[sling5s]

Decided to remove my impressions since I was not one of the signed up reviewers. I did write my impressions on the Grado Fan thread.
 
I do have a question. Are you also considering making a Deluxe version of the L-Cush/Bowl Pads. I feel making it more dense like the Deluxe Flat Pads may also improve the sound. Just wondering. 
 
thanks Todd  

 

[xylin6]

received my package of standard and deluxe flats yesterday evening.
I'll be sharing my impressions later in the week -so far i really love what i am hearing.

 

[KG Jag]

Mine have arrived as well. Unfortunately, I don't until midnight on the 15th/16th.
 
I look forward to starting the listening on the 16th.

 

[ivanrocks321]

Got my review set on Saturday unfortunately it did not make it sooner by a day, I was Hoping I chould bring it to the recent long island meet. I did not get a real chance to try them yet but my first impression is the new deluxe pads are more rigid. I also wonder if the new processing effects the longevity of the pads. Anyway stay tuned and hopefully I will post my review soon.

 

[KG Jag]

First Listen & Initial Impressions
 
I have heard many Grado (and Alessandro) models over the years.  However, in each case it was always with the stock ear pads that came with that particular model.  So this is my first go with alternative ear pads within the greater Grado family.
 
I began with the Grado RS-2i plugged directly into an Onkyo C-S5VL SACD deck.  My test disc for the evening was the recently released Santana III MoFi SACD, played in its entirely with each set of pads.  First up was a run through with the stock pads (SP) to form a base line.
 
Second in line was the Original Flat Pads (OFP).  They provided a very different sound signature from the 2i with SP.  The first thing I noticed was that there was much more volume produced at the same setting on the deck’s headphone section.  Given the shortening of the distance between the business ends of the 2i and my ears when going from the stock pads to flat pads, an increase in volume was not a surprise.  However, the amount of increase was.  Another big difference was the increase in the amount of bass relative to mids and highs.  The bass guitar and lower end of the percussion were clearly more prominent in the overall sound signature.  This increase in bass came with a significant reduction of the sound stage.  The clarity and imaging also suffered, which I suspect is due, at least in part, to the reduction of the sound stage.
 
Third to the plate were the Deluxe Flat Pads (DFP).  The volume was very close to that heard with the OFP—perhaps just a touch less.  The amount of bass was similar as well—again perhaps a touch less.  However, the size of the sound stage was noticeably larger that rendered through the OFP (although smaller than with SP).  The clarity and imaging showed a great leap forward over those heard through the OFP.  The DFP presented the most balanced sound between and among the bass, treble and mids over both the SP and OFP.
 
More to come with different cans and equipment…

 

[KG Jag]

Test #2 was conducted by playing the Rhino HDCD “The Very Best of Grateful Dead” fed into an Alessandro MS-2i by way of an Oppo BDP-83SE and Cavalli Liquid Carbon headphone amp.  Perhaps it is due at least in part to increased experience, but I found it easier to trade out the various pads on the MS-2i than on the RS-2i.
 
Once again I began with the SP.
 
As before, the OFP was second to be tested.  For the most part the results were very similar to those with the RS-2i.  When compared to the SP, the mid bass was much more prominent—in this case beyond warm to near basshead lite territory.  The treble was toned down a bit.  The soundstage was greatly reduced.   The clarity was reduced, but not as much as with the RS-2i.
 
The DFP were tested third and the results also bore a similarity to those of the DFP with the RS-2i.  I heard the sound stage as relatively smaller than that produce with the SP.  It was much closer in size to that produced with the OFP than to that heard with the SP.  With regard to sound stage and presentation, the biggest difference between the OFP and DFP was that the DFP had wider left/right separation than did the OFP.  The bass was well into a warm sound signature, and was less bloated than bass heard with the OFP.  The treble was similar to that of the OFP.

 

[KG Jag]

Preliminary preview of upcoming test: Using same same equipment and disc as used in test #2, but with the SR-125i, the DFP offer the largest (and best) sound stage and best overall sound.  It takes the 125i up significantly from stock--although probably not quite to the level of the a stock SR-225 (at least for most).

 

[xylin6]

as much as I dislike having to say so, I honestly can not distinguish enough (if any) sonic/aural variances between either the original or the deluxe flat pads regardless of what genre of music i happen to be listening to, the source (or which pair of Grado's i have them on) to feel comfortable stating that any small difference i may invariably hear isn't merely a placebo in my mind.also i should note that physically neither pair measured differently in circumference or thickness nor does either pair appear to be denser or more rigid than the other and if not for the small silver marking on the inside of the deluxe flats i would have no way of knowing which was which.
 
