Also, the older pads have a mesh velour underneath the lip of the ear opening, while the newer pads have perforated pleather on the inside and non-perforated pleather on the underside.
Quote from: TMRaven on July 05, 2014, 04:08:16 AMAlso, the older pads have a mesh velour underneath the lip of the ear opening, while the newer pads have perforated pleather on the inside and non-perforated pleather on the underside.I wonder if perforating the underside would warm them up a bit.
Quote from: ThurstonX on July 05, 2014, 02:12:57 PMQuote from: TMRaven on July 05, 2014, 04:08:16 AMAlso, the older pads have a mesh velour underneath the lip of the ear opening, while the newer pads have perforated pleather on the inside and non-perforated pleather on the underside.I wonder if perforating the underside would warm them up a bit.No doubt it will, AFAIK the only sonic difference between the two pads is the underlining material.
Quote from: jerg on July 05, 2014, 02:37:20 PMQuote from: ThurstonX on July 05, 2014, 02:12:57 PMQuote from: TMRaven on July 05, 2014, 04:08:16 AMAlso, the older pads have a mesh velour underneath the lip of the ear opening, while the newer pads have perforated pleather on the inside and non-perforated pleather on the underside.I wonder if perforating the underside would warm them up a bit.No doubt it will, AFAIK the only sonic difference between the two pads is the underlining material.So the differences in material appear to be the "inner ring" (for want of a better term), which went from the mesh to perforated pleather (a la the PM-1 style), and the "underside" (up against the mounting ring), which was the same mesh(?), but is now un-perforated pleather? I don't recall seeing a pic of the underside. I would guess the "inner ring" material would matter more/have a greater effect on the sound.
No, the older style is a single sheet of mesh fabric, the new one is two rings of pleather.So the cross-section of the older pads is a quarter-circle, and the new one a square.
