Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Fostex T50RP Incremental Mods and Measurements
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Fostex T50RP Incremental Mods and Measurements - Page 45

post #661 of 987

I'm curious what mods were done as well, if you're willing to share. Maybe you mentioned it before...

 

I've noticed the T50RP has a somewhat high (but not terrible) amount of harmonic distortion across the board based on recent measurements of them (modded and stock) from both Tyll and Purrin.

post #662 of 987

More importantly, when are you going to start selling them? wink.gif

post #663 of 987
Sell? I don't really have the time to do that, but I'm more than happy to give out my design. I posted it on HF last year:


http://www.head-fi.org/t/452404/just-listened-to-some-fostex-t50rps-today-wow/6075#post_8114313

The only variation from that is I switched to Fischer FA-003 earpads over the Shures.
post #664 of 987

Heh, I was just teasing you. smile.gif In any case, congrats on a job well done!

post #665 of 987

Just bought the maddog ...

 

decided i didnt like the closed muddy sound.. opened it..

 

removed the felt over the vents + removed the felt behind the driver... 

 

Sound a lot better now.. still have very good bass

 

Anybody can tell me WHY THE HECK DID HE put a square of FELT behind the driver?? in the middle of the driver

 

I cant see how this can help wouldnt it do more harm than good?

post #666 of 987

Most people use a piece of felt behind the driver. It is meant to dampen the driver. The headphone also comes stock with a piece of felt covering the vents. 

 

Just because you don't prefer the sound the way Mr. Speakers does it, doesn't make it wrong or strange. 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Audiolic View Post

Just bought the maddog ...

 

decided i didnt like the closed muddy sound.. opened it..

 

removed the felt over the vents + removed the felt behind the driver... 

 

Sound a lot better now.. still have very good bass

 

Anybody can tell me WHY THE HECK DID HE put a square of FELT behind the driver?? in the middle of the driver

 

I cant see how this can help wouldnt it do more harm than good?

post #667 of 987
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magick Man View Post

Got the measurements of my modded T50RPs from Tyll (many thanks to him), I think they measured well and they sound pretty good.

http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/FostexT50RPDIYModifiedMagicman.pdf

 

The raw graph looks like a diffuse field curve where energy has been reduced from the 3 kHz peak and inserted into the 10 kHz one. Though whether the latter peak is partly an artifact of Tyll's measurement process I don't know - haven't kept up with news regarding that.

 

What was your goal for these in terms of sound, Magick? It seems you were going for neutrality but I suspect you didn't target a diffuse curve specifically? The response looks very similar to the LFF mod, anyway.

post #668 of 987

I wish I could get mine measured or at least auditioned by somebody who really knows what they are talking about. I really have mine sounding reeeeaaally good. I would describe them pretty much the same way people describe the Mad Dog, except I wouldn't call mine dark at all. I'd call mine neutral and very extended on both ends. They have about as much energy as the Q701, but smoother with better sparkle up top. The Q701 has some peakyness which can make them seem bright and thin, where my T50rp still has a good amount of treble it just seems flatter across the upper end. I loved my Q701 and at first thought that these modded T50rp's would never get more head time than my Q701, but for about a month now I haven't really touched the Q701. My T50rp really sounds just as good or better in every way except for soundstage width, but going back to the Q701, now it seems to have an exaggerated soundstage width. 

post #669 of 987

I just tried stacking shure 840 pads and t50rp pads on my modded t50rp. Works great haha it feels more immersive now, like im surrounded. 

post #670 of 987

Anyone here ever compare a Beyerdynamic T70 to a modified Fostex T50RP headphones?

post #671 of 987
Quote:
Originally Posted by vid View Post

The raw graph looks like a diffuse field curve where energy has been reduced from the 3 kHz peak and inserted into the 10 kHz one. Though whether the latter peak is partly an artifact of Tyll's measurement process I don't know - haven't kept up with news regarding that.

What was your goal for these in terms of sound, Magick? It seems you were going for neutrality but I suspect you didn't target a diffuse curve specifically? The response looks very similar to the LFF mod, anyway.

What I was stabbing at was a more relaxed HE-6, less treble energy, particularly @6kHz, but with more forward upper-mids (to bring out female vocals). So I started by listening to my HE-6s and tuned by ear until I got what I wanted. They're my "Sade phones", hence why I call them the Smooth Operators. wink.gif
post #672 of 987

I just picked a Pioneer SX-750 in what appears (and sounds) to be in great condition, from a local flea market for $40. It really woke my T50rp's up. A difference that is definitely worth 40 bucks. 

post #673 of 987
I love vintage pioneer amps, my sx727 works great with the he400, a little bright, but a great clean powerful amp. It only got better after gutting it out and giving it a little rehab. I picked up mine for 30 I think and still am under 100 on it. Do yourself a favor and grab some, expensive but worth it, deoxit and clean it all out.
post #674 of 987

I recently converted my modded T50RPs to balanced operation. I detailed the mod and cable work here: http://robrobinette.com/HeadphoneMods.htm I connected them to my Sony AV receiver to test the balanced operation and it sounds fine. I have a proper balanced DAC and headphone amp on the way. I plan to do the same mod to my AKG K240 Studios.

 

post #675 of 987

I have a question concerning weighting of the baffle.

 

Is it possible that the loading materials used; clay, modeling clay, blu-tack, are limiting the usefulness of this modification due to their relative lack of density?

 

Simply put, would a significantly denser (heavier) baffle improve sound quality? I'm talking about an increased density of between 6 to 8 times that of blu-tack Bringing baffle weight to near 100g). Would this conceivably improve sound, or does the weight of modeling clay/blu-tack already provide an optimal solution for the baffle weight design flaw?

 

Thank you for the very informative thread. 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Fostex T50RP Incremental Mods and Measurements