Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Just listened to some Fostex T50RPs today... WOW!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Just listened to some Fostex T50RPs today... WOW! - Page 377

post #5641 of 10597

So have you splurged on the Stax, or are you waiting to see what comes of their recent acquisition? If audio is your passion, it makes sense to treat yourself.

 

One thing that might make a rather big difference between the T50rps and Stax for HRTF emulation is that when using blocked ear canal measurements, the acoustic impedance of the headphones reproducing the sound should be as close to free air as possible. Otherwise the introduction of the ear canal at playback has too much of an influence on the sound at the eardrum. Closed headphones are worse for such HTRFs.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by HDMan View Post

LOL, you aint heard open sounding until you try the Stax. Trust me, the T50RP's are CLOSED in sound.

 

But yes, many Stax models are bass light unless you spend the megabucks and lash out for the best, then you get it all, plenty of bass in the 007's and 009's.
I can afford it beerchug.gif

 

Is there any clinical studies to prove the amount of EMF, or if it is harmfull in the way it is generated from Stax earspeakers.

 

I think my computer screen drains my energy more so than headphones, and cellphones send and recieve radio signals that can pass through your brain as they move about.

 

Anyhow, this discussion has been had in other threads that I searched, couldn't see any real proof of serious EMF and some Stax listener's going on 20 years vouch for there health.

 



 

post #5642 of 10597
Quote:
Originally Posted by symphonic View Post

So have you splurged on the Stax, or are you waiting to see what comes of their recent acquisition? If audio is your passion, it makes sense to treat yourself.

 

One thing that might make a rather big difference between the T50rps and Stax for HRTF emulation is that when using blocked ear canal measurements, the acoustic impedance of the headphones reproducing the sound should be as close to free air as possible. Otherwise the introduction of the ear canal at playback has too much of an influence on the sound at the eardrum. Closed headphones are worse for such HTRFs.
 



 

 

Yes that is exactly why Smyth Research recommend Stax, they are as open as you can get, and further increase realism.

 

I will be purchasing the Stax SR-007II with an amp undecided, but the purchase of the Realiser sucked my cash, have to save up a bit for a while. Will keep you posted.

 

I think the T50RP's would really step it up a few paces with a dedicated amp and a DAC though, for the money there hard to beat, but for HRTF measurements, your right that they can't get the same accuracy being closed in design.

 

I may just buy a temporary set of open cans, like the AD900's.
 

 


Edited by HDMan - 12/28/11 at 11:59am
post #5643 of 10597

I (finally) pulled the fabric lining off the O2 pads (which are on the CottonDryers).  Heaven only knows why I didn't do this earlier cause I was really surprised by how much better they sounded (an impressive feat considering they were pretty amazing with the lining).  Acoustic foam surrounds the driver on the earside of the baffle w/ the driver exposed (mesh lining is in place, though).

 

What I noticed was the midbass frequencies became more neutral, the upper midrange through the treble gained noticeable clarity.  The smoothness gave way to a bit more crispness, air, and sparkle.  The nice thing is that there is still some of that uber-tasteful coloration in the (slightly forward) central midrange.  For a phone on the more "fun" side of things, the bass quality & quantity is absolutely perfect for my taste.. the mids continue to absolutely sing, making it quite hard to transition back to any dynamic or BA.
 

One thing that's been stated ad-nauseum bears repeating: a tight seal/clamp from the pads (regardless of type/brand) is absolutely imperative to hearing the full potential of not only the bass, but the rest of the frequencies.  I noticed even the slightest leakage had a discernable impact on what I was hearing.

