[JeremyR]

   
I don't speak for every use case. I'm speaking for a use case that has been ignored. I can't believe you'd release a $600 closed headphone with better imaging and soundstage, in a market that has a severe lack of such headphones, and not realise that perhaps some people may want to use it portably.

 
Well,  You already can use it portably. what you're asking for is a cable that makes it more convenient. If convenience is a top priority, I am not sure why you would use the AD's in the first place. They are not a very convenient option for portable use, even if they had a more convenient cable.
 
However as you can see from Dan's post above, he is all for making the cable, if he feels enough people really would buy it.

 

[TenMoonsNorth]

Perhaps rather than building the whole cable it may be easier to make an SN-8-4(P) to 3.5mm adaptor and then you can just plug in a Y cable like this.
 

 

[JeremyR]

  Perhaps rather than building the whole cable it may be easier to make SN-8-4(P) to 3.5mm adaptor and then you can just plug in a Y cable like this.
 

 
Yea. That was my suggestion 5-6 posts up.
 
However Dan does not have to do it. Some other company could sell them. Anyone out there who has a cable company listening?

 

[kstuart]

   
I don't sit there and listen to the harmonic distortion products of a 1KHz sine wave, but that test, while basic and not music itself, does say a lot about the harmonic distortion that will be reproduced during music.

What you are missing is that is a circular argument.  How do you know that the test says a lot about the harmonic distortion that will be reproduced during music ?  Because you reason that it does.  You are your own validation.   It sounds like science because it has numbers and test devices, but in reality it is not scientific.
 

 My whole point was that the T50RP driver is inexpensive, small, and just has more limitations than more expensive, more technically competent drivers that you're more likely to see in good headphones costing $1K+.

Again more circular arguments.  How do you know that the other drivers are more technically competent and have less limitations ?
 
You ignored what I said about "small", so I will repeat it again. As regarding size, I don't know of any connection between driver size and quality.  Size is generally necessary for volume/efficiency or bass.
 
Your argument seems to be "the T50RP driver is inexpensive and small, so it must be wimpy relative to drivers used in more expensive headphones".
 
The entire reason that there are so many T50RP mods by people like Dan and LFF is that the driver is capable of producing sound quality far beyond its cost. 

 

[pdrm360]

With $600 budget, I couldn't find any better closed headphone than Alpha Dog. 

 

[Clemmaster]

  What you are missing is that is a circular argument.  How do you know that the test says a lot about the harmonic distortion that will be reproduced during music ?  Because you reason that it does.  You are your own validation.   It sounds like science because it has numbers and test devices, but in reality it is not scientific.
 
Again more circular arguments.  How do you know that the other drivers are more technically competent and have less limitations ?
 
You ignored what I said about "small", so I will repeat it again. As regarding size, I don't know of any connection between driver size and quality.  Size is generally necessary for volume/efficiency or bass.
 
Your argument seems to be "the T50RP driver is inexpensive and small, so it must be wimpy relative to drivers used in more expensive headphones".
 
The entire reason that there are so many T50RP mods by people like Dan and LFF is that the driver is capable of producing sound quality far beyond its cost. 

 
Because they sound better?
 
The size of the driver obviously has a consequence on the sound, otherwise why bother to make it big or small and just make it the way it is most affordable to build with no other concerns?.
Yes, some small drivers might give you deep bass extension (in small rooms, though) but look at the other end of the spectrum: are they good at reproducing mid-range in such a configuration? The answer is most likely a big no.
 
Take the Airmotiv 4s, for instance. They have excellent mid-range and the bass feels adequate if you have no comparison and an adequate (read small) room.
But then switch to the 6s. The bass is more extended, has better punch/definition and the mid-range stays pretty much the same. Everything else stays the same.
Which one of the two would you consider the better speaker then? The 4s are very close in most area, except bass. The driver is the same technology, but obviously the bigger one is the better one here.
The bigger driver has an obvious advantage in that it has a bigger range of operation. It is what it is. This is enough to make it the better driver of the two, IMO.
 
What Dan achieved with the T50RP is probably fabulous (and this is my opinion), but I still feel the ADs lacks bass extension and tactility compared to the MDs. Same drivers, different operation. If one cannot have both at the same time, then it is safe to say that the driver's limit was reached.
Things can be pushed more by designed new cabinet (cups here). This is what happened with the ADs. Overall, they are (much) better than the MDs across the board, but out of the 100% change in sound (be it tonality or technicality) is feel """only""" 80% was for the better. Bass belongs to that 20%.
That's still a very good score here and yes, I'll say it again, the Alpha Dogs are clearly the better headphones and retain almost the same (very good) value as the MDs in a pricier segment.

 

[kstuart]

So these must be worse than any other headphones, with worse bass - because they are so small:

 

 

[Clemmaster]

  So these must be worse than any other headphones, with worse bass - because they are so small:

 

 
Take them 1" further back and yes, they are much worse...
 
You're comparing apples to oranges here...

 

[koolas]

If there are improvements in newer Alpha Dog versions I'd have to declare Dan MrSpeakers a magician because I can't imagine him squeezing more performance out of this T50RP driver via cup design.

They indeed are very good especially with binaural recordings (guys, you really need to try that). But I can imagine some improvements. The cups could be made of wood, because they do sound plastic. I wonder if Dan could print wood Maybe resin could be usable with 3D printing technology soon. If that ever happened I wonder what would be the price... Would that be less than 2k But then why to use T50RP driver, maybe better use Audeze one... Yeah, I think there is no point in improving AD and making it cost more than $600, better to go level up from here

 

[kstuart]

 

  So these must be worse than any other headphones, with worse bass - because they are so small:

 
Take them 1" further back and yes, they are much worse...
 
