Here i come I just tracked me down to make headphones. I'm looking for a pair of headphones and a sound control pad
Home-Made IEMs
- Thread starter Bilavideo
- Start date
dhruvmeena96
Headphoneus Supremus
This group/thread is for in ear monitors
[QUOTE = "dhruvmeena96, โพสต์: 15700363, สมาชิก: 413452"]
กลุ่ม / เธรดนี้ใช้สำหรับหูฟังในหู
[/ quote]
ฉันต้องการเรซิ่น and crosover Sorry, I wrote it wrong
กลุ่ม / เธรดนี้ใช้สำหรับหูฟังในหู
[/ quote]
ฉันต้องการเรซิ่น and crosover Sorry, I wrote it wrong
If I were to make a 2-way system with balanced armatures, would it be better with 1x low end and 1x high end, or 2x full range BA's?
dhruvmeena96
Headphoneus Supremus
2x fullrange are easy as beginner
Cross system has learning curve but more worthwhile on spec point of view
mattmatt
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2012
- Posts
- 456
- Likes
- 282
Do we still need the dampers for this?
.
Last edited:
stephensynanta16
Member of the Trade: 7th Acoustics
Yes
what is benefit for connect 2 *Ci-22955 in series or parallel ?
dhruvmeena96
Headphoneus Supremus
Series
Advantage are
higher inductance shown to circuit, passively very micro level lowpass but nice texture bass if we talk in psychoacoustics
More power handling(double watt handling but also more resistive so you take more volume knob turn to reach required MV)
-3dB from single driver in sensitivity
Way less distortion
And easily low passed with circuit and dampers and way easily integrated in multi way iem
musmecca
100+ Head-Fier
I joined June 1st and read every post and followed every link since then...I have a large spiral notebook full of ideas and pics thanks to you guys! It has been fascinating to see the evolution of IEM's over the years and how all the great contributors have pushed the ball upward. I am experienced in electronics and have already successfully made multiple shells (thanks shiloh, force,eunice, dhruv, furco, xymordos, piotrus, jedrula, maodi....this is easy if people would simply read). My question revolves around using the SR6438 as a full range in combination with other drivers for bass, mids and highs. I am seeking a full stage with no flab in the bass...but very tight...bass has to be impactful but clear...should be able to do Geddy Lee and Chevelle with no problem without being muddy or thuddy. Others asked in the past but I never saw anyone explain or even propose a successful build incorporating the SR's. I 've already re shelled my westones and some old audeze, so not a total beginner and I feel I have my "average setups" covered. I have my functioning umic-1 so can can do baseline analysis....anyone with any ideas? Of course if anyone thinks I'm going down the wrong rabbit-hole, please let me know. I'm happy to experiment and report.
stephensynanta16
Member of the Trade: 7th Acoustics
SR is quite great, yet odd driver, @dhruvmeena96 and me has successfully build a good single driver iem based on SR, its a good driver, has great mids but...
Difficult to implement in multi driver config. Due to its size and shape. Other driver may end up in not so ideal position & orientation. I'd still prefer regular rectangular BA for multi driver.
musmecca
100+ Head-Fier
Thanks for the reply. I think what drew me to it in the woofer category was how linear it was from 100 up to 1K HZ, whereas th CI and Hodvtec begin to dip as they reach 1K. Did you guys have any success at all? I have big ears and stock of SR's! I have noted that very few manufacturers have SR's in their lineup, so they can't be that easy to use in spite of the fact they are very cheap...
cyph3r
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2011
- Posts
- 109
- Likes
- 46
Hi all,
I recently got a sample of Bellsing 260C90021 (short BRC260 hereafter) which are kinda like clones of the well known dual driver module Knowles GQ-30783-000 and I thought it would be interesting to make a direct comprison. I subsequently performed a number of side-by-side tests in order to investigate similarities.
I thought you guys would be interested in a short report:
1) Appearance
Both the GQ and the BRC260 look like they are the same. Look at the side by side picture and you can conclude that there are virtually no differences to be seen by eye. Low frequency driver width as measured using a precision caliper confirms this observation, the dimensions are the same to the first digit after comma. All BRC260 had the same width, demonstrating substantial consistency.
