Latest Thread Images

Tascam TH-02 - Headphones waiting to be discovered??? (now Appreciation Thread)
Nov 8, 2013 at 6:04 PM Post #121 of 194
c61746961 said:
BTW: A high Q is actually narrower, in most EQ's a Q of 1.4 corresponds to approximately one octave, so you're cutting 9KHz down to around 3 KHz at the toe, so you may wanna adjust that.
Click to expand...

 
That's what I have been beginning to discover in experimenting between Rockbox's EQ (Q-measured) and Electri-Q (BW-measured).  I will apply your Q recommendation of 1.4 and see how that turns out. Thanks! And for those who aren't aware, this site is useful for on-the-fly Q to BW factor conversions.
 
Nov 8, 2013 at 6:15 PM Post #123 of 194
Thanks for clarifying. That is why things seemed and looked a bit off in Electri-Q after performing the Q to BW conversions. This seems to have fixed things a bit.
 
I have done some more serious, reflective listening to the Tascam TH-02 to avoid any placebo or listening bias. It has become apparent despite my hopes that the Tascam TH-02 has some sort of housing resonance that do not register in Innerfidelity's distortion graphs. This problematic resonance can be remedied with a few household items and a couple inexpensive materials from a local home improvement store. purrin has kindly created graphs of the frequency response and the various orders of harmonic distortion that more accurately follow what I am describing from my listening tests. In addition, purrin also describes a modification which involves applying some Dynamat, stuffing some acoustic fiber and inserting one-ply toilet paper reducing the treble spike and the chamber reverberation. Useful images of some graphs and modifications can be found at the end of this post for those interested. Credit again is given to purrin:
 
 
Original Tascam TH-02:
 
index.php

 
index.php

 
 
Modified Tascam TH-02:
 
index.php

 
index.php

 
 
Tascam TH-02 Modification Images
 
index.php

 
index.php
 
 
Nov 14, 2013 at 12:19 AM Post #124 of 194
So is this the thread for the mx2 as well?

I just got my pair. When I first tried them out there was a weird rattle at a certain frequency. I didn't listen to it for long before I put it through some noise for burn-in. It disappeared and the cans sounded significantly better than before. I always thought burn-in was a placebo.
 
I'm not the sharpest listener so I can't really comment on the sound, and I haven't listened to them that much either.
 
 
They look very much like the sony mdr-v6/7506 & beredynamic dt250, which seem to share a similar frequency response.
Do any of you guys who've listened to both reckon that they've got a similar sound signature?
 

 
Nov 20, 2013 at 9:36 PM Post #130 of 194
Just got these in today. It's been awhile since I had the Monoprice, but my initial impression is I like these better.
 
The pads aren't great. I swapped them for some Shure SRH840 pads I had lying around and it improved the comfort a lot. These are a tad loose... the HM5 pads I have would probably work a little better.
 
They're not going to challenge my $200 headphones, but for $20 these are fantastic!
 
Nov 21, 2013 at 9:07 PM Post #131 of 194
Got the mx2 today. VERY nice sounding so far. They might actually be more balanced than the TH-02, with slightly more bass, and leaning a little warm. No nasty treble peak on this one, and I can't detect any enclosure vibrations despite the bigger bass slam. I'm guessing early on that these could be a low cost alternative Sony MDR-7506. They even look the same. Impressive. At $33.. total steal.
 
Nov 22, 2013 at 8:58 PM Post #132 of 194
Listening to the Monoprice 8323 now.  Still don't quite understand the difference between MEP-839 and MHP-839.  Overall first impression is very good, better than TH-02's first impression.  Thanks again, bhazard.
 
Nov 22, 2013 at 9:03 PM Post #133 of 194
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top