Earbuds Round-Up

[droenald]

in matter of fact, the air flow is fundamental.

75ohms nanofiber in example:
- Give it too much air and you'll have more bass quantity, though bloated, congested, textureless and bleeding heavily into the mids, also highs will be absent.
- Now give it less air, and everything will balance out, highs will appear, the bass bleed will recede and bass will be much more controlled.
- Continue taking air from it and bass will disappear, highs will too, making it sound dull, very midcentric and shouty, but that will only happen if you block almost all air.

But then look at 120 LCP:
- if you give it too much air it will lift up mids a bit and upper bass a lot, treble is there but under the smear of upper bass.
- Give it less air and treble and mids will go to a similar level, upper bass will become less proeminent, allowing mid bass to be perceived.
- Restrict even more the air flow, and you'll have good mid bass and good treble response, mid takes a slight step back.
- Lessen even more the air flow from here will make upper bass dip even more, and midbass to become more pronounced, highs will take a step back.
- Continuing with it from here, will only make bass more and more as the other frequencies disappear, until you have taken most of the air that could enter the driver, and it will sound midcentric and shouty and all.

I have a question about the air flow:
Guessing that it is a matter of balancing the air pressure from behind the driver and in front of the driver.
Looking at the driver covers there cannot be a lot of air exiting there, they are pretty restrictive with tiny holes.
In fact I tried my hand at modifying a few cheap buds I had and am pretty surprised at the improvement that can be had. I ended up restricting airflow more in most of them, ending up with much improved treble and only slight drawbacks for the bass. Probably not even drawbacks. Less bass, but in turn better bass.
I realize from your description about 120r LCP and 75r Bio drivers, that the answer for my questions will be "it all depends on the driver", which is the answer I have gotten before.
Still...
1.)
What is the general difference of using horseshoe foam (7:1, 10:1) vs. Using tuning paper (Y2-Y7) on the back of the driver?
2.)
What is the difference of using High density foam vs. Medium density foam on the shell vents in MX500?
More treble with high density, because of less venting?

I've gotten all of the necessary things for DIY bud making, also some drivers and shells.
I'd simply love to get a better basic understanding of the tuning materials before starting out.
I understand that drivers will react differently to tuning. Still hoping for some basic guidelines for the materials and what they do.

So you see, when I wrote "we need you", what I actually meant was "I need your help"...

 

[droenald]

Whoops, double post...

 

[metrics]

edit: i don't know how to mention people, sorry

@droenald


Well, i fear all answers i can give you, you heard before, but let me try to answer.
And always remember, that's only my experience.


1.)
In my experience, damping the driver with horseshoe foam will in most cases take some of the resolution, sounstage and treble, mids usually will be lowered too, and bass will be raised (or at least you'll have that impression as the other frequencies were lowered); so in general i think it makes the sound softer, easier to hear. There are instances where it may raise pinna region, and sometimes it can also raise the mids, but again, it depends on the driver.
I usually do not put them in the back of a driver (mainly by how it usually affects the treble), but when i face too forward, or harsh sounding drivers as this 32 ohms ti comp pink dot, or 28 ohms 1dd + 1pzt (AKA Aeolian Bells driver), then i put horseshoes on them. BUT do note that both this drivers like more pressure/less air, so, doing this to them does not skews the treble, and is the only way to get decent bass response (which is minimal bass response in a-bells driver).
i think horseshoe causes less disturbance if put in the back of the shell, were they usually give some increase to bass, with the rest of frequencies are little affected compared to putting it in the back of the driver.

Now for tuning paper, i mainly use these in the back of drivers, the amount of bass, mids, treble they add or take is less than horseshoe, so if you don't need to add or subtract much of the sound, they are the way to go.
Y2 - Changes very little of the sound compared to when there's nothing on the driver's back, but if you need minimal adjustment, it works.
Y3 - Makes bass just a bit more tight, may supress by very little bass bleeding into the mids. Again, talking about little adjustments. Y2 and Y3 will not change much the dynamic range, Dynamics, and Resolution
Y4 - Bass will be tighter than Y3, can supress some bass bleed, mids may take a very slight dip, treble will sound more present. Y4 may affect dynamic range, Dynamics, and Resolution, not really significatively though.
Y5 - Bass will be tighter than Y4, it will supress bass bleed, mids do dip a little, pinna region may be pronounced, treble will sound more present than Y4. Y5 will affect dynamic range, Dynamics, and Resolution, a bit.
Y6 - Bass will be tighter than Y5, it will supress bass bleed, mids do little dip, pinna region tend to be pronounced, treble will sound more present than Y5. Y6 will affect dynamic range, Dynamics, and Resolution, more than Y5, still much less than Horseshoe foams though.
Again, it all depends on the driver, some drivers may show a smidge more bass with higher damping rather than the opposite due to needing less air, and vice-versa.

