or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › "Mad Dog" by MrSpeakers, modified Fostex T50RP review
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

"Mad Dog" by MrSpeakers, modified Fostex T50RP review - Page 408  

post #6106 of 6388
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrspeakers View Post

Over the last three months, there've been lots of posts asking if the Alpha Pads work for HE400 and HE500.  Thanks to Fred at Audio Prana, I have a HE500 on my head with Alpha Pads.   I was able to do it all in about 10 minutes having never taken a pad off an HE before.  They went on without any modification, though it was mildly tricky to attach to the phone.  I'm enjoying the sound and comfort but my wife is not enjoying sharing the music unless Mozart is on.  Use case #1 for closed phones.  

 

 L3000.gif

 

I did crack one of the pad mounting rings, ironically while removing it from the original stock pad.  Fortunately only one edge cracked a bit so it was still usable, and it was easy to get into the Alpha Pad.

 

I like the result, and will share graphs (along with the much requested 3.0 to 3.1 to 3.2 changes) this weekend.  

 

I'll also make a video of how the pads went on the ring and how the ring is replaced on the phone sometime this coming week. 

For me so far, the Alpha Pads on my HE-400 have been great for both sound and comfort.  Others may disagree of course, but it's good to see that they pair well with the HE-500 from your experience.  As far as technicalities go in how the pads alter the sound (if it's even discernible), I can't wait to see your graphs (and of course for the Mad Dogs) - still looking forward to the day I can pull the trigger cool.gif


Edited by modulor - 5/18/13 at 8:08pm
post #6107 of 6388

anyone tried the alpha pads on the k550? 

popcorn.gif

post #6108 of 6388
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lorspeaker View Post

anyone tried the alpha pads on the k550? 

popcorn.gif

 

Do they fit???  I would love to see that too.

post #6109 of 6388
Quote:
Originally Posted by HiFiGuy528 View Post

 

Do they fit???  I would love to see that too.

 

Anyone with a set can measure the rough dimensions, and maybe take a picture of how the 550 pads are attached?

post #6110 of 6388

Dog Pads fit on K271S, and they sound gorgeous btw. Alpha Pads fit quite loosely.

post #6111 of 6388
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew_WOT View Post

Dog Pads fit on K271S, and they sound gorgeous btw. Alpha Pads fit quite loosely.

 

I agree completely. I have Dog pads on my K272. A great match, as if they were made for each other.

post #6112 of 6388
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrspeakers View Post

 

Anyone with a set can measure the rough dimensions, and maybe take a picture of how the 550 pads are attached?

padsize for the K550 :

 

 

 

 

 

 

if the pad-flange is bigger, it can wrap over the top, just like the t50rp...

instead of trying to insert into the slit between the cup.

post #6113 of 6388

The 550 appears to be larger than the HF phones, it may be too tight.  

post #6114 of 6388
Don't wanna rip those lovely pads.
post #6115 of 6388
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrspeakers View Post

The 550 appears to be larger than the HF phones, it may be too tight.  
The alphas cannot fit on the Q-701. Do the 550s have similar pad size?
post #6116 of 6388

At long last, here are the Alpha comparisons...

 

Blue = 3.0

Green = 3.1

Red = 3.2

 

 

 

 

 

The 3.0 was mid-forward, with a step down to the bass and the treble of a few db, and IMHO the lower mids were a bit too prominent to be neutral.  

 

3.1 improved the balance by smoothing the mids and blending better with the lows and highs, and 3.2 was just a tiny bit more so with an increase in bass and upper mids/highs relative to the mids.  In test tones and sweeps the 3.2 is audibly more linear, and IMHO it's more fun too, as the bass has more output relative to the mids.  You can also see the bass is slightly smoother below 70Hz, and even though it looks small, you can hear it.  

 

The 3.2 has about 2dB more bass output relative to the mids, and increased energy from 3K up, which increases the sense of speed on sounds with fast transient attack, such as acoustic guitar, drums and percussion, etc.  

post #6117 of 6388
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrspeakers View Post

At long last, here are the Alpha comparisons...

 

Blue = 3.0

Green = 3.1

Red = 3.2

 

 

 

 

 

The 3.0 was mid-forward, with a step down to the bass and the treble of a few db, and IMHO the lower mids were a bit too prominent to be neutral.  

 

3.1 improved the balance by smoothing the mids and blending better with the lows and highs, and 3.2 was just a tiny bit more so with an increase in bass and upper mids/highs relative to the mids.  In test tones and sweeps the 3.2 is audibly more linear, and IMHO it's more fun too, as the bass has more output relative to the mids.  You can also see the bass is slightly smoother below 70Hz, and even though it looks small, you can hear it.  

 

The 3.2 has about 2dB more bass output relative to the mids, and increased energy from 3K up, which increases the sense of speed on sounds with fast transient attack, such as acoustic guitar, drums and percussion, etc.  

 

Very nice, thanks for the measurements Dan!

post #6118 of 6388

As requested, here are the results of measuring the HE500 with stock pleather (Red) and Alpha Pads (Blue).  It's easy to get the pads onto the HF500 mounting rings, but it takes a few tries to get the rings onto the headphone.  I'll post a video on how to put the pads on tomorrow for the curious.

 

 

The Alpha Pad smooths the peak from 800-1.5K, ads some energy to the upper mids and lower highs, and has a less output around 8-10K, perhaps owners who play with EQ could comment on these changes

 

I won't comment on the sonic changes, as I don't wish to present a biased message and will leave commentary on the sonic affects to any users who do the pad swap.  The pads did have the Alpha feel, but the overall experience of the fit and sound of the phone is quite different from the Mad Dog.  


Edited by mrspeakers - 5/20/13 at 6:35pm
post #6119 of 6388
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greed View Post

 

Very nice, thanks for the measurements Dan!

 

You're welcome!

post #6120 of 6388
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrspeakers View Post

At long last, here are the Alpha comparisons...

 

Blue = 3.0

Green = 3.1

Red = 3.2

 

 

 

 

 

The 3.0 was mid-forward, with a step down to the bass and the treble of a few db, and IMHO the lower mids were a bit too prominent to be neutral.  

 

3.1 improved the balance by smoothing the mids and blending better with the lows and highs, and 3.2 was just a tiny bit more so with an increase in bass and upper mids/highs relative to the mids.  In test tones and sweeps the 3.2 is audibly more linear, and IMHO it's more fun too, as the bass has more output relative to the mids.  You can also see the bass is slightly smoother below 70Hz, and even though it looks small, you can hear it.  

 

The 3.2 has about 2dB more bass output relative to the mids, and increased energy from 3K up, which increases the sense of speed on sounds with fast transient attack, such as acoustic guitar, drums and percussion, etc.  

Quite interesting... Thanks for the graphs!

Even though I do like my mids, I tried doing a bit of EQ in iTunes to simulate 3.2 on my 3.0s and I think I like what I'm hearing.

I'll be sending them in within the next month.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
This thread is locked  
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › "Mad Dog" by MrSpeakers, modified Fostex T50RP review