You're comparing apples to oranges here...

No, if you take them further back, then you are changing the design relationship between the ear, driver and enclosure.
 
Alpha Dog takes the T50RP driver and changes the relationship to the ear (Alpha Pads) and to the enclosure (new 3D printed ear cup).
 
So, you are agreeing with me on both points:
 
* Previously you stated that one identified technically superior drivers "Because they sound better".  That was my point arguing against the other poster's comment that the drivers were identified as superior because they were more expensive, bigger and had graphs.
 
* Now you are agreeing with me that the relationship to the ear and to the enclosure is crucial to whether a driver works well or not.
 
We can only evaluate a driver based on its sound quality in use in a headphone.   As people like Dan and LFF make better and better headphones from the T50RP, we find that our estimation of the T50RP driver increases.   So, the original argument "it can't be that good because it uses a T50RP driver" is a circular argument.

 

[Clemmaster]

 
No, if you take them further back, then you are changing the design relationship between the ear, driver and enclosure.
 
Alpha Dog takes the T50RP driver and changes the relationship to the ear (Alpha Pads) and to the enclosure (new 3D printed ear cup).
 
So, you are agreeing with me on both points:
 
* Previously you stated that one identified technically superior drivers "Because they sound better".  That was my point arguing against the other poster's comment that the drivers were identified as superior because they were more expensive, bigger and had graphs.
 
* Now you are agreeing with me that the relationship to the ear and to the enclosure is crucial to whether a driver works well or not.
 
We can only evaluate a driver based on its sound quality in use in a headphone.   As people like Dan and LFF make better and better headphones from the T50RP, we find that our estimation of the T50RP driver increases.   So, the original argument "it can't be that good because it uses a T50RP driver" is a circular argument.

 
Again, your're comparing apples to orange here.
 
The T50RP driver is in the same category of that of the Audeze and Hifimans, that is: full size headphones.
I agree that the relationship to the ear and enclosure is crucial, but it doesn't change the fact than a driver might be better than another one in the same application.
 
How about a driver that you can find in many different designs and application - but still in the same category (e.g. full size headphones) - and compare it to another single headphone that gives you better results than all the others implementations. Wouldn't it be fair to say this last headphone has the best drivers? What if this headphone had bigger drivers and was the only one capable of producing good quality across the full audio range when all the others had pro and cons but never quite did it all? Wouldn't it be fair to to say it is the better driver (in part) because it is bigger?
 
On a side note: I'm pretty sure the T50RP driver in a in-ear monitor would be a pretty painful experience 

 
 
This is the last OT for me 

 

 

[miceblue]

Why is it that kstuart is always in an argument here? I don't even know what the last few pages were about...I just came here and there's an argument again. -_-

 

[kstuart]

  How about a driver that you can find in many different designs and application - but still in the same category (e.g. full size headphones) - and compare it to another single headphone that gives you better results than all the others implementations. Wouldn't it be fair to say this last headphone has the best drivers? What if this headphone had bigger drivers and was the only one capable of producing good quality across the full audio range when all the others had pro and cons but never quite did it all? Wouldn't it be fair to to say it is the better driver (in part) because it is bigger?

If you had 1,000 headphones, and had a panel evaluate them, and rate them on sound quality... and then checked the driver size, and it was a statistical correlation, then yes.   If you had three or four headphones, then no.
 
Again, unless I am missing something in the theory, bigger drivers only give you bass or efficiency, and even that is a tradeoff (worse treble).   $30,000 speakers have tiny tweeters, not big ones.
 
(And it is not OT, because the context is the earlier statement by another poster - paraphrased - " Alpha Dog can only be so good because they use T50RP drivers ".)

 

[C.C.S.]

  If you had 1,000 headphones, and had a panel evaluate them, and rate them on sound quality... and then checked the driver size, and it was a statistical correlation, then yes.   If you had three or four headphones, then no.
 
Again, unless I am missing something in the theory, bigger drivers only give you bass or efficiency, and even that is a tradeoff (worse treble).   $30,000 speakers have tiny tweeters, not big ones.
 
(And it is not OT, because the context is the earlier statement by another poster - paraphrased - " Alpha Dog can only be so good because they use T50RP drivers ".)

Please, just let it go. It gets really tiresome to read you getting into an argument with somebody every other day. Honestly, you've said enough about the issue. I'd like it if people who have something to say about the headphones, in a non-argumentative manner, would have the chance to post without it getting buried under the things you - and whoever you choose to argue with next - say. It's very irritating to try to find information in this thread when this keeps happening.
 
So... How about those Alpha Dogs?

 

[WNBC]

Valid points.  Maybe it has been discussed here and I missed it.  As even a hypothetical exercise, Dan can let us know what is possible with the T50RP driver and cup materials.  Wood, open design, etc.?  Different drivers all together?  Dan, fill us in on your methods to take over the headphone world 

.
 
 
Quote:

They indeed are very good especially with binaural recordings (guys, you really need to try that). But I can imagine some improvements. The cups could be made of wood, because they do sound plastic. I wonder if Dan could print wood

Maybe resin could be usable with 3D printing technology soon. If that ever happened I wonder what would be the price... Would that be less than 2k

But then why to use T50RP driver, maybe better use Audeze one... Yeah, I think there is no point in improving AD and making it cost more than $600, better to go level up from here