[khbaur330162]

Bass is actually intensely dynamic. Too much for my tastes, tbh, these get no head time. Not only did I not lose bass, but it's there in spades. These are my dubstep headphones. Feed Me - Grand Theft Ecstasy, etc.
 
Puncturing the holes did nothing for me. Actually made the treble more harsh. I have it damped with some chamois which is very thick and dense. Resonant aspect? I have the felt over the driver for a reason. >< On certain music it's fine. Very energetic and fun. On others it's sibilant and I have to turn volume down. The sibilance and excess bass may be because of my damping scheme. Sort of biding my time for a transplant. Probably something angled like a CD750, or else.
 
I'll be attempting your mods soon. We'll see how that goes. Would be interesting to hear your thoughts on an opened T50RP. I'm sure yours would be prettier, too!

 

[bluemonkeyflyer]

Quote:

If baffle port is there, no problem then. Though IIRC all closed cans have baffle port in some way - at least in form of leaks, there's no really sealed stock can.
Ear is not sealed, it is connected to pharynx via Eustachian (sp?) tube exactly for pressure equalisation purposes. SCUBA provides air at ambient water pressure, so ear is pressure-equalised. If you dive over 3m without any gear,  pressure gets noticeable and you have to blow the tube by 'pushing' air into them.

 
If you are a scuba diver, or a free diver using a snorkel, you know you must equalize the pressure in your middle ear chambers about every 3 feet or feel pain and eventually rupture your eardrums. "Clearing your ears" involves a valsalva maneuver where you pinch your nostrils closed and force air against your closed nostrils. This forces air from your throat into and through the Eustachian tubes that connect to your middle ears. Air is "pumped" into your middle ears via the Eustachian tubes which equalizes the pressure on both sides of the ear drums.  The opposite occurs when you fly and the pilot begins to pressurize the cabin. You feel the same pressure on your ear drums as when diving, but from the opposite side. So, you must open your mouth wide, close your mouth and repeat until your Eustachian tube opens enough to allow pressurized air inside your middle ears to escape into your throat. Problem solved.
 
I think the Baffle Port serves a similar function of equalizing the pressure inside the headphones.  The driver is sort of analogous to the ear drum and the internal cups analogous to your middle ears. Consequently, there needs to be a way to equalize the internal cup volume with ambient barometric pressure changes and from the movement/pressurization from the driver diaphragm. That's why there is a baffle port. I don't think it's an accident that the baffle port is present and I think its size was calculated by Fostex and determined by the essentially non-existent dampening scheme found inside the stock cups. Another hypothesis: Modifying the dampening scheme likely requires modifying the size of the baffle port. I find that a modified smaller diameter baffle port  increases bass. This can be taken to the extreme by sealing the baffle ports. Completely sealing the baffle ports is similar to what happens when you have a cold and congestion closes the Eustachian tubes preventing pressure equalization.
 
Making a much smaller modified bass port limits the amount of back pressure, created by the movement of the diaphragm, allowed to escape out the back of the cups. The stock black cup vent felt essentially provides a Huge bass port that produces too much bass that's loose and "dirty."  Reducing the size of the bass port to only a few square millimeters tightens the bass so it sounds more controlled with good quantity and good quality, at least with my dampening scheme. 
 
Another hypothesis:  A modified bass port also serves a similar function as the baffle port. Pressure can move both ways, in and out of the cup, through the bass port. If this is true, sealing the baffle port may not be a problem. Thoughts?

 

[leeperry]

I'm surprised nobody tried those yet: http://www.craftparts.com/flower-pots-boxes-small-wooden-boxes-c-204_217.html
 
You could even use the lid as baffle, slap a brand new headband onto them, keep the back open w/ a thin grill and you're in business 

 

[nick n]

Ha! Why not cheap enough. I wonder what happened to Vaughn's pair he made with the angled drivers in the cups made from baking tins, he did a really good job, they looked great, then disappeared.

 

[jbarr1989]

I don't know how I haven't made the $80 plunge for these yet.  Really want to hear a pair!

 

[jjswee]

BMF:  I am getting a message that I reached my daily allotment of 2 PM's a day, even though I sent them yesterday.  I am rethinking the damplifier (dynamat alternative) right now because they want 24.99 for shipping, when the product only costs 8.99 and weighs less than 2lbs.  I will send them an email for options.  

 

[kalbee]

Hm... I'm curious: has anyone tried hockey tape for damping?
I'll play around with it since I have an old old roll. Up till now, on ear-side it seems to lower the output of just about all frequencies quite keeping a bit more bass presence. Bass becomes becomes less tight though... though I'd just throw a common material name to see if any of you can find use for it.

 

[jjswee]

What do you guys use for an amp for the T50RP?
 
I'm looking for the $100-150 price range USB DAC/Amp.  I don't want to bother working with my Audigy 2.    So far my over budget interests are the Yulong U100 ($225) and the Audinist HUD-mx1 ($179).  I was looking on the for sale section here, and I honestly don't have any idea what I'm looking for.  

 

[MattTCG]

A fully modded set of t50's are not easy to drive. I have the Asgard and it does drive it sufficiently. WJE mentioned that he got good results from the LD...I think. He would have to clarify that. Of the two that you mention, I have owned the Yulong and it would drive them fine.
 
gL!!

