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 7

post #91 of 1214
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluemonkeyflyer View Post

I don't have Paradox or Mad Dogs. I would be pleased to measure and include the data if anyone is willing to loan their TP1, Mad Dog, and Paradox to me.  I'll pay shipping both ways.

 

I'll add my measurements of my LCD2 v.1 to the database. I used the same exact measurement chain and methodology that I used for the incremental measurements. You can then compare my LCD2 measurement vs Tyll's/purrin's LCD2 v.1 measurement, do the math to calculate an "offset," and have a "pretty good" idea how my incremental mods might measure through theirs setups. 

 

This offset adjustment process is not required, though, to make use of the incremental mod database "as is."  The first measurement I posted to the database is "All Stock" which is the baseline. Compare all graphs relative to one another and against the baseline graph.

Bump. I will pay shipping both ways.

post #92 of 1214
Quote:
Originally Posted by calibro View Post

Thank you for the replay!!!

 

It seems a little bit strange that the N. 9 waterfall (that don't use damping material) is faster than the following (that uses damping material).

 

What do you think about=?????

 

;-)

Bump!! Any news about waterfall???

 

My cans arrived in Italy today....

 

I was thinkink to attach a bigger plate to the external side of the baffle (N° 12 part). In this way I could use bigger custom pads that don't touch my ears and rests directly to my head. What do you think about??

 

Anyone built a twin driver cans??? (Two for each side, one in high position and one in lower position, not rotated as stock T50rp). Impedance should be 25 ohm (parallel) or 100 ohm (series).

 

PS Thank you for the detailed specs of the materials used for modding !!!!


Edited by calibro - 9/3/12 at 9:06am
post #93 of 1214

.


Edited by preproman - 11/12/12 at 4:12pm
post #94 of 1214

Maybe you just got used to the inaccurate cans thinking they were accurate preproman. This reminds me of people thinking k701s are neutral. Anyways here are some graphs to compare the Paradox(top pic) and the AD2000 (Bottom)

 

 

 

post #95 of 1214
Quote:
Originally Posted by donunus View Post

Maybe you just got used to the inaccurate cans thinking they were accurate preproman. This reminds me of people thinking k701s are neutral. Anyways here are some graphs to compare the Paradox(top pic) and the AD2000 (Bottom)

 

 

 

 

 

Wow the Paradox does measure great.  

 

Sorry donunus I'm not a graph guy.  I just let my ears do the talking.  I'm not saying that your graphs are not correct.  I just don't go by them.  

 

You know you also may get different results from different amps, also one being open and the other closed.  I don't know This is a question.

 

Don't get me wrong I really do enjoy the Paradox.  So if your graphs say that's what they measure, then I guess that's what they measure.  


Edited by preproman - 9/3/12 at 6:37pm
post #96 of 1214

I owned the ad2000 before and i wouldn't say they were neutral since I found the upper mids/highs to be boosted like I see it on the graph is basically what I was getting at. I don't hear that kind of pronounced highs when I listen to live instruments playing in a good sounding concert venue.

post #97 of 1214

Well I never used the word neutral - or did I?  I try to stay clear of that word, it can get tricky.  All I was trying to say was the BMFs remind me of the AD2K and the HD800s "some what" not identical but "some what".  

post #98 of 1214
more or less yeah I just replied based on the gist of your post :) accurate=neutral by the way
Edited by donunus - 9/4/12 at 4:53am
post #99 of 1214
Quote:
Originally Posted by donunus View Post

more or less yeah I just replied based on the gist of your post :) accurate=neutral by the way

 

 

Ahhh - I say tomato you say tomatoo.  Get it.  wink_face.gif

 

 

When I use accurate I'm talking accurate instruments - not neutral sounding.  Oh well.  That's why we love this hobby.


Edited by preproman - 9/4/12 at 5:01am
post #100 of 1214
ahh yes accurate sounding instruments are usually described as having good timbre but when it all comes together then it becomes perfectly neutral and natural all at the same time like we hear things in real life
post #101 of 1214
Quote:
Originally Posted by donunus View Post

ahh yes accurate sounding instruments are usually described as having good timbre but when it all comes together then it becomes perfectly neutral and natural all at the same time like we hear things in real life

 

 

lol..  Got it..

post #102 of 1214
I haven't heard the Paradox yet by the way but when I do I will post my comments here. Just so you know how i feel about headphones..... No headphone I have heard (check my profile) has sounded as natural as good speakers yet so i am still looking forward to the day that they do.
Edited by donunus - 9/4/12 at 7:00pm
post #103 of 1214

OOOO  I see.  So your a graph first guy huh.  Now, now, now.  We must be ears first then let the graphs be verification.

post #104 of 1214
No i am not a graph first guy. I've just been reading these things for a while and have noticed that with all the headphones I have owned/heard that the site where these graphs are from make perfect sense with exactly what I hear with every one of them. Add me on FB here are the pictures of most of what I've owned. feel free to ask questions... https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10150262037479900.338214.592879899&type=3
post #105 of 1214

OK,

 

I was under the impression (no pun intendant) that you heard them before.

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