2.) As said before, in my experience horseshoe foams in the back of a shell increase bass without sacrificing much. A medium density foam would increase the bass less than a higher density, but also taking less treble, while the higher density would take more.
Once again (i bet you are tired of hear me talk this for the forty time in this post) it depends on the driver, riveted 400 graphene loses bass and gains more treble if you do this, while 32 ohms TI pink dot gains more bass (and may gain a tad more treble depending on how much pressure you already gave it) if you put a horseshoe on the back of its shell. I do not know any exemple of drivers losing treble that way, but i have used mx500 for like, very few builds.

But now we get to a point that i wanted to talk about.
I rather control airflow by changing shells instead of aplying damping, as it tends to give more drastic results.
Example, put 75 ohms nanofiber in that metal shell with a circular vent, you'll get flabby bass, bass bleed, highs recessed. You can damp it as much as you want, it will not deviate much from this, and you may end up making highs disappear for real as you add even more damping to it. But now if you put it in a shell like the metal shell with three vents on back top of it, and the result will be tight bass, clean mids and treble, and also very good timbre, just be sure to make something about the reverberations in that shell and you are fine.
But, if you need only to make a little adjustment, then horseshoe or tuning paper must suffice.

I will also ask for you to take in consideration how much loud you listen to your music, as if you listen really loud, some part of the frequency range can become too pronounced (usually midrange does that, because of how 'buds work), so, if that's the case you applying horseshoes to tame that shouty mids would make sense.


What you said at the beginning about driver covers letting little air flow throught given its small holes, reminded me that OurArt made two earbuds that had much more open covers than conventional buds (OurArt ti7 and OurArt qj21), and i now i'm curious on how this would affect the sound.

Spoiler

 

[trevdawg94]

I don't know. it has that depression at the center of the pcb that often drivers with that vent do, but i do not know. Taking the cover out of the driver would also not help, as the cone of the diaphragm is the only part that's not transparent in it. Sorry for not being of much help

Also, i tried the other 32 ohm TI comp in a stock MX500 with high density horseshoe foams in the back of the shell (i usually evict MX500 due to me abhoring fixed cables, and the fit not being the most confortable), and they sounded much more like the description on Rary's Guide, and i liked them in the end, they seem to have some potential, but will need more than a unmodded MX500. It remained a bright driver, but its bass got more defined, its bleeding into the mids diminished, resolution (probably due to less bleed) and soundstage improved.
Sadly my testing with them ended there, as i accidentally ripped one of the solder joints off the pcb, and proceeded to burn the coil trying to fix it.

Yeah that's a good point about the center of the driver, sounds like I might have to sacrifice a pair to see for sure but thanks for checking.

That's interesting, I wonder if a rivet modded MX500 would complement that driver well. Yeah I feel the same way about the standard MX500, as even though you can add MMCX connectors to it you can't wear them over-ear and the connectors aren't very secure. I'll have to try it in the QKZ MDR shell, as it already has a hole in the shell for tuning and you can add an MMCX connector to it though removing the stock strain relief is a PITA. That sucks, some solder pads aren't very durable and I've definitely damaged a coil or two myself lol.

I feel you; i always have to stop myself from posting about builds i have just assembled but already love, because when the honeymoon phase passes, all those overlooked short comings sound pretty embarassing.
Once i nearly posted a building guide for 32 ohms bio composite + dp100 shells, i was so entranced by their thick sound that i completely ignored the severe mid bass bleed, congestion, rolled higs and lows; glad i didn't posted it.