The only observable differences are
- The PCB
While the layout is exactly the same (serial resistor 0.2 ohm on mid low driver, a cap serial on the high frequency driver, did not measure). On the BRC260 the PCB looks kind of lower quality with lots of flux residues and open vias. The GQ PCB look much better, very clean with gold plated solder pads, tented vias and no flux anywhere. Interestingly if you carefully on the backside of the PCBs, the high frequency driver is connected in reverse polariy on the BS versus the GQ. Bellsing says their drivers incl PCBs are ROHS compliant, I have to accept that because you’d have to perform ICP-OES or something like that to test whether any heavy metals impurities are present.
- Sound port, looks slightly different but nothing to complain about here.
2) Measurements
One interesting nondestructive test to probe inner workings of balanced armature drivers are impedance spectra. I have measured impedance of both, a group of 4 GQs and one group of 4 BRC260s and is an direct comparison of those (all with the same setup, x-Axis log-impedance in Ohms, y-axis: frequency in Hz; not much going on below 300Hz hence not shown):
The yellowish curves are the BRC260, the darker traces with average higher impedance are GQs. Its evident that among each driver type group there is very good consistency (apart from the one grey curve which is one of the four BRC260 drivers that really looks odd, don’t know why). There are also quite some differences in impedance between GQ and BRC260 in general pointing towards difference in construction (materials, coils) inside the package. RMS impedance of the GQs from this data are 56 ohms versus 49 ohms in the BRC260s. So, BRC260 appear to have overall slightly lower impedance with less amplitude (GQs peak at slighlty below 3 kHz at above 140 ohms and 190ohms at ca 6.7 Hz) which could be a tiny advantage for lower-powered amplifiers such as those in most mobile phones. The one BRC260 driver that has a markedly different impedance spectrum worries me a bit. I haven’t tested that one in full but this could point to issues. If I have time I may update on that later.
Onto acoustic frequency response, I just compare one of each drivers with each other as I had no time to solder up all of the BRC260s. termination was a 1cmx1.5mmID acoustic tube to my setup (For those raising fingers now: I have a DIY setup, don’t bother to ask for IEC / DIN accuracy or references etc; what counts here are relative results).
Relative to each other, I found the two drivers to nearly identical within margins of measurement error typically observed in my setup, with the BRC260 have a bit of a deeper dip at ca 9 kHz. And thats it more or less. Its not really objective, but I also listened to both driver modules at the same time (in one ear BRC260 in the other GQ), I could not hear any difference in a nearly identical setup but that’s only anecdotal evidence.
3) Conclusion
Actually I don’t know who invented this dual driver module with integrated crossover concept was first, but I do believe that Knowles came up with the very successful GQ module in first place several years ago. So if Bellsing came in second afterwards, they either did a meticulous reengineering job or they get some kind of OEM from the same factory where Knowles produces: Both chassis and sonic performance are virtually identical. I am pretty sure the untrained operator would not be able to distinguish the drivers in the shop if you don’t have a look at bottom markings (so beware when purchasing GQs from other than official sources..).
Impedance hints to slight internal built differences which apparently have no impact on sonic performance.
The GQ is a very successful module with many listeners appreciating it out of the box. It may be quite obvious to make an exact replacement with identical dimensions that fits already existing earphone platforms so manufacturers could make an easy switch with no one noticing. Why should you switch? Well current retail price of the GQ is at (on Mouser / Digikey you get them for 27 – 35 USD depending on quantity and the BRC260 are on average 10USD cheaper per piece, moving 20 USD from your COGs to your margin which may be quite a percentage depending on your pricing strategy and translate to quite some earnings on mid / high volume sales).
In the end what will also be important is reliability and quality. As said above impedance could hint to different materials used for the internals with unknown longevity track record. You don’t want customers returning your IEMs after a few months for some malfunctioning drivers. Here I don’t have any experience yet with BRC260s (I am sure the Sampler I got was handpicked, don’t know what the variability of the BRC260 is when you order and test like 50 – 100 of ‘em). Anyone has any "statistically robust" experience with Bellsing drivers?
