Thanks man, if I may ask could you judge
- do the bass shape resemble Vido or EMX more (everything un-eq'ed)? To my ears EMX has the lowest bass center (more subbass), Vidos center is further up making it sound bloated when compared. But thats just my impressions.
- could you briefly compare to EMX with regards to mids/treble? I think someone has said Svara is rather rolled off, which is not my impression with EMX.
I'll try to get to those comparisons soon. I will say that it feels quite comfortable so far, and while I'm typically not a fan of over ear wearing for earbuds, it works well so far. My first initial thought on listening was it reminded me of my old HE400, which I sold off and kind of regret doing so. Currently doing a non-eq listen with Walnut V2S, which is providing really pleasing vocals with the bass not taking so much of the front stage. I'll also see if the cables I have do well with over ear so I can see if a cable upgrade provides any noticeable changes.
@slappypete
In your case, you leave 1 hole uncovered, so air/sound escapes from there.
This is only an opinion, my understanding is also limited to my observation and tests:
If manufactures wanted a complete seal, they wouldn't use different densities porous materials that partial block the vent holes and then try to seal them with glue, they would use any other non porous material in the first place.
I think it is more expensive to apply glue only around the dampening materials, so maybe some apply glue to the metal grid, that way the foam still works as a vent, because the holes section wont have glue.
In the case of the HP320M mod, yes one hole was left open. I totally get what you are saying. My feeling is that perhaps a thin application of spray glue to the foam like I did, doesn't actually seal off the foam completely. The foam is porus so will soak up the glue to an extent. I will do a test with a monk plus and get back to you later. I will measure a monk plus with its stock foam configuration, then I will remove the foam and apply a new piece of foam with glue sprayed on the entire piece of foam and measure the results.
Yes, it makes sense that a very thin spray of glue doesn't completely block the foam.
The idea is to adjust the amount of air we block from the back holes, this allows to tune the sound to some degree.
Haha since i never even heard a Zen i can't really say I wanted a zen sound. perhaps even the driver is different . But so far I quite like with results of my mod. I may lose some of bass response but somehow gain something in the upper mids. After few hour listening its apparent that the sound of upper mids now reminds me of qian39. More room for separation.
I think. I'm going to keep it for a while. Until someday i can get myself another 320ohm or smart to experiment. Or perhaps move along altogether to a new earbud.
Do you knowk some earbud more little than MX500 shells with very good bass presence and good vocals, below 20$? Maybe Qian39?
I have a lot of problems with MX500 shells. I have several models, VE Monk Plus, Mrz Tomahawk, Toneking TP16, T-Music v1 (Bass Tuned) and Pioneer SE-CE521-K. The last one has the better fit for me, but not the best. Pioneer has good vocals with little bass presence. I think that my problem with bass frequency is the bad fit of earbuds in my ears.
Now I'm using T-Music v1 (Bass Tuned) with Zishan Z1 (oamp LME49720NA), very well with electronic music, but I can't move beacuse they fall.
Do you knowk some earbud more little than MX500 shells with very good bass presence and good vocals, below 20$? Maybe Qian39?
I have a lot of problems with MX500 shells. I have several models, VE Monk Plus, Mrz Tomahawk, Toneking TP16, T-Music v1 (Bass Tuned) and Pioneer SE-CE521-K. The last one has the better fit for me, but not the best. Pioneer has good vocals with little bass presence. I think that my problem with bass frequency is the bad fit of earbuds in my ears.
Now I'm using T-Music v1 (Bass Tuned) with Zishan Z1 (oamp LME49720NA), very well with electronic music, but I can't move beacuse they fall.
I can't help you with a suggestion, but, I got a fit problem with MX500 shells only on my left ear. I've fixed it using a large earhoox attached with the earbud, the classic method blocks the back vents changing quite a bit the SQ, so using in this way it just solved my problem.
Do you knowk some earbud more little than MX500 shells with very good bass presence and good vocals, below 20$? Maybe Qian39?
I have a lot of problems with MX500 shells. I have several models, VE Monk Plus, Mrz Tomahawk, Toneking TP16, T-Music v1 (Bass Tuned) and Pioneer SE-CE521-K. The last one has the better fit for me, but not the best. Pioneer has good vocals with little bass presence. I think that my problem with bass frequency is the bad fit of earbuds in my ears.
Now I'm using T-Music v1 (Bass Tuned) with Zishan Z1 (oamp LME49720NA), very well with electronic music, but I can't move beacuse they fall.
You might try the cheapies Philips (Philps) SHE3800 and Sony E808+ (if still available) and see from there. They're good. There's also Edifier H180, Qian 39, Baldoor E100 if its still available. Maybe someone else can supplement
@Merlin-PT I tested a bunch of tuning configurations with the Monk+ and found that re-gluing the foam (applying glue to the entirety of the foam) didn’t make much of a difference in FR measurements. It is worth mentioning though that there is always one hole open allowing sound to enter the shell. That hole is the one where the voice coil wires go through to the front side of the driver. I have yet to see an earbud driver that doesn’t have this area open. So perhaps it doesn’t matter if the driver holes are sealed completely off. Perhaps the shape, density, and volume of anything put in the shell will have an effect on sound.
So I started by measuring the R channel of a new Monk+. All the measurements for this experiment were done with only the R channel. I then opened the shell, and removed the original foam. Here are before and after photos showing the stock configuration and then foam removed:
I then replaced the foam with a piece of original Monk+ foam. The foam on this Monk was destroyed when removing it, but on another Monk I was messing with the other day the foam came off easily and in tact, so I used this foam for the experiment. I glued the foam with the same procedure I described in the Zen 1 mod post. To recap it goes like this: spray a light amount of craft glue on cardboard, rest foam on the glue, then remove foam from cardboard and apply with very light pressure to the back of the driver with tweezers. The measurements come out close enough that I feel this is an acceptable approach to applying new foam to a driver. Here is the measurement result:
So now lets take a look at what happens if I stuff another layer of foam in the shell, placing it on top of the first, and without glue.
