JVC HA-RX900 modifications, a picture tutorial. (56k, forget about it...) - Page 7

I may try the re-cable next week. I need to listen to them for a little more before I do it.

i think someone did a recable over on the 700 and 900 thread.

j2kei: Yes you're right, that was a RX700...I think hawker800mech is going to recable RX900s...hopefully

Any word on anyone completing the first known RX900 recable and its affect?

The first few steps are what you guys are calling the "felt mod", right? Then the rest is a different mod? The felt mod looks quite simple but when you start adding dynamax etc could seem a little tricky. BTW, this is coming from someone who will be buying their first full-sized hi-fi can and obviously first mod.

I haven't really been in this thread for a while, so I thought I would just thow out my thoughts on the subject.

The best mod for the RX900 is to go out and buy the RX700. Seriously. There's something about the construction of the 900 that makes it sound boomy and cluttered, no matter how you mod it. The RX700 is cleaner and more forward and just sounds better.

I've done full TopPop mods to my 900, including felt, stuffing and full dynamat extreme, and it still sounds worse than a stock RX700. The RX700 with felt mod and stuffing only sounds better than stock.

So if you're considering modding your RX900 with dynamat and recable, just think that you'll probably spend about $30 on the materials, plus your time. Just add $4 to that and you've got the RX700, a better headphone out of the box.

Just my $0.02.

I disagree with that, Rex. While the HARX9 indeed feels more boomy, it possesses qualities that the HARX7 simply cannot replicate (e.g. larger sound stage, echoey, empty concert hall sound). I think you're trying too hard to make the RX9 sound like the RX7 when in actuality, they're completely different cans. I wouldn't say either is better or worse than the other, just different. As far as listening goes, I would say the RX7 is better for live performances requiring a crystal clear midrange and unmistakable highs but for anything bass heavy, I immediately miss my HARX9.

I paid $35 for my HARX7 and $40 for my HARX9 (bought second-hand, although at the time of purchase I had listened to it more than the original owner had). I have not modded either headphone because I'm afraid I'll screw something up and really don't intend to. I'm keeping both as they are because different can be good.

My 2¢.

I haven't had the chance to sample the RX700 yet, but the RX900 are well described above. Very modern, easy to drive, bass orientated headphone with wide soundstage.

There are aspects of the 900s that I found and still find difficult to adjust to. The topend activity was simply non existent before the felt mod and even now is lost somewhat in the 2D soundstage.

I'm going to remove the rest of the felt sticky covering the holes on the drivers, remove the acoustic lens, put some filler behind drivers and add some sticky foam to back of drivers to try and focus and tighten the sound. I believe the drivers are of a quality that belies their price. If I hear a significant improvement, I will then look at undertaking a recable.

It's all fun at the end of the day.

where did you get the black dynamat in the OP ?
all I can find is aluminium dynamat..and aluminium is bad for sound reflections..

This is the way I feel. I removed the felt and it didn't brighten up as much as I thought it would. I'm going to do what Notuagain is going to do before I re-cable.

Not so. Aluminum may reflect light, but is less efficient at transmitting sound waves. And remember that the purpose of dynamat is to dampen the reverberations produced by the plastic in the cups, not to prevent sound reflections. Most high-end (butyl-based) sound deadeners use aluminum backing.


Sound Deadener Showdown

RallyMaster: Fair enough. If you like the RX900 as much as the RX700, more power to you. I don't mean to dissuade anyone from not attempting to mod their 900 if they really like it and feel it would be worth it. I just hate to see people put time and money into chasing better highs, more controlled bass, less echo and a less muddy midrange, when these characteristics are already present in the stock 700, and in my opinion, better quality than the fully modded 900.

But I agree, the 900 has a more full sound than the 700, and perhaps is a bit more spacious, and some people may really like that. I've found that the extra tightness and balance, coupled with the already quite full sound of the 700 sounds overall better, but that is of course, my own opinion, and any reader and listener should take any comment on sound as opinion and opinion only.

I just hate to see people buy the 900 because they automatically assume the higher price and model number are better, are dissatisfied with the big boomy echoey sound, and say they hate the RX series.

Perhaps we can agree that the best solution is to buy both and see for oneself!

The only thing that I want from RX900 is the ear pad. That thing looks comfy

I've used Dynamat Xtreme and/or similar products in loudspeaker enclosures, throughout a car, in a PC, and in headphones. Each deaden reverberations (sympathetic vibrations), block sound, absorb sound, and reflect sound. One or a combination of products could be preferred by some but not everyone over others because of the application, weight, expense, resulting sound, and/or a few other considerations.

ok thanks for the link, I'll have a look.

but I did try aluminium foil in my 770Pro, and it sounded terrible...the trebles were metallic to death.



this Dynamat Xtreme is meant to kill vibrations, when what we actually want(at the back of the driver at least) is kill the back resonances ?!

I guess the Dynamat Original(no aluminium on the outside, just rubber) might be a better option for this?

or high density acoustic cork? which is used for saxophones and stuff

this is the real deal, too bad it's so thick : http://www.dynamat.com/products_car_audio_dynaxorb.html