I recently got a sample of Bellsing 260C90021 (short BRC260 hereafter) which are kinda like clones of the well known dual driver module Knowles GQ-30783-000 and I thought it would be interesting to make a direct comprison. I subsequently performed a number of side-by-side tests in order to investigate similarities.
I thought you guys would be interested in a short report:
1) Appearance
Both the GQ and the BRC260 look like they are the same. Look at the side by side picture and you can conclude that there are virtually no differences to be seen by eye. Low frequency driver width as measured using a precision caliper confirms this observation, the dimensions are the same to the first digit after comma. All BRC260 had the same width, demonstrating substantial consistency.
The only observable differences are
- The PCB
While the layout is exactly the same (serial resistor 0.2 ohm on mid low driver, a cap serial on the high frequency driver, did not measure). On the BRC260 the PCB looks kind of lower quality with lots of flux residues and open vias. The GQ PCB look much better, very clean with gold plated solder pads, tented vias and no flux anywhere. Interestingly if you carefully on the backside of the PCBs, the high frequency driver is connected in reverse polariy on the BS versus the GQ. Bellsing says their drivers incl PCBs are ROHS compliant, I have to accept that because you’d have to perform ICP-OES or something like that to test whether any heavy metals impurities are present.
- Sound port, looks slightly different but nothing to complain about here.
2) Measurements
One interesting nondestructive test to probe inner workings of balanced armature drivers are impedance spectra. I have measured impedance of both, a group of 4 GQs and one group of 4 BRC260s and is an direct comparison of those (all with the same setup, x-Axis log-impedance in Ohms, y-axis: frequency in Hz; not much going on below 300Hz hence not shown):
The yellowish curves are the BRC260, the darker traces with average higher impedance are GQs. Its evident that among each driver type group there is very good consistency (apart from the one grey curve which is one of the four BRC260 drivers that really looks odd, don’t know why). There are also quite some differences in impedance between GQ and BRC260 in general pointing towards difference in construction (materials, coils) inside the package. RMS impedance of the GQs from this data are 56 ohms versus 49 ohms in the BRC260s. So, BRC260 appear to have overall slightly lower impedance with less amplitude (GQs peak at slighlty below 3 kHz at above 140 ohms and 190ohms at ca 6.7 Hz) which could be a tiny advantage for lower-powered amplifiers such as those in most mobile phones. The one BRC260 driver that has a markedly different impedance spectrum worries me a bit. I haven’t tested that one in full but this could point to issues. If I have time I may update on that later.
Onto acoustic frequency response, I just compare one of each drivers with each other as I had no time to solder up all of the BRC260s. termination was a 1cmx1.5mmID acoustic tube to my setup (For those raising fingers now: I have a DIY setup, don’t bother to ask for IEC / DIN accuracy or references etc; what counts here are relative results).
Relative to each other, I found the two drivers to nearly identical within margins of measurement error typically observed in my setup, with the BRC260 have a bit of a deeper dip at ca 9 kHz. And thats it more or less. Its not really objective, but I also listened to both driver modules at the same time (in one ear BRC260 in the other GQ), I could not hear any difference in a nearly identical setup but that’s only anecdotal evidence.
3) Conclusion
Actually I don’t know who invented this dual driver module with integrated crossover concept was first, but I do believe that Knowles came up with the very successful GQ module in first place several years ago. So if Bellsing came in second afterwards, they either did a meticulous reengineering job or they get some kind of OEM from the same factory where Knowles produces: Both chassis and sonic performance are virtually identical. I am pretty sure the untrained operator would not be able to distinguish the drivers in the shop if you don’t have a look at bottom markings (so beware when purchasing GQs from other than official sources..).
Impedance hints to slight internal built differences which apparently have no impact on sonic performance.