YMMV of course and at 49 my hearing is certainly not what it was 25 years ago , though in defense of my ears i am able to hear as low as 23Hz and as high as 14kHz
(not incredible but also far from deaf).
 
that aside I'm completely smitten with the TTVJ flats.in particular when paired with the SR-60i and SR-80i as they offer a richer and more robust listening experience than the L cush bowls in the midrange and bass frequencies also adding more volume without sacrificing much sense of depth or soundstage and still retaining that sparkling Grado treble yet without any of the sibilant qualities the bowls tend to reveal on certain recordings.
 
compared the S cush comfies which  come stock with the SR60i/80i's or  third party Sennheiser hd414 pads which i have two pairs of (one quarter moded one standard) the TTVJ flats provide more focus and definition and made the experience of listening to the SR series so impressive that more than once i found myself thinking they sounded on par with my PS500e, - of course that notion was destroyed the moment i put on my PS500e for comparison, nonetheless I am honestly blown away by what a vast difference the flats make on the SR series and can't imagine ever going back to comfies or bowls now.
 
the experience wasn't as favorable when i tried the flats on my Symphones Magnum V6 mod and on the PS500e as they are both already more dominant in the bass regions than the SR series and the flats tend to over accentuate that (and this coming from a basshead!) whereas the L cush seem to be the ideal pads for those two pair offering more than ample bass impact,soundstage,clarity in midrange and highs.
 
 
I think a lot of variable factors come into play including musical preferences,the synergy between source components and headphones along with the sort of sound signature you are accustomed to and/or prefer (i tend to prefer a warmer sound signature which i believe is why i am such a fan of Sony Walkman DAPs)
as it stands I am spending more time listening to my SR60i and SR80i than I have in years and really immensely enjoying the experience.
 
ftr i used a variety of players including : Sony NW-F887 Walkman / Sony NW-F807 Walkman  /Sony NWZ-A17 Walkman /Sony NWZ-E345 Walkman / Sony Minidisc MZ-NF610 Walkman /Sony D-NE 330 MP3/CD Walkman /Aiwa XP-SP 921 portable CD player.

 

[KG Jag]

Test #3 moved to analog and the SR 325e.  The music source was the MoFi “Legend” album by Poco presented through a Rega RP-3 turntable with the Elys 2 cartridge, Vincent PHO-8 phono pre-amp and Burson HA-160 headphone amp.
 
The same order of testing was used, starting with the SP and ending with the DFP.  Once again the results were similar to the earlier tests.
 
The OFP provided a great deal more bass and reduced the treble.  It also produced a muddy sound on the low end that took away detail.  The sound stage was again noticeably reduced.
 
The DFP is a good match for those seeking a significantly warmer sound signature than the SP presents.  It also reduces the treble. This was particularly noticeable on tracks like "Barbados", which were harsh and even sibilant at times with SP, but noticeably less so with DFP.
 
Even with the treble issue I found the SP to be closer to neutral/balanced; providing the greatest detail retrieval, and producing the largest & best defined sound stage.  They are my pick among the three with the SR 325e.  However, I can certainly understand others preferring the more bass, less treble and somewhat smaller sound stage of the DFP.

 

[dpump]

Comparison of the: Original Flat Pads (OFP), Deluxe Flat Pads (DFP), and stock L-Cush (LC).
 
First, a little history. Please correct me if I'm wrong on any of these details. Most of you probably know that the first series of Grado phones used flat pads on all models and looked just like the OFP that TTVJ sells. The first Grado series had a smaller chamber and I think were all designed by Joe Grado. The i series was the next series and were designed by John Grado with no help from Joe Grado. The i series debuted the larger chamber and replaced the flat pads with the pads that are used now-the LC and the comfies. I believe the G-Cush pads came later. The e series continues to use the same pads as the i series. When Grado came out with the i series they eventually stopped selling the OFP. TTVJ came to the rescue of those needing OFP and had them made and started selling them. As far as I know, if it wasn't for TTVJ, there would be no OFP.
 
Probably it was 2013 when I talked to Joe Grado at a headphone meet. I listened to his HP1 or HP2-don't remember which-and a 225i. Both were using the OFP, which I assume he got from TTVJ. However, Joe wasn't using a stock OFP, he was using pads that he had 'treated' and was selling for something like $100 or more a pair. He said these treated pads sounded much better than the stock pads and would last much longer. He also made the comment that he had advised John Grado against using the LC pads, but that John hadn't listened. The recording Joe was playing was a live recording he made using the microphone arrays he had invented and was selling and it was astounding on both the HP and 225i. Joe also commented that the 225i was all the headphone the average person would ever need. I wonder if the treated DFP that TTVJ is now selling has something to do with the treatment Joe Grado said he was doing? Maybe Todd can answer this question. 
 
Now for my comparison. I used my Grado 225e and GH1, and my Alessandro MS2i, which is the Alessandro version of the Grado 325i. All of these phones use the LC. As was stated above by several users, a couple of things happen when you swap the LC for the OFP or the DFP. First there is an increase in volume with the OFP or DFP since the drivers are now closer to your ears, so you have to try to compensate for this on your amp. The second thing is that the phones have a looser fit since the flat pads aren't as thick as the LC. Makes comparing more difficult.
 