Yep it was a pretty big slap in the face after listening to them for a while. Even after I abandoned the original build one of the builds I was pretty close to releasing was too bright and had a very small soundstage which wasn't my goal at all. Thankfully I took a break and started over, I'm so much happier with how it sounds now.

PS: If anyone is interested in building a pair with the caveat that it isn't 100% final please let me know, as I have the parts list and build guide written. I've already message a couple of posters to this thread who love earbuds with graphene drivers as I figured they would be my biggest critics but I welcome feedback from anyone else as well.

That's for sure a chonky driver, lol
its thicker than Aeolian Bells driver, the thickest i had contact until now, that fits in wind chime's without hassle (and no, they don't sound very good togheter if you are wondering), but this driver you showed... i'm afraid it will not fit, wind chime has 5mm of depth, and that driver is 8,1mm.
and yeah, those shells could use more space

Yeah it is, it's so absurd that when I saw it I knew I had to try and make it work just because of how ridiculous it is lol.
I haven't measured that driver, I should do that to get an idea of how thick it is. Has anyone found a driver that sounds best in that shell? It seems like everyone's always saying that a driver doesn't sound good with this shell. Ugh I must've missed that measurement, thanks for the warning. I wonder if I can find an o-ring to fill that gap...

in matter of fact, the air flow is fundamental.

75ohms nanofiber in example:
- Give it too much air and you'll have more bass quantity, though bloated, congested, textureless and bleeding heavily into the mids, also highs will be absent.
- Now give it less air, and everything will balance out, highs will appear, the bass bleed will recede and bass will be much more controlled.
- Continue taking air from it and bass will disappear, highs will too, making it sound dull, very midcentric and shouty, but that will only happen if you block almost all air.

But then look at 120 LCP:
- if you give it too much air it will lift up mids a bit and upper bass a lot, treble is there but under the smear of upper bass.
- Give it less air and treble and mids will go to a similar level, upper bass will become less proeminent, allowing mid bass to be perceived.
- Restrict even more the air flow, and you'll have good mid bass and good treble response, mid takes a slight step back.
- Lessen even more the air flow from here will make upper bass dip even more, and midbass to become more pronounced, highs will take a step back.
- Continuing with it from here, will only make bass more and more as the other frequencies disappear, until you have taken most of the air that could enter the driver, and it will sound midcentric and shouty and all.

Aaaand the sound you want is somewhere between this two extremes, lol

Thanks for posting your experiences with those two drivers, I'll have to keep this in mind if I build a bud with either of them. Yep and finding that happy medium is a real PITA lol, as it was pretty easy to overshoot one way or the other. It's given me a lot more appreciation of the work that goes into earbuds from commercial and custom builders.

For real, there are very few small shells, that's so... uninspiring

Found this bell shaped shell recently, don't know if you are aware of them. Don't know why the price is so high tough

You'd think there would be more options with how many commercial earbuds have 14.2mm drivers, maybe there just isn't enough DIY demand?

I had seen that shell, I'm guessing it's due to the copper (if it actually is made of copper) and the hydro dipping they had to use to achieve that design.

I wanted to put a different driver in Lun Sheng's Starlight shell as it has a decent amount of volume and has a rear vent but I need to tear it apart to see whether that's possible. If it is then I'm looking at either this driver without a cover or this one that has a cover if I can't reuse the original cover for some reason.

Have you heard only the dd of Aeolian Bells driver after disassembly? it is a full range driver?

Regarding that other 13mm dd with a piezo, that driver is even an earbud driver? Wow, if you manage to make that work, please let us know.

Yes I have, I'm not sure whether it is or not since it was damaged. I want to order another pair and disassemble it without isopropyl to see how it truly sounds.

I don't think so since it has an adhesive ring around the outer edge which is likely for adhering it to an IEM shell. But I'm going to try anyway even if I kill the drivers doing it lol.

I see that after so much fighting, you finally surrendered to buying DB1 , hope it is a big step up from DB1E, and i'm looking forward to read your thought on both sets.

Talking about DB1E, how does it compare to Toneking Dendroapsis Viridis? The king of treble and staging from the past still holds its crown?

As much as I waffled on about buying it or not I always planned on buying it at some point, droenald's description of the DBX more than pushed me over the edge lol.

