I hope everyone is enjoying the FXT100/200/LTD with the front filter removed. I found this idea from Jant71's.
Though I do not recommend everyone who has the FXTs to do this attempt because the removal is irreversible, only those who have been disappointed due to dullness or congestion, or having the FXTs sitting on dust could give this method a try. Do not do it if you are happy the way it is.
Currently I am happy with the FXT100 and FXT200LTD with their front filters off. First noticeable change is it opens up the sound space due to increased clarity in treble section. The filters I removed feel thick and woolly - no wonders they clog the sound path. Furthermore I notice higher imaging and clearer instruments' positioning, like the feel when music walks through your head from left to right. I do not feel them to sound disjointed instead they still remain coherent. The FXZ200 still remains superior to the FXT100/200/LTD in term of soundstage but they lack of power and the "bite" that the FXTs have.
So far I have no complains with the sound but the main gripe I have been facing with the FX100/200LTD is its housing design. Comfort is the first thing I grade while the sound signature is secondary. It is the most important aspect of an earphone as I have small ears. The FXTs appear to be bigger and taller than its predecessor; yet, the nozzle seems longer, allowing deeper insertion. Furthermore they have fin supposedly to increase stability but my ears didn't like that. It makes the FXT100/200LTD harder to insert and more intrusive than it already is unlike the FXT90 which sits shallowly yet smaller in size. I let my coworkers tried both the FXT90 and FXT100/200/LTD and they do agree with my opinion - they even have to hold the latter with their hand because they barely insert while the former "just slips like a glove", one said.
The FXZ200 follows the same FXT90 front-casing and despite its bigger and protruding housing, I have to be honest the FXZ200 is as comfortable as the FXT90.
On top of the design issue, my ear stress is exacerbated by the stiff cable of the FXT200LTD, which is unlike of JVC. I like to have an earphone clipper attached to help stabilize the cable and remove the tugging force down from my ears. The FXT200LTD cable, if attached on the clipper, will form an rotating S-like direction that makes the earphones to coil and not point toward my ears - I have to actively rotate the cable to ensure it rests in my ears. The LTD cable does not drape down like the FXT100 does - let alone be as supple. I should had picked up the FXT200 instead. The word "LTD" or limited seems attracting but unpromising, take a look at Klipsch's S4 reference, its S4 limited version, and look how many rants the customers lashed due to its memory-forming and stiff cable compared to its normal version
Lastly would be there are quality changes with the Spiral dots included with the new FXTs. Back in late 2016 the FXT200 LTD I got was supplied with a soft spiral dots and they were indeed soft - so comfortable yet improves sound quality of most JVCs I have. Afterward I purchased a box of spiral dots overseas and even wrote a review about it. The FXT100, which purchased in the December 2017, was attached with a stiff and somewhat bigger spiral dots than my older one. This new spiral dots, supposedly more durable, is basically unusable - they just feel like putting a fist into my ears. As I have used all the Spiral Dots on my JVCs, I bought another pairs and guess what, they came with the stiff version. I gave them tortures hoping to soften them up through squeezing, put on oil and constantly grinding, even chewing to the point one of them has a slight tear, but they still do not insert. The mouth of the new spiral dots so stiff they do not even conform with my ear canal. So this is the reason why I use Sony Hybrids on the FXT100. Changes the sound somewhat - the bass got more oomph, more so than the FXT200LTD, and the guitar got more bites - similar to the FXT90 grittiness. Excellent for listening slow songs but become strident when listening to busy ones.
In my opinion, so far in term of soundstage: FXZ200 >> FXT200LTD > FXT90 = FXT100
Bass: FXT100 > FXT200LTD > FXZ200 > FXT90
Mid : FXT200LTD > FXT100 > FXZ200 > FXT90
Treble: FXT90 > FXT200LTD > FXT100> FXZ200
Imaging (tough one) : FXT200LTD > FXZ200 > FXT100 = FXT90
The aforementioned comparison is the perceived quantity, not by preference. I cannot judge quality as it is subjective matter. Hope someone can dispute if I am wrong.
That's all and let's hear from anyone! I felt my complain is longer than my praise. This will be one of my topic in my upcoming writing.