremost, they are just downright uncomfortable for most people to wear. They feel as awkward as they look. Their width is not adjustable, so they either press uncomfortably against your head or flop loosely all over the place, depending on the fatness of your skull. Also, if you have a short neck, or like to sit hunched down in an easy chair while listening, the bottoms of the 'phones or their protruding cable get hung on your shoulders.
</p><p>
Sonically, they are extraordinarily good (fig.1), except for two little hitches: They have virtually no deep-bass response; and they have a slightly vowel-like "eeh" coloration that seems to have something to do with the cavity between the headphones and the sides of your head.
</p><p>
Finally, and this may turn out to be the most important consideration after all, the Jecklin 'phones are exceedingly intolerant of excessive signal levels, and have acquired a reputation for pooping out without warning when severely overloaded for even a moment. One of our review sample's drivers went out after an hour's use, and we were not listening at anywhere near the manufacturer's rating of 110dB sound-pressure-level.
</p><p>
If these headphones cost $90, we could recommend them without reservation. At $300, they are just out of the question.
</p><p>
Incidentally, Mark Levinson informed us that there may be some changes made to the product. Whether or not his firm continues to import the Jecklin Float will depend on the effect these changes have on its performance and durability.
[Source: http://www.stereophile.com/content/jecklin-float-electrostatic-headphones]
<p>
First, and probably foremost, they are just downright uncomfortable for most people to wear. They feel as awkward as they look. Their width is not adjustable, so they either press uncomfortably against your head or flop loosely all over the place, depending on the fatness of your skull. Also, if you have a short neck, or like to sit hunched down in an easy chair while listening, the bottoms of the 'phones or their protruding cable get hung on your shoulders.
</p><p>
Sonically, they are extraordinarily good (fig.1), except for two little hitches: They have virtually no deep-bass response; and they have a slightly vowel-like "eeh" coloration that seems to have something to do with the cavity between the headphones and the sides of your head.
</p><p>
Finally, and this may turn out to be the most important consideration after all, the Jecklin 'phones are exceedingly intolerant of excessive signal levels, and have acquired a reputation for pooping out without warning when severely overloaded for even a moment. One of our review sample's drivers went out after an hour's use, and we were not listening at anywhere near the manufacturer's rating of 110dB sound-pressure-level.
</p><p>
If these headphones cost $90, we could recommend them without reservation. At $300, they are just out of the question.
</p><p>
Incidentally, Mark Levinson informed us that there may be some changes made to the product. Whether or not his firm continues to import the Jecklin Float will depend on the effect these changes have on its performance and durability.
[Source: http://www.stereophile.com/content/jecklin-float-electrostatic-headphones]