 

BTW, I had a chance to audition an LCD rev. 2 a week or so ago.. it sounded fantastic.. but I came away feeling the Paradox was definitely the superior sounding phone.  The kicker?  The LCD's owner felt the same way  wink_face.gif.

post #5644 of 10597


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluemonkeyflyer View Post
Tip-of-the-Hat to rhythmdevils' experience and knowledge...and a New Year's Resolution to not get too big for my britches.  beerchug.gif

 



Thanks.   But don't give me too much credit.  I mostly just have a different perspective from working on some of the vintage models, many of which are much more stubborn and more underdeveloped than the T50rp, but a lot of the folks in the ortho thread have played with a lot more models than I have and have much more technical understanding than I do.  bigsmile_face.gif


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by devouringone3 View Post

Can I ask quickly if there is any harm (sonic degradation or increased oxidization type of harm) in covering with plasticine the exposed orange part of the driver, on the baffle, where the wire contacts are being made. I don't think I ever seen that on any pictures posted here... I'm about to damp my baffle and while at it I'm thinking of plasting 100% of the baffle's surface and leaving only the driver exposed to air.


If you ever want to recable them, that will make it difficult, or if the cabling comes apart in modding (easy to do).  Also, a tiny bit more plasticine will not make a bit of difference. 

 

post #5645 of 10597
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cortlendt View Post

 

This.

 

Cotton did not help much in my case. Shure pads do something to reduce it though. I'm thinking Acoustipack in cup bottom and tampered plasticine wall around the driver may help but I've to try it yet.


Been offline for a while.  If this was already addressed and I missed it, sorry.

 

But yes, your ear is spot on.  The stock system has a massive resonance at 1K, I've measured it and was really surprised how strong the peak was.  Cotton reduces the tail of the resonance, but doesn't tame the fundamental much.  You really need an acoustic foam on the back of the cup AND cotton to ta this sucker.  

post #5646 of 10597
Quote:
Originally Posted by Omark12 View Post

As a Denon user. How do BMF/Rastapants fare with EDM/Electronica. Also I understand that The T50RP is a closed can, how well does it isolate, and how much does it leak?


I'm a big electronica fan, and IMHO they are awesome for it.

 

The isolation varies based on how open the port is and which pads are used.  The O2 pads isolate very nicely, but alas as the vents have to be partially open, sound leaks in that way.  It's not for DJ use.  The 840 pads isolate less.

post #5647 of 10597
Quote:
Originally Posted by rhythmdevils View Post

 

I hear no less resonance in my plasticine pair than my non plasticine pair and no difference in bass quantity.  I still need to A/B to try to find differences in bass quality. 


I have tested and measured this effect.  The plasticine and dynamat mods all make a reduction in plastic resonances, though the effect is subtle and second order.  By far the dominant problem in the stock-cans is reflections/standing waves in the cup vs. vibration-induced enclosure resonances (the latter being what plasticine and dynamat mods address).

 

IMHO until internal reflections are addressed there is little audible benefit to loading the enclosure and the effect on bass is really more a question of changing enclosure volume which modifies the system Q.

post #5648 of 10597
in my opinion, fiberglass and polyfill is much more effective combination over plasticine(that's the play-doh stuff right?) and dynamat when it comes to completely eliminating resonance and reflections in the cups.
post #5649 of 10597
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrspeakers View Post


I have tested and measured this effect.  The plasticine and dynamat mods all make a reduction in plastic resonances, though the effect is subtle and second order.  By far the dominant problem in the stock-cans is reflections/standing waves in the cup vs. vibration-induced enclosure resonances (the latter being what plasticine and dynamat mods address).

 

IMHO until internal reflections are addressed there is little audible benefit to loading the enclosure and the effect on bass is really more a question of changing enclosure volume which modifies the system Q.



I haven't set up two pairs with all else equal for a test for subtle differences.  But I can agree with a fair amount of confidence that it doesn't do nearly as much as damping materials in the cup, and should definitely not be the first thing people do to these phones.  And if someone is wanting to do simple mods, the plasticine is the thing to axe.  IMO of course. 