I haven't compared the two much and it's been a bit since I listened to the Green Mamba, but from what I remember it was brighter and harsher than the DB1E which rounds some of the sharper edges off without losing detail. But the Green Mamba responds to bass EQ much better than the DB1E which really surprised me, it probably comes down to the larger shell volume and different driver type. It also suffers from the same problem as the DB1E where its sound is very dependent on how it's positioned in your ear. Soundstage is narrower and more enclosed than the DB1E, though it is wider than a lot of other commercial earbuds. My biggest problem is the comfort, it's a really large earbud that requires you to use the wings it comes with even if you're using it with a cable designed to be worn over-ear. It's not a bad earbud by any means but if you are coming from the DB1E it might be a little disappointing since it's a much more raw, less refined experience.

 

[ttorbic]

edit: i don't know how to mention people, sorry

@droenald


Well, i fear all answers i can give you, you heard before, but let me try to answer.
And always remember, that's only my experience.


1.)
In my experience, damping the driver with horseshoe foam will in most cases take some of the resolution, sounstage and treble, mids usually will be lowered too, and bass will be raised (or at least you'll have that impression as the other frequencies were lowered); so in general i think it makes the sound softer, easier to hear. There are instances where it may raise pinna region, and sometimes it can also raise the mids, but again, it depends on the driver.
I usually do not put them in the back of a driver (mainly by how it usually affects the treble), but when i face too forward, or harsh sounding drivers as this 32 ohms ti comp pink dot, or 28 ohms 1dd + 1pzt (AKA Aeolian Bells driver), then i put horseshoes on them. BUT do note that both this drivers like more pressure/less air, so, doing this to them does not skews the treble, and is the only way to get decent bass response (which is minimal bass response in a-bells driver).
i think horseshoe causes less disturbance if put in the back of the shell, were they usually give some increase to bass, with the rest of frequencies are little affected compared to putting it in the back of the driver.

Now for tuning paper, i mainly use these in the back of drivers, the amount of bass, mids, treble they add or take is less than horseshoe, so if you don't need to add or subtract much of the sound, they are the way to go.
Y2 - Changes very little of the sound compared to when there's nothing on the driver's back, but if you need minimal adjustment, it works.
Y3 - Makes bass just a bit more tight, may supress by very little bass bleeding into the mids. Again, talking about little adjustments. Y2 and Y3 will not change much the dynamic range, Dynamics, and Resolution
Y4 - Bass will be tighter than Y3, can supress some bass bleed, mids may take a very slight dip, treble will sound more present. Y4 may affect dynamic range, Dynamics, and Resolution, not really significatively though.
Y5 - Bass will be tighter than Y4, it will supress bass bleed, mids do dip a little, pinna region may be pronounced, treble will sound more present than Y4. Y5 will affect dynamic range, Dynamics, and Resolution, a bit.
Y6 - Bass will be tighter than Y5, it will supress bass bleed, mids do little dip, pinna region tend to be pronounced, treble will sound more present than Y5. Y6 will affect dynamic range, Dynamics, and Resolution, more than Y5, still much less than Horseshoe foams though.
Again, it all depends on the driver, some drivers may show a smidge more bass with higher damping rather than the opposite due to needing less air, and vice-versa.

2.) As said before, in my experience horseshoe foams in the back of a shell increase bass without sacrificing much. A medium density foam would increase the bass less than a higher density, but also taking less treble, while the higher density would take more.
Once again (i bet you are tired of hear me talk this for the forty time in this post) it depends on the driver, riveted 400 graphene loses bass and gains more treble if you do this, while 32 ohms TI pink dot gains more bass (and may gain a tad more treble depending on how much pressure you already gave it) if you put a horseshoe on the back of its shell. I do not know any exemple of drivers losing treble that way, but i have used mx500 for like, very few builds.

But now we get to a point that i wanted to talk about.
I rather control airflow by changing shells instead of aplying damping, as it tends to give more drastic results.
Example, put 75 ohms nanofiber in that metal shell with a circular vent, you'll get flabby bass, bass bleed, highs recessed. You can damp it as much as you want, it will not deviate much from this, and you may end up making highs disappear for real as you add even more damping to it. But now if you put it in a shell like the metal shell with three vents on back top of it, and the result will be tight bass, clean mids and treble, and also very good timbre, just be sure to make something about the reverberations in that shell and you are fine.
But, if you need only to make a little adjustment, then horseshoe or tuning paper must suffice.

