In some comments by Tyll H (Home Theater Geeks YouTube blog), a big deal was made about the fact that most cans are not damped in a manner similar to loudspeakers.
I don't think the issues is as simple as add some Blu-Tak here, and melamine there (HD800 mod) ... put it on an IEC dummy head ... tweak ... computer simulate ... and bingo ... you've got a WAYYYYYY-improved set of cans.
I've been tempted .... but I've also had man-bite-dog: the damping SUBTRACTED punch and dynamics ... no matter how much smoother they measure.
In the loudspeaker world, you can room-treat 'till the cows come home (to an anechoic barn) ... and they manure all over the place 'cause the acoustics suck!
So the question ... (if as Hertsens and others think this is NOW such a big deal) is simply this:
In the many decades they've been around, why didn't the majors -- Sennheiser, beyer, AKG, A-T, Fostex, etc.-- ALREADY EXPERIMENT WITH DAMPING...AND INCORPORATE IT INTO THEIR MODELS?
Maybe at the short internal dimensions and driver-ear geometry, the reflections (important for loudspeaker-room) are not critical.
Maybe some have, a bit, but with fabrication (chassis) material, as with the case of wooden Grados , etc.
OTOH...
My ES SM3v2 (IEM) have a VERY reverby and "under-damped" cavity (shell). You can hear it twang if you bite hard candy or snap on almonds or even chew gum. I was tempted to open them up and add some BluTak. etc. But I really dig these IEM's snappy/punchy sonics. So I'm gonna keep my moddy paws off them
[I'm sure this topic has been repeatedly & widely discussed among forums and blogs. If you know of any important and topically-related threads/articles, please provide links below]