As you can see, the midrange is flattened, mids and bass level lowered, and a bump around 1.9kHz is created.
Now lets take a look at the effect of opening up one of the driver holes like in the Zen 1 mod.
Not too much of a difference here, a little dip at 1.5kHz and increase in the 2kHz bump. Now if you are wondering why it doesn’t seem to have such a large effect like it did on the HP320M, remember that the foam is applied to the shell of the HP320M in stock configuration, not the driver.
So what happens if we apply foam to the shell of the Monk+ only? Take a look:
You can see that you get a flatter response from about 2kHz all the way into the bass. This however doesn’t look like the greatest transition from mids to treble to me. Now let us compare the Monk+ with one hole open (Zen 1 config) to the Monk+ with shell foam (TY Hi-Z config):
The difference between them is quite similar to that of the Zen 1 and HP320M.
Now lets take a look at the effect of using paper-like dampening material instead of foam:
Upper mids become slightly elevated, and the bump at 2.2kHz is significantly lowered.
This had me wondering what would happen if we combined paper dampening on the rear of the driver with foam dampening on the shell, since the paper dampening seemed to lower response around 2kHz. Here are the results:
Notice the transition from mids to treble now has a nicer curve compared to shell foam only. This response looks quite nice to me. To take this mod even further I tried adding 0.25g of duct seal to the back of the driver. I wanted to see if adding literally anything inside the shell would make a difference in tuning. So to recap, at this point the Monk+ is using foam on the shell, paper on the back of the driver, and a glob of duct seal on the driver magnet. Here are the results:
Not so nice in my opinion. It seems to have had a similar effect to when I used the double foam. Take a look at double foam vs this arrangement here:
So in the end I learned a lot and I hope you guys found this helpful/interesting as well. I think the configuration using foam on the shell and paper on the back of the driver looks intriguing. From the graphs it looks like it will be brighter, possibly more “neutral”, with less colored mids, and better bass extension. I haven’t listened to it yet myself. I called this configuration the "Final Mod" in the rest of the graphs I will post comparing this mod to other earbuds. I can't fit any more attachments into this post so they will be in a post following this one.
Here are the FR graphs comparing the “Final” Monk+ mod to some of my other earbuds:
EDIT: The measurements I posted here aren't as accurate as they should be due to me forgetting to volume match the Monk+ again after modding it and before comparing to the other buds. Please see this post for better measurements and a follow up to the mod.
Do you knowk some earbud more little than MX500 shells with very good bass presence and good vocals, below 20$? Maybe Qian39?
I have a lot of problems with MX500 shells. I have several models, VE Monk Plus, Mrz Tomahawk, Toneking TP16, T-Music v1 (Bass Tuned) and Pioneer SE-CE521-K. The last one has the better fit for me, but not the best. Pioneer has good vocals with little bass presence. I think that my problem with bass frequency is the bad fit of earbuds in my ears.
Now I'm using T-Music v1 (Bass Tuned) with Zishan Z1 (oamp LME49720NA), very well with electronic music, but I can't move beacuse they fall.
@slappypete
I wouldn't apply glue to one full side of the foam like that, it will block the the foam in an amount we can't control.
I also think it negates the purpose of using a porous material like foam or paper.
Thanks for all the measurements, you give us a lot of information to process.
I have no experience in tuning, so I look forward to read more from your findings.
When you have more listening time, please let us know how your final tune changed the monk+ sound.
I can't help you with a suggestion, but, I got a fit problem with MX500 shells only on my left ear. I've fixed it using a large earhoox attached with the earbud, the classic method blocks the back vents changing quite a bit the SQ, so using in this way it just solved my problem.
Thank you for your suggestion, but I've already used it. I have serveral earhooks from monk+ extension pack. They are good to fix earbuds in my ears but not with the sound. They makes some leverage and separates the earbud a little, enough to lose low fequencies...lol.. Very complicated everything...
You might try the cheapies Philips (Philps) SHE3800 and Sony E808+ (if still available) and see from there. They're good. There's also Edifier H180, Qian 39, Baldoor E100 if its still available. Maybe someone else can supplement
So I finished mod on the L channel, took some more measurements, and did some listening as well. I realized I forgot to volume match the modded monk+ after the modding was done, so those graphs I posted comparing the R channel of the mod to other buds won't be very accurate. Here are new measurements made from both L and R channels averaged at proper SPL:
So after listening to these I have to admit they don't sound anything like how they measure, in the low end anyway. If I press the buds into my ears there is certainly plenty of deep bass, but under normal listening conditions I would describe these as sounding bass light. The stock Monk+ has more punch in the bass in a volume matched listening session. When I measure buds they have lots of pressure applied to them to get a good seal on the coupler. This explains why they seem to have good bass in measurements, but it seems that having that much dampening material inside the shell negatively effects bass response when less pressure is used, such as in a real world listening test. I personally don't find this mod very appealing in practice, but others who like a lean sound might like it. This experiment was quite the learning experience for me. All kinds of new variables to consider.
@Merlin-PT
So in the end I learned a lot and I hope you guys found this helpful/interesting as well. I think the configuration using foam on the shell and paper on the back of the driver looks intriguing. From the graphs it looks like it will be brighter, possibly more “neutral”, with less colored mids, and better bass extension. I haven’t listened to it yet myself. I called this configuration the "Final Mod" in the rest of the graphs I will post comparing this mod to other earbuds. I can't fit any more attachments into this post so they will be in a post following this one.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Though as someone recently (almost) said "Its a little more complicated than I had thought"!