I will also ask for you to take in consideration how much loud you listen to your music, as if you listen really loud, some part of the frequency range can become too pronounced (usually midrange does that, because of how 'buds work), so, if that's the case you applying horseshoes to tame that shouty mids would make sense.


What you said at the beginning about driver covers letting little air flow throught given its small holes, reminded me that OurArt made two earbuds that had much more open covers than conventional buds (OurArt ti7 and OurArt qj21), and i now i'm curious on how this would affect the sound.

Spoiler

Jim's SBS has a rather open faceplate design
https://audionotions.com/tgxear-serratus-black-sand-jim-should-be-charging-more-for-these/

 

[qua2k]

not needed post

 

[Eric0]

So far, I’ve seen people recommend the Dunu Alpha 3s and the DGVP DX7s. With the AliExpress sale, I can get the Dunus for about $90 and the DX7s for about $110 Canadian.

I have the Alpha 3. After applying EQ, they are fantastic.

 

[nick67]

edit: i don't know how to mention people, sorry

@droenald


Well, i fear all answers i can give you, you heard before, but let me try to answer.
And always remember, that's only my experience.


1.)
In my experience, damping the driver with horseshoe foam will in most cases take some of the resolution, sounstage and treble, mids usually will be lowered too, and bass will be raised (or at least you'll have that impression as the other frequencies were lowered); so in general i think it makes the sound softer, easier to hear. There are instances where it may raise pinna region, and sometimes it can also raise the mids, but again, it depends on the driver.
I usually do not put them in the back of a driver (mainly by how it usually affects the treble), but when i face too forward, or harsh sounding drivers as this 32 ohms ti comp pink dot, or 28 ohms 1dd + 1pzt (AKA Aeolian Bells driver), then i put horseshoes on them. BUT do note that both this drivers like more pressure/less air, so, doing this to them does not skews the treble, and is the only way to get decent bass response (which is minimal bass response in a-bells driver).
i think horseshoe causes less disturbance if put in the back of the shell, were they usually give some increase to bass, with the rest of frequencies are little affected compared to putting it in the back of the driver.

Now for tuning paper, i mainly use these in the back of drivers, the amount of bass, mids, treble they add or take is less than horseshoe, so if you don't need to add or subtract much of the sound, they are the way to go.
Y2 - Changes very little of the sound compared to when there's nothing on the driver's back, but if you need minimal adjustment, it works.
Y3 - Makes bass just a bit more tight, may supress by very little bass bleeding into the mids. Again, talking about little adjustments. Y2 and Y3 will not change much the dynamic range, Dynamics, and Resolution
Y4 - Bass will be tighter than Y3, can supress some bass bleed, mids may take a very slight dip, treble will sound more present. Y4 may affect dynamic range, Dynamics, and Resolution, not really significatively though.
Y5 - Bass will be tighter than Y4, it will supress bass bleed, mids do dip a little, pinna region may be pronounced, treble will sound more present than Y4. Y5 will affect dynamic range, Dynamics, and Resolution, a bit.
Y6 - Bass will be tighter than Y5, it will supress bass bleed, mids do little dip, pinna region tend to be pronounced, treble will sound more present than Y5. Y6 will affect dynamic range, Dynamics, and Resolution, more than Y5, still much less than Horseshoe foams though.
Again, it all depends on the driver, some drivers may show a smidge more bass with higher damping rather than the opposite due to needing less air, and vice-versa.

2.) As said before, in my experience horseshoe foams in the back of a shell increase bass without sacrificing much. A medium density foam would increase the bass less than a higher density, but also taking less treble, while the higher density would take more.
Once again (i bet you are tired of hear me talk this for the forty time in this post) it depends on the driver, riveted 400 graphene loses bass and gains more treble if you do this, while 32 ohms TI pink dot gains more bass (and may gain a tad more treble depending on how much pressure you already gave it) if you put a horseshoe on the back of its shell. I do not know any exemple of drivers losing treble that way, but i have used mx500 for like, very few builds.