 

Beyond my sonic impressions of the effects, I question the plasticine because it's fairly light, it really doesn't add much weight to the baffle at all.   I also have other gripes, but I'll save those for another time, maybe I'll figure them out... bigsmile_face.gif


Edited by rhythmdevils - 12/28/11 at 10:23pm
post #5650 of 10597

Something interesting I noticed yesterday when pad rolling is that the O2 pads sound better to my ears (with my current damping) when attached to the baffle with adhesive than when fitted around the baffle with the lips of the pads.  They get stretched out and loose their shape because they are slightly too small (and round) for this baffle.  Attached via adhesive they have more bass and I believe less upper mids as well, though that's hard to tell with the loss of bass.  They are also more comfortable because they become thicker. 

 

I tried L3000 pads this way and it sounds really glorious until I reaized there's absolutely no treble at all.  Cymbals are a faint whisper.  Everything else sounds great though. 

 

For anyone wondering, jMoney Denon pads are not a good match for these phones.  After trying them on a number of orthos I've come to the conclusion that their strange opening shape/size creates a pretty specific frequency response change that is tailored to match the Denon phones (or is part of the reason their FR is so wonky).  they're also not that comfortable.  Loose loose. 

 

The jMoney Beyer pads may be a good fit SQ wise.  I have an older version though, so it's not really that relevant. 


Edited by rhythmdevils - 12/28/11 at 10:22pm
post #5651 of 10597

What does the ringing in the 1khz turn into from a sound perspective?

post #5652 of 10597
Quote:
Originally Posted by rhythmdevils View Post

Something interesting I noticed yesterday when pad rolling is that the O2 pads sound better to my ears (with my current damping) when attached to the baffle with adhesive than when fitted around the baffle with the lips of the pads.  They get stretched out and loose their shape because they are slightly too small (and round) for this baffle.  Attached via adhesive they have more bass and I believe less upper mids as well, though that's hard to tell with the loss of bass.  They are also more comfortable because they become thicker. 

I tried L3000 pads this way and it sounds really glorious until I reaized there's absolutely no treble at all.  Cymbals are a faint whisper.  Everything else sounds great though. 

For anyone wondering, jMoney Denon pads are not a good match for these phones.  After trying them on a number of orthos I've come to the conclusion that their strange opening shape/size creates a pretty specific frequency response change that is tailored to match the Denon phones (or is part of the reason their FR is so wonky).  they're also not that comfortable.  Loose loose. 

The jMoney Beyer pads may be a good fit SQ wise.  I have an older version though, so it's not really that relevant. 

thanks for the impression on the denon pads! i was actually plan on splurging on those to see if they'll do anything good cause of the deep seal. now i know. i think also the beyer might do better since they're closer to the 240 pads from guessing cause i tried some 240 pads on my fostex and were great before i gotten the shure 840 pads. so far i feel the shure 840 leather pads are best for me in my opinion i think.
post #5653 of 10597

Just got the Shure 940 velour pads. First impressions are good - and it FITS :)

post #5654 of 10597


I've been using the velour 940 pads for I little while now but I'm thinking on going back to pleather 840. The bass is much diminish with the velour and with my setup it's a bit too bright.

 

They are very comfy it's a shame to changed them. frown.gif

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ardilla View Post

Just got the Shure 940 velour pads. First impressions are good - and it FITS :)



 

 


Edited by Twinster - 12/29/11 at 10:41am
post #5655 of 10597

I've had the Beyer DT990 pads - they are even brighter and less bassy - but soundstage and airiness is brilliant. I think I'll mod different pairs to different pads

 

BTW - the shure are not all velour - they are vinyl on the inside. 

 

Anyone tried the Beyer DT770 pads? 
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Twinster View Post


I've been using the velour 940 pads for I little while now but I'm thinking on going back to pleather 840. The bass is much diminish with the velour and with my setup it's a bit too bright.

 

They are very comfy it's a shame to changed them. frown.gif

 



 

 



 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Just listened to some Fostex T50RPs today... WOW!