Of the drivers out there you have the following (I Gave each a little description of them IMO):
Electrostat - Requires entire Own Chain
Dynamic - Lacks Raw Speed and ability to play deep bass with vocals at the same time
Planar - No inherent design flaw that hasn’t been worked out
Ribbon - Basically RAAL and Audeze
AMT - Basically just HEDD, lacks Sub-Bass?
For speakers it makes sense that you have a dynamic driver paired with another type, like AMT because you have the space for multiple. Headphones have room really for only one driver, so why (and this is going to make some people upset) have we not decided on one driver that is clearly better. How do we have $4,000 Dynamic’s like the Utopia and Many $4,000 Planars and E-Stats? I get stuck in my ways, I only just found out that nearfield speakers are awesome, but Dynamic drivers have the inherent design flaw of moving the entire driver causing distortion to the higher frequencies while playing the lower ones. You can be blunt, tell me I’m an idiot, but at least give me a reason certain drivers still exists in the High End.
I’m very much full Hifiman planars (the clean separation of different frequences is certainly a very strong point) and do think they’re overall better than other driver types, but I can think of a few reasons why there would be other driver types so high up.
One is that I feel that audio is often times a collection of various sonic characteristics and usually, the higher you go up, the more you can get of what you want. Dynamics can still excel in certain things, like punch and weighting around the mid to upper bass and even lower mids, something I feel most planars are still lacking in. And of course, that consequently can mean a lot for certain kinds of tracks, like vocals/instruments being more real/intimate or just getting meat on the bones in general. You need to almost build a system around forcing texture and punch/slam forward to try to make up for it on planars, and you’ll lose in other characteristics because most units/pieces of gear are rarely balanced well in performance like that, especially in ever cheaper ranges. Preferences really make or break things, and the more I’ve read the more I’ve realized that people will easily sacrifice multiple other things for their singular preference, even in ways I often find incomprehensible. But I would also do the same at other times.
Another is that resolution comes in different forms, planars excel at being clean and spatial, but if I’m listening to very specific things like texture in vocals or somewhat more intimate chamber music, many of them can be pretty bad. There’s a reason why recent planar releases have been largely about taming the treble and having fullness in the bass, so that they try to meet the larger audience who is accustomed to dynamics and represent that aspect better.
To not overcomplicate things it’s pretty much just because you can get worthwhile results with almost all driver types at all performance ranges, it just comes down to what aspects of sound suits you preference and equipment. I don’t think I could comfortably consider one driver type overall above the rest, but I could absolutely consider a driver type to have an advantage in a few characteristics over others. It all comes down to what your priorities are and how you build your system.
I’ve just heard so many systems that have completely destroyed my expectations on what a specific driver type can do, it’s just as much about implementation of that driver as it is the driver technology itself, not all dynamics are made equal and so on. The only thing I’m personally not sold on for headphones are multi driver sets, I think that’s generally not a great idea just because one of the headphone’s advantages are that it can get away with a single driver and perform extremely well, it’s in that sweet spot where I don’t see the value of complicating that with another driver, crossover, and complex internal design to make it work. I only say that though just because I’ve never heard a multi driver headphone that sounded worth it to me, but maybe something will change my mind some day. IEMs and speakers I hear more value there.
A bit more on the source side of things, a lot of amps and chains overall are designed around performing best with whatever the designer created it with/for, and that synergy aspect is imo equally important as you go up and imo more important than the driver type in the high end in some cases. Once you get a specific chain dialed in and really setup, you stop caring as much about the transducer on it’s own and focus on everything as a whole (as long as you feel that transducer can scale well lol).
Idk, I’m personally at the point that I don’t really seek out a specific technology/design philosophy overall and just focus on individual examples and determine from there. If there truly was a compelling case for one driver type being practically (not theoretically) superior overall to everything else, most everything would’ve shifted awhile ago, aside from a few classic/nostalgia focused stragglers, but we’re seeing constant new releases for all driver types at all levels, with largely balanced reception for most.
If I had to say anything, I do think over the years there’s been a bigger trend toward planar, but I think that’s just because they’ve become more accessible and more refined from what they were, making them a more plentiful, compelling, and viable option, rather than them just being all out superior to dynamics or estats and so on. They’re great generalists that can impress especially on the modern trend for amplifiers being clean + power, and that’s an appealing proposition for most but that can come with its own set of downsides as well, jack of all master of none is what I would categorize a lot of modern planar into, but again it entirely depends on the headphone at hand. There are plenty of planar I’ve heard that are very much designed and focused in specific directions that make more clear sacrifices in some aspects to make bigger gains in others, all depending on preference
Those umbral hps by UM look interesting… Just not 6k interesting atm lol. Maybe ill try em out at a show someday
The Isvarna was a lot better than I thought it would be but it was a really picky headphone for a lot of weird reasons including having almost zero isolation for a closed back and the most microphonic cups I’ve ever heard that actually made audible noises at louder volumes. They weren’t bad for such a weird design and I just wish aftermarket pads were a possibility, but the dynamic driver is half in the pad and half in the cup and shared with no other headphones lol.