 

[KneelJung]

Quote:

What do you guys use for an amp for the T50RP?
 
I'm looking for the $100-150 price range USB DAC/Amp.  I don't want to bother working with my Audigy 2.    So far my over budget interests are the Yulong U100 ($225) and the Audinist HUD-mx1 ($179).  I was looking on the for sale section here, and I honestly don't have any idea what I'm looking for.  

 
I've been using an A version of the Audio gd Sparrow. I've had my T50 plugged into that as well as a vintage Harmon Kardon 330b receiver. One of the channels went out on my HK recently, but I prefer the tone and timbre of the Sparrow versus the HK for the T50's. My woodied 225's arent to happy about it though. Anyway I think the way my T50's are configured they really benefit from the neutral sound of the Sparrow. There was just a B version on forums for a $140, not sure if it's still there or not.

 

[wje]

Quote:

A fully modded set of t50's are not easy to drive. I have the Asgard and it does drive it sufficiently. WJE mentioned that he got good results from the LD...I think. He would have to clarify that. Of the two that you mention, I have owned the Yulong and it would drive them fine.
 
gL!!

 
Yes, I've just added a Little Dot I+ to my amping capabilities.  So far, the modified Fostex headphones seem just slightly less efficient than the HifiMAN HE-400s.  I have to bump the volume a few more clicks when using the Fostex 'phones.  I haven't used the Little Dot I+ too extensively yet with the Fostex phones, because I desired a bit more control over the dsp and lower end being sent to the headphones.  The HE-400s seem to do quite well with the default sonic capabilities of the Little Dot I+ and really don't cry for much more bass.  However, I should be getting the HRT Audio Streamer II tomorrow, which I then try with my computer and the Little Dot I+ a bit more extensively to check how the performance is with the Fostex.
 
Also, I owned the HifiMAN EF-2A hybrid tube amp with the built-in DAC.  The DAC isn't the best, but is acceptable.  However, the EF-2A did perform well with my Fostex 'phones.  In fact, I thought it performed better than when I used the HifiMAN HE-400s.  But, the EF-2A is a less powerful amp than the Little Dot I+ -- yet, I never had to use the volume past the 12 o'clock position for adequate volume while listening.

 

[headphonatic]

 
Yes, I've just added a Little Dot I+ to my amping capabilities.  So far, the modified Fostex headphones seem just slightly less efficient than the HifiMAN HE-400s.  I have to bump the volume a few more clicks when using the Fostex 'phones.  I haven't used the Little Dot I+ too extensively yet with the Fostex phones, because I desired a bit more control over the dsp and lower end being sent to the headphones.  The HE-400s seem to do quite well with the default sonic capabilities of the Little Dot I+ and really don't cry for much more bass.  However, I should be getting the HRT Audio Streamer II tomorrow, which I then try with my computer and the Little Dot I+ a bit more extensively to check how the performance is with the Fostex.
 
Also, I owned the HifiMAN EF-2A hybrid tube amp with the built-in DAC.  The DAC isn't the best, but is acceptable.  However, the EF-2A did perform well with my Fostex 'phones.  In fact, I thought it performed better than when I used the HifiMAN HE-400s.  But, the EF-2A is a less powerful amp than the Little Dot I+ -- yet, I never had to use the volume past the 12 o'clock position for adequate volume while listening.

 
I thought the t50rp's preform poorly with a tube.

 

[headphonatic]

 
Yes, I've just added a Little Dot I+ to my amping capabilities.  So far, the modified Fostex headphones seem just slightly less efficient than the HifiMAN HE-400s.  I have to bump the volume a few more clicks when using the Fostex 'phones.  I haven't used the Little Dot I+ too extensively yet with the Fostex phones, because I desired a bit more control over the dsp and lower end being sent to the headphones.  The HE-400s seem to do quite well with the default sonic capabilities of the Little Dot I+ and really don't cry for much more bass.  However, I should be getting the HRT Audio Streamer II tomorrow, which I then try with my computer and the Little Dot I+ a bit more extensively to check how the performance is with the Fostex.
 
Also, I owned the HifiMAN EF-2A hybrid tube amp with the built-in DAC.  The DAC isn't the best, but is acceptable.  However, the EF-2A did perform well with my Fostex 'phones.  In fact, I thought it performed better than when I used the HifiMAN HE-400s.  But, the EF-2A is a less powerful amp than the Little Dot I+ -- yet, I never had to use the volume past the 12 o'clock position for adequate volume while listening.

 
I thought the t50rp's preform poorly with a tube.

 

[Neogeo333]

Me too, so weird right?  My LFF Paradox  sounds better coming out of my Eximus DP-1 than my LD mk6+.  And the MK6 was designed with orthos in mind.  Then again cans like Sony SA5k and the LCD-2.2 sounds better with the MK6.  Go figure.

 

[Llloyd]

Quote:

 
I thought the t50rp's preform poorly with a tube.

 
I don't see how any headphone would perform poorly with every single tube amplifier.  Did you mean they don't do well with a "tubey" sound? The syrupy warm sound that people associate with poorly made or extremely colored tube products?  From my experience little dot amplifiers do not have an overly warm or syrupy sound especially with EF92 tubes.  It's not an analytical or dry sound by anymeans.  I'd use the word natural.  The t50rp sounds good to me from my LD amplifier.