2. misc-audio
  3. 150390-100071

Miracles in Audio, by luck, by good choices,by design or by tweaking...

I owned a low cost headphone for many years, the Fostex TH7B, first version( a new one close version exist Fostex TH7BK), semi-open headphone...I was never completely satisfied by any headphones I ever owned: Hifiman 400, Stax basic lamda, Stax 5 gold,Akg 340,Akg 701, beyerdynamic 990, and T150... Because in each of them with all their qualities I never listen to at the same times, a confortable headphone with natural timbre and voicing, with a good imaging and a realistic soundstage(not too close to my ears)...


For the last days I tweaked this Fostex, to damp his internal resonance I used sorbothane, I put some shungite stones at the exterior part of the cups and I use some Herkimer diamond in the interior pads( 3 at 120 degree) … Now this low cost headphones crush all my others if I sum all his qualities... For example his mids and voicing cannot beat the AKG 340 but among all my other headphones it is the best that is near that mids and it is more confortable, and with longer cable than the 340...His imaging is better and more realistic than the 340 etc etc...It is the same if I compare with the others...


His most important qualities is natural timbre and clear imaging,very precise pinned point accuracy and natural, so clear it crush for that ALL the others to dust...In the French audio circle the reviews were more than very positive few years ago...Diapason d’or and choc Classica...I am not the only one impressed buy the ratio quality/price... But remember that thesae reviewers dont tweak their headphone...The difference between before and after the tweaks are staggering...


Yes Miracles happens in Audio: cost is under 100 American dollars... Few years ago they cost me 50 bucks new... I never dreamed that I will go back to headphones...


I will enjoy your miracles stories of any kind ….My best to all...
128x128mahgister
mahgister's avatar
mahgister OP
12,987 posts
 
I think that you are right G.K. but we must begins somewhere and addressing smaller problems than the " all external factors" that’s are at play in sound perception... And beginners like i was not long ago dont know this truth that is self evident for you about room-speakers-ears...And last but not least I can speak only of what I experiment myself to begins with like any beginners...My best to you...
mahgister's avatar
mahgister OP
12,987 posts
 
One remark about my "singing resonators" grid set of ten quincunx or sextile buckets...

My room is relatively small 14 feet by 14 feet and 11 feet high...I think that in a way bigger room my metal buckets resonators would be less efficient to controls the imaging and way less spectacular if working...Then take that into account in the equation...My best to all...
geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
23,365 posts
 

thecarpathian
Geoff, you try the new Emat yet?

>>>>>No.
geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
23,365 posts
 
The trouble with resonators like crystals and tiny little bowls is that you can get lulled into a sense of security. In fact, it’s very easy to damage the sound with incorrect placement of a single resonator, much less a boatload of resonators. That’s why I oft say beer bottles and wine bottles lying around in a room at CES hurt the sound, because they’re not in the right locations. We oft times buy into a concept a little too much before it’s too late. There is probably a psychological term for that but it escapes me right now. Some kind of prophecy. Perhaps expectation bias.

The only real way to find correct locations for resonators is using a test tone and sound pressure meter to determine where the offending pressure peaks in a given room are. This SPL method is accompanied by listening tests as you proceed. Any other method will not produce maximum results because it’s like trying to solve x simultaneous equations in x + n unknowns. Do the math!

Another tip. Don’t bring all the resonators into the room at the same time, even if they’re just sitting on the table. Bring them in one at a time.
mahgister's avatar
mahgister OP
12,987 posts
 
For sure you are right, my methods by ears, one set at times is not optimal without SPL meter...But it is an improvement anyway across the board...

And by the way I have all the rest of my life to play with a SPL meter to optimize these location... It is fun to play whatsoever, with or without SPL meter, and except for the half-deaf it is simple to place them and look for a location where the sound improve anyway...

It is like my design of Helmholtz resonator ,this homemade creation, without calculus ,created only with the help of the ears is not optimal either, but the results I had with only my ears, for designing and calculating the maths relation between aperture, volume, etc, is not optimal at all, but successful, because the improvement is evident for my ears...All are not physicist here or engineer...I want to keep all that simple and fun, and relatively efficient, and it is ok like that; if not, it will be too complicate for all normal people...All we are asking for is simple and fun experiments to improve...Mine are free, easy, fun and gives results...I will certainly use a SPL meter one day to improve my installation by the way... But it was not necessary to have one to begins playing... My best to you and to all...
More to discover