The GQ is a very successful module with many listeners appreciating it out of the box. It may be quite obvious to make an exact replacement with identical dimensions that fits already existing earphone platforms so manufacturers could make an easy switch with no one noticing. Why should you switch? Well current retail price of the GQ is at (on Mouser / Digikey you get them for 27 – 35 USD depending on quantity and the BRC260 are on average 10USD cheaper per piece, moving 20 USD from your COGs to your margin which may be quite a percentage depending on your pricing strategy and translate to quite some earnings on mid / high volume sales).
In the end what will also be important is reliability and quality. As said above impedance could hint to different materials used for the internals with unknown longevity track record. You don’t want customers returning your IEMs after a few months for some malfunctioning drivers. Here I don’t have any experience yet with BRC260s (I am sure the Sampler I got was handpicked, don’t know what the variability of the BRC260 is when you order and test like 50 – 100 of ‘em). Anyone has any "statistically robust" experience with Bellsing drivers?
tirrorex
Head-Fier
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2016
- Posts
- 76
- Likes
- 67
Hello, it's been a while since i went here.
The reason is my friend was looking for bluetooth earphones and i bumped into the FOSTER TM2 which comes with mmcx connector.
Triggering my need for a ciem again (yeah i never managed to motivate myself to do the shells...)
So, anyone here tried to go the 3d resin priting road?
I know some people did hollow shells with classic 3d printers.
Basically 3dhub has a category for resin printing :
https://www.3dhubs.com/3d-printing/plastic/resin/
I have to do some research on what is safe for the human hear for i guess at least one of those will do.
Did you guys talk about colors in the thread? I've seen some sick colors on this :
http://www.kumitatelab.com/images/companies/1/KumitateLabDesignBook2017-2018.pdf
I found someone willing to scan the molds i got from the audiologist and make the 3d model for me so that is sweet.
The next part is the electronics, i still have my old parts
knowlers gk-31732-000
knowles bf-1861-000
But if i remember my last conversation in this post those are out of date nowaydays.
Even though i will mostly use those for sports and commutes, considering the price i will pay for the resin 3d printing i might want to go high-end on this.
But i am not sure i will hear the difference due to the bluetooth connection :/
I listen mainly to techno hardcore (angerfirst and the likes), from rock to metal (basically anything from metallica to slipknot including nightwish and lacuna coil) and some french touch music like daft punk.
Will scroll throught the messages i saved as you guys gave me some good tips last time but that was more than a year ago i think.
Also since i will go resin, is there ANY way to make the shells reusable?
That would greatly impact my decision on the electronics, if i can remove the drivers afterwards i won't bother and use what i have and call it a day.
The reason is my friend was looking for bluetooth earphones and i bumped into the FOSTER TM2 which comes with mmcx connector.
Triggering my need for a ciem again (yeah i never managed to motivate myself to do the shells...)
So, anyone here tried to go the 3d resin priting road?
I know some people did hollow shells with classic 3d printers.
Basically 3dhub has a category for resin printing :
https://www.3dhubs.com/3d-printing/plastic/resin/
I have to do some research on what is safe for the human hear for i guess at least one of those will do.
Did you guys talk about colors in the thread? I've seen some sick colors on this :
http://www.kumitatelab.com/images/companies/1/KumitateLabDesignBook2017-2018.pdf
I found someone willing to scan the molds i got from the audiologist and make the 3d model for me so that is sweet.
The next part is the electronics, i still have my old parts
knowlers gk-31732-000
knowles bf-1861-000
But if i remember my last conversation in this post those are out of date nowaydays.
Even though i will mostly use those for sports and commutes, considering the price i will pay for the resin 3d printing i might want to go high-end on this.
But i am not sure i will hear the difference due to the bluetooth connection :/
I listen mainly to techno hardcore (angerfirst and the likes), from rock to metal (basically anything from metallica to slipknot including nightwish and lacuna coil) and some french touch music like daft punk.
Will scroll throught the messages i saved as you guys gave me some good tips last time but that was more than a year ago i think.
Also since i will go resin, is there ANY way to make the shells reusable?
That would greatly impact my decision on the electronics, if i can remove the drivers afterwards i won't bother and use what i have and call it a day.
Last edited:
Users who are viewing this thread