But now we get to a point that i wanted to talk about.
I rather control airflow by changing shells instead of aplying damping, as it tends to give more drastic results.
Example, put 75 ohms nanofiber in that metal shell with a circular vent, you'll get flabby bass, bass bleed, highs recessed. You can damp it as much as you want, it will not deviate much from this, and you may end up making highs disappear for real as you add even more damping to it. But now if you put it in a shell like the metal shell with three vents on back top of it, and the result will be tight bass, clean mids and treble, and also very good timbre, just be sure to make something about the reverberations in that shell and you are fine.
But, if you need only to make a little adjustment, then horseshoe or tuning paper must suffice.

I will also ask for you to take in consideration how much loud you listen to your music, as if you listen really loud, some part of the frequency range can become too pronounced (usually midrange does that, because of how 'buds work), so, if that's the case you applying horseshoes to tame that shouty mids would make sense.


What you said at the beginning about driver covers letting little air flow throught given its small holes, reminded me that OurArt made two earbuds that had much more open covers than conventional buds (OurArt ti7 and OurArt qj21), and i now i'm curious on how this would affect the sound.

Spoiler

Interesting how adding horseshoes to the back of the shell increases bass, yet opening a big hole with rivet mod also gives added bass.

 

[trevdawg94]

I currently have a pair of Fiio FF3S that, unfortunately, have started to rattle in one ear, so I’m looking to pick up a new pair of earbuds.

So far, I’ve seen people recommend the Dunu Alpha 3s and the DGVP DX7s. With the AliExpress sale, I can get the Dunus for about $90 and the DX7s for about $110 Canadian.

Does anyone have experience with these and any recommendations on which way to go?

I listen to many different genres of music and prefer a “warm,” inoffensive sound, as I use these to listen to music while working.

I didn’t find the FF3S too impressive—they almost sound unclear and not much better than the Faaeal Rosemary I also have.

Thanks so much!

I have all three of the earbuds you listed, give me some time and I can tell you what the differences are. Is there anything in particular that you liked about the FF3S that you would really miss from it? Neither option will have as much bass as the FF3S but what bass they do have will be more controlled and less boomy.

 

[trevdawg94]

I have the Alpha 3. After applying EQ, they are fantastic.

What EQ have you applied to them, and what problem areas did it fix for you? I need to spend some more time with them and this would be the perfect excuse to do so.

 

[trevdawg94]

edit: i don't know how to mention people, sorry

@droenald


Well, i fear all answers i can give you, you heard before, but let me try to answer.
And always remember, that's only my experience.


1.)
In my experience, damping the driver with horseshoe foam will in most cases take some of the resolution, sounstage and treble, mids usually will be lowered too, and bass will be raised (or at least you'll have that impression as the other frequencies were lowered); so in general i think it makes the sound softer, easier to hear. There are instances where it may raise pinna region, and sometimes it can also raise the mids, but again, it depends on the driver.
I usually do not put them in the back of a driver (mainly by how it usually affects the treble), but when i face too forward, or harsh sounding drivers as this 32 ohms ti comp pink dot, or 28 ohms 1dd + 1pzt (AKA Aeolian Bells driver), then i put horseshoes on them. BUT do note that both this drivers like more pressure/less air, so, doing this to them does not skews the treble, and is the only way to get decent bass response (which is minimal bass response in a-bells driver).
i think horseshoe causes less disturbance if put in the back of the shell, were they usually give some increase to bass, with the rest of frequencies are little affected compared to putting it in the back of the driver.

Now for tuning paper, i mainly use these in the back of drivers, the amount of bass, mids, treble they add or take is less than horseshoe, so if you don't need to add or subtract much of the sound, they are the way to go.
Y2 - Changes very little of the sound compared to when there's nothing on the driver's back, but if you need minimal adjustment, it works.
Y3 - Makes bass just a bit more tight, may supress by very little bass bleeding into the mids. Again, talking about little adjustments. Y2 and Y3 will not change much the dynamic range, Dynamics, and Resolution
Y4 - Bass will be tighter than Y3, can supress some bass bleed, mids may take a very slight dip, treble will sound more present. Y4 may affect dynamic range, Dynamics, and Resolution, not really significatively though.
Y5 - Bass will be tighter than Y4, it will supress bass bleed, mids do dip a little, pinna region may be pronounced, treble will sound more present than Y4. Y5 will affect dynamic range, Dynamics, and Resolution, a bit.
Y6 - Bass will be tighter than Y5, it will supress bass bleed, mids do little dip, pinna region tend to be pronounced, treble will sound more present than Y5. Y6 will affect dynamic range, Dynamics, and Resolution, more than Y5, still much less than Horseshoe foams though.
Again, it all depends on the driver, some drivers may show a smidge more bass with higher damping rather than the opposite due to needing less air, and vice-versa.

