[slidesear]

I am not looking for those... I am looking for the actual screws inside the ear pad.
Quote:

Yep, these are what you need: http://www.qables.com/shop/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=644&zenid=04e02d2d4f7a4d35a07bdf6f22ecb6f3

 

 

[JesperZ]

Quote:

I'm interested in their response, so keep us posted.

I got very thorough response. Props to digiZoid for that
 
 
Quote:

We are familiar with the X-Fi Crystalizer technology, and in order to explain how SmartVektor (the technology inside ZO) is different, I need to explain briefly how the Crystalizer works (sorry if you already know this, but if not, you can say you learned something new today). =)
It uses something called the missing fundamental theorem. Most, if not all, digital bass enhancement technologies use this approach to "extend" the frequency response range of a speaker on the low and high ends of the spectrum (which is where they are the most inefficient). The premise goes something like this:

1. A speaker can't reproduce low frequencies very efficiently, but can reproduce midrange very well
2. So the algorithm first removes the low frequencies contained within the signal (typically anything below 100Hz)
3. Then, it analyses what has been removed, and adds overtones (i.e., harmonics) of those frequencies into the midrange portion of the spectrum
4. Because the ear perceives these higher tones as being lower than they actually are, it creates the illusion of bass. 
5. This type of processing is evident in the THD plot below. You can clearly see peaks at approx. 200, 300, 400, 550, 650 Hz, which are the added harmonics (the 60Hz is due to the power mains).
6. So basically, the result isn't actually an increase in dynamic range per se, it's really just audio trickery - and at the expense of the midrange (by muddying it up)!

 
Now, I don't want to get in trouble for bashing other company's technologies in any way. Their approach is reasonable, especially since physics up until now has stated that "small speakers can't reproduce big bass". So audio engineers took a different approach to improve low frequency reproduction, and they came up with something that does make the audio preceptively better. However, the overall sound quality diminishes.
 

 
 
So, now on SmartVektor technology (SVT). The key differences between SVT and other technologies are:

1. SVT is not a digital algorithm - the signal conditioning is purely analog (which in of itself is better for maintaining sound quality)! - and also why our simulation is illustrative only
2. SVT is the real deal - i.e., it enhances the low frequencies themselves, and doesn't remove them from the audio signal
3. It does not add any harmonics or overtones (in fact, some of our tests have show that it actually cleans up the THD of a signal)
4. SVT only enhances frequencies contained within the signal (i.e., classical music won't sound boomy, since there is predominately little bass)
5. SVT does in fact improve the dynamic range - but only on the low and high ends of the spectrum (ZO only acts on the low end though), where both the speaker and the ear are most inefficient <-- this approach is exactly the opposite of the current trends in audio technology
6. SVT does a lot more than just improve the dynamic range... it also physically extends a speaker's reproduction capabilities without causing distortion or muddiness (i.e., SVT makes a speaker driver perform better than it could all on it's own), among other things that would take much more time to explain (but the above two things are the biggies).

 
I encourage you to check out our tech page: www.digizoid.com/tech/ if you would like to find out more. I hope I have been able to answer your questions regarding our technology. Please feel free to email me back if you have anything else you would like to ask.

 
I also did put an order last week in order to get it in time for christmas (shipping overseas and handling of import taxes takes a long time). I haven't gotten an e-mail confirmation about the Zo2 being sent though, is that normal? I only got the paypal payment confirmation.

 

[rezel]

That's pretty interesting. They should start licensing the technology out.
 
Glad to hear you've given it a shot. Yeah I think that's normal not to receive a confirmation; I didn't get one. 
Be sure to post your impressions for us: http://www.head-fi.org/forum/newestpost/579013

 

[ZenErik]

I'm going to snag a pair of these very soon. Should hopefully be a nice compliment/contrast to my wonderful Q701s. They're $306.80 on Amazon right now. Is that a good price, or is it likely to drop even further?

 

[SKULL]

That's the lowest price I could see in 3 months. I would say go ahead if you want one.

 

[Sorensiim]

Quote:

I'm going to snag a pair of these very soon. Should hopefully be a nice compliment/contrast to my wonderful Q701s. They're $306.80 on Amazon right now. Is that a good price, or is it likely to drop even further?

Go for it! I haven't heard the Q701 but I know the K701 is the perfect compliment to the Pro900, so you won't regret it!

 

[JesperZ]

Quote:

Go for it! I haven't heard the Q701 but I know the K701 is the perfect compliment to the Pro900, so you won't regret it!

I got both the K701 and the Pro 900 and I must admit the only thing the K701 is better at is classical, jazz, soul and the like. The Pro 900 smashes the K701 to the ground in all other genres along with movies and gaming.

 

[seaskimmer]

I **Think** the Q701 are the K702 are the same? I thought the Quincy Jones line was just green and had a premium to it. Having owned both the K701, K702 and Pro900 at one point in time, I must say I prefer that Pro900 for anything where you want bass impact. The K701/702 has bass, but being open back, the bass is very light and doesn't have impact. It gets all the frequencies imo, but there is little 'punch.' The K701/702 definitely preforms better for jazz or classical due to the open back design which gives a larger soundstage though. I found they are way harder to drive than Pro900 though.

 

[ZenErik]

I'll let you know what I think. I find the Q701s great for all genres. Just hoping the Pro 900s will be more "fun" and give me that bass impact I wouldn't mind having in EDM. I generally prefer the neutral sound of the Q701s, but sometimes I just want to crank up the bass. 

 

[Sorensiim]

I'll let you know what I think. I find the Q701s great for all genres. Just hoping the Pro 900s will be more "fun" and give me that bass impact I wouldn't mind having in EDM. I generally prefer the neutral sound of the Q701s, but sometimes I just want to crank up the bass. 

You're in for quite a treat

 

[ZenErik]

Quote:

You're in for quite a treat

I hope so. Also considering the Beyerdynamic DT990 600ohm. Does anyone have a comparison between the two? Thanks.
 
By the way, how big are the cups? Are they likely going to be big enough to completely go around my ears, like the Q701s? I'm assuming they will be large enough. My HD 428's are a bit smaller and go all the way around.

 

[ineedmorebase]

http://www.head-fi.org/t/585238/poll-best-basshead-cans-200-and-below#post_7968614 PLEASE VOTE!

 

[SkinnyPuppy]

Quote:

http://www.head-fi.org/t/585238/poll-best-basshead-cans-200-and-below#post_7968614 PLEASE VOTE!

Stop posting, spammer.

 

[DannyBai]

Quote:

Stop posting, spammer.

X2

 

[shamrock134]

Glad I'm not the only one irritated by lolineedmorebase