Quote:
1) But with my CE-H's that I dodged bullets for, that's like $170 in orthoey goodness, and I'm a cheap person.
2) Aren't those guys supra-aural, meaning that they already are leveled to the outer-ear? Do you really need to angle the driver on supraaurals?
2.1) Also, could a small change in angle make a wideband difference in the outer ear's combing effects, enough to create a perception of more bass?
1) I agree, that's a bit much. Plus the U70's chassis is about as unsympathetic as you could possibly get for a dipole driver. So,
meh. Don't let my cheap curmudgeonly
mehing stop anyone from experimenting with the U70 if one plops into your lap; just realize that it will take a lot of clever re-engineering to overcome the deficits imposed by the enclosure.
2) Right, usually (some headphones rely on the squishiness of the earpads and/or outer ear). I was wondering if DAC built in any slant beyond that. There's an advantage in making the volume enclosed by the earpads asymmetrical-- we don't want to create a nice cavity that resonates at a single frequency and we don't want to support standing waves. The Stax Lambda design is worth a ponder or two, even though it's circumaural.
2.1) because of the above, it's possible, and some experimentation is called for.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sambones /img/forum/go_quote.gif
1) This means I'm gonna need some screen material for it, maybe two offset layers of window screen glued to the driver front?
2) Meanwhile, HOLY Snickers, batman, they've got bass! I've got them damped with two layers of microfiber chamois imitation cloth, and the pads are those old air-filled vinyl deals, except they're circumsupra sized. I can even get my ears to pop by pressing them against my ears.
1) You don't need to have something like that unless the environment next to your head is really dicey. A layer of pantyhose-type netting should more than suffice.
2) You've obviously got a very good seal, which is helping the bass.
Quote:
I wonder how many folk would be interested in the esw9 - i know I would and I am sure there are more of us wanting to play with a decent yolk for the planar experiments.
Folk want yolk? If I ever design a headphone, I'll name it Nigel Planar.
Quote:
1) But we all seemed to agree that the LCD-2 was the best compromise of all the phones there
. It seemed to have the least overall flaws.
2) My personal 2nd favourite was the Aiwa HP-500. But the others there liked other cans such as the Sigma Pro (and also even dynamics
).
1) Once your ears are well trained, this is about the best you can expect-- you hear the flaws but they're been dealt with so well and the overall package works so beautifully that you can hear past them.
2) Tsk. There's no accounting for tastes, is there.
How are the YH-5Ms?
Quote:
Germania owned real ESW9s and I did as well. She said the SFI 32ohm version just spanked the real ESW9s, especially unmodded ESW9s. She developed a pretty sweet dampening scheme for the real 9s that good rid of a lot f the bass bloom and over powered low end, but the tuned SFIs still trumped those.
I had no idea Germania was getting such promising results from the SFI. Rule Germania!
Quote:
Personally, I've had the best luck in well vented (open) enclosures. As long as the ortho is well damped, the lack of backwave mess tends to yield the most satisfying results (good extension, less spikes at certain frequencies, etc.).
Opening the back will give you the smoothest but least-boosted highs, but then the backwave is free to cause mischief in the bass. The sealed-vented-absorptive enclosure controls the backwave better but roughs up the top end. Bottom line, most people will choose the style depending on the intended use for the 'phone. The most promise still lies, as I've always said, in an open 'phone, but with some extra care to scatter reflections, a SmeggiPuck style enclosure can work too.
i'll have to decide if I want to sell one or not now...)