2.) As said before, in my experience horseshoe foams in the back of a shell increase bass without sacrificing much. A medium density foam would increase the bass less than a higher density, but also taking less treble, while the higher density would take more.
Once again (i bet you are tired of hear me talk this for the forty time in this post) it depends on the driver, riveted 400 graphene loses bass and gains more treble if you do this, while 32 ohms TI pink dot gains more bass (and may gain a tad more treble depending on how much pressure you already gave it) if you put a horseshoe on the back of its shell. I do not know any exemple of drivers losing treble that way, but i have used mx500 for like, very few builds.

But now we get to a point that i wanted to talk about.
I rather control airflow by changing shells instead of aplying damping, as it tends to give more drastic results.
Example, put 75 ohms nanofiber in that metal shell with a circular vent, you'll get flabby bass, bass bleed, highs recessed. You can damp it as much as you want, it will not deviate much from this, and you may end up making highs disappear for real as you add even more damping to it. But now if you put it in a shell like the metal shell with three vents on back top of it, and the result will be tight bass, clean mids and treble, and also very good timbre, just be sure to make something about the reverberations in that shell and you are fine.
But, if you need only to make a little adjustment, then horseshoe or tuning paper must suffice.

I will also ask for you to take in consideration how much loud you listen to your music, as if you listen really loud, some part of the frequency range can become too pronounced (usually midrange does that, because of how 'buds work), so, if that's the case you applying horseshoes to tame that shouty mids would make sense.


What you said at the beginning about driver covers letting little air flow throught given its small holes, reminded me that OurArt made two earbuds that had much more open covers than conventional buds (OurArt ti7 and OurArt qj21), and i now i'm curious on how this would affect the sound.

Spoiler

This is by far the most complete explanation I've seen for how different tuning materials affect sound, well done! Saving this post for my future builds!

 

[droenald]

As much as I waffled on about buying it or not I always planned on buying it at some point, droenald's description of the DBX more than pushed me over the edge lol.

I really *hope* it is a real upgrade to your DB1E! Fingers crossed. I was thinking that it is internally the same as the DBX, as it has the same resistance as the DB1, whereas the DB1E is 80 ohms and thus clearly different. Then again there was a post on another forum saying the DBX is sounding more refined. Then again there was no further explanation in the vein of "after listening to both I'll say that the DBX sounds more refined"...

 

[droenald]

Well, i fear all answers i can give you, you heard before, but let me try to answer.
And always remember, that's only my experience.

I have not heard any of those answers before. Thank you for supplying them!
All I ever got so far was "It all depends on the driver". While I am sure that is partly true, I knew there must be some guidelines for the materials at least. There is Rary's DIY earbud guide, and while this explains how to do mods and is an absolutely great achievement on its own, the background and "why" stay in the dark.
While there is a lot to learn and to fiddle around for sure, I feel prepared now having at least some general ideas of how to use the different materials.

Once again (i bet you are tired of hear me talk this for the forty time in this post)

Not tired at all! Your post is one of the most profound and helpful answers I have ever gotten on the internet. Full stop.
I really appreciate the effort you put into answering my questions in depth. I know from writing some impressions posts about earbuds, that it can easily eat up hours of your lifetime if you try to write something that makes sense. Thank you for putting in the time, we all have real life stuff going on, I am sure you stole that time from another activity you probably should have done instead!

 

[atomLI631]

ive been spending the last several days cleaning out a storage closet in my house. Came across these still sealed in the box!

 

[fidgeraldo]

ive been spending the last several days cleaning out a storage closet in my house.

Dude, either you are soooo slow...or that closet is soooo huge???

Cheers!