To make it brief, I found that the OFP caused the bass to be elevated over the DFP or the LC. On the GH1, I didn't care for either flat pad as they both had too much bass, even though the DFP had a little less bass than the OFP.. I also didn't care for the OFP on the 225i or the MS2i as it was also too bassy, kind of thumpy, and brighter on the high end. . I thought the DFP had a balanced sound on the 225i and the MS2i and really didn't prefer the LC over the DFP or the DFP over the LC. After trying to adjust the volume levels and then listening, I had a hard time hearing any difference between the DFP and the LC.
 
So, in my opinion, the DFP is a good alternative to the LC. If you find the LC pads to be uncomfortable, and they do hurt my ears after wearing them for a while, the DFP is a good thing. The DFP is more comfortable and, at least to my ears, not a compromise over the LC. I'm leaving the DFP on my MS2i. Thanks Todd at TTVJ for the chance to try these flat pads.

 

[KG Jag]

Test #4 centered around the SR 125i, which is the first can I tested that comes stock with the S Cush pads.  It is also worth noting that the ear pad mounting collar is (understandably) less deep that its upline G cush brethren. The music source was “The Band” Japanese SHM-SACD played on a Marantz SA 8004 SACD deck feeding a Burson Soloist headphone amp.
 
The same order of testing was used, starting with the SP and ending with the DFP.
 
The OFP provided a great deal more bass and reduced the treble.  It also produced a muddy sound on the low end that took away detail.  Significant clarity was lost in comparison with the SP.  The sound stage was again noticeably reduced.
 
The DFP enhanced the bass and reduced the brightness of the headphone.  Its soundstage was smaller than the SP, but produced greater left to right separation.  Some of the detail of the treble and mids was lost.  In net (and in the context of this audio chain) DFP is a good alternate sound signature option from the SP.
 
It is worth mentioning that this test featured arguably the best overall music source and equipment chain that I have thus far used with the 125i.  Using the SP, it was the best overall that I have ever heard from this headphone.  Although a bit bright, the bass--while not prominent in the sound signature--was present and fast.  The sound stage was bigger than heard before.  The clarity and detail hit new highs.  With this equipment and music source, I preferred the SP over the others.  However, someone who finds the 125i to be too bright would probably prefer the DFP.
 
On the other hand when playing the Rhino HDCD “The Very Best of Grateful Dead” into the SR 125i by way of an Oppo BDP-83SE and Cavalli Liquid Carbon headphone amp (nothing shabby in this audio chain), I preferred the DFP over SP—see post #22 above.

 

[KG Jag]

Test #5a brings the SR 225e into the mix.  I also wanted to include a tube headphone amp into the equation.  My only pure tube amp is the Little Dot Mark IV SE, which is fed by the Sony NS999ES disc player.  The music was The Band “Cahoots” Japanese SHM-SACD.  This test provided notably different results than obtained from audio chains using solid state headphone amps.  Although there were differences in sound presented by each of the three sets of pads, the horse race between each of the three contestants was, to my ears, the closest among all the tests.
 
The same order of testing was used, starting with the SP and ending with the DFP.
 
When compared to the SP, the OFP provided more bass and a more unified & natural sound stage. 
 
The DFP had less bass than the OFP, but also noticeably more than SP.  The DFP bass was clearer and faster.  The DFP had more left/right separation than the OFP, along with better clarity and imaging.  However that was in the context of a narrower and less natural sound stage than that presented by the OFP.

 

[KG Jag]

Test #5b brought a return to the solid state Burson Soloist and vinyl, Steve Young’s “Renegade Picker”.  The turntable/cartridge combination used was the Music Hall 5.1 SE and Music Hall (Ortofon made) MM Mojo.  The Parasound Zphono MM/MC Phono Stage (with USB) was used to test the pads on the SR 225e.
 
The same order of testing was used, starting with the SP and ending with the DFP.
 
Listening with the SP reminded me of why many think that this can is the sweet spot in the Grado line—especially for the price.  Nevertheless it was a bit bass lite from a neutral and a balanced sound signature(s).  It provided the best clarity and imaging of the three.  However, that imaging was rendered on a very narrow but also very wide sound stage.  It produced the brightest sound signature.
 
When compared to the SP, the OFP provided significantly more bass and a more unified & natural sound stage.  OFP provided more immediacy and slam.  This came at the cost of a loss of clarity and imaging, when compared to SP.   This far above neutral mid-bass presence was not to my taste.  Between the two I preferred the slightly bass lite sound of the SP.
 
The DFP soundstage was just a bit bigger, a bit more natural and presented just a touch better imaging than that of the OFP.  In most other respects DFP fell somewhere in between the SP and OFP—although generally closer to OFP.  DFP had less bass in its sound signature than did does the OFP, but what was there was faster and less thick.   

 

[KG Jag]

50% of the testers have not yet reported in.  Am waiting for and interested in your commnets/reviews.

 

[Todd]

HI All,
 
I sent 2 FREE sets of Flat pads to 6 people and am looking for you to write your impressions on the differences between them. Please write your reviews and thank you to those who have written what they have heard - or not heard.
 
Todd