Topic: Fostex T50RP Paradox, LCD-2, LCD-3 Frequency Response (Read 29920 times)

Hands · « **Reply #30 on:** December 10, 2012, 05:20:25 PM »

Quote from: stratocaster on December 10, 2012, 03:05:04 PM

I am sorry, but I have to say that I would prefer measurements. Of the Mad Dogs compared to the Paradox. I have learned to mistrust impressions. Not only because I have found out that every too often I have not been able to share people's impressions once I heard praised headphones myself. Also, because I have learned it it's NOT sensible to trust your impressions of a specific headphone at a specific time in specific situations. If you unconsiously want something to sound great, it will. And only over time you realize that you did not get the right picture.

I am using or have measurements of both from a few different people/setups. Why are you assuming I do not?

I can't give all of the details, unfortunately, and I did have to do a lot of inference across different graphs, but I'm fairly certain they measure and sound much more similarly than not. I did not say they measure or sound identically, and I also did not say one was better than the other. This is, of course, going off the latest "revision" of the MDs. I do, however, think the MDs get an unnecessary level of criticism. Yes, I'm aware of the name and the stickers.

They are horribad, but at least they don't affect the sound!

I want you to understand that I am on the same page as you. I generally don't trust impressions anymore these days. I can promise you that I have tried to back up my claims as comprehensively as possible with data and measurements. I am hoping that purrin can measure the pair of MDs I got (one of the main reasons I purchased them, honestly) and my Paradox so I can verify or discredit my thoughts on the matter.

stratocaster · « **Reply #31 on:** December 10, 2012, 06:17:04 PM »

As I said, I would love to see measurements of both. On the same system. I am not asuming anything, not about the Mad Dogs, since I have not heard them, and I am also not asuming that your impressions could be unreasonable or wrong. Yet again, I would be interested to see how they compare objectively.
Personally, I do not care about whether a set of headphones has ridiculous stickers or not, if they look superb or not. It is the sound (plus comfort maybe) that matters. And, I am a 100% open to good headphones, be they Paradox or Mad Dogs. I would be really happy to see the Mad Dogs measure nicely on the same system on which the Paradox were put to the test. Although I do own and happen to appreciate the Paradox, I am not on a crusade to defend them.

Hands · « **Reply #32 on:** December 10, 2012, 07:12:50 PM »

Quote from: stratocaster on December 10, 2012, 06:17:04 PM

As I said, I would love to see measurements of both. On the same system. I am not asuming anything, not about the Mad Dogs, since I have not heard them, and I am also not asuming that your impressions could be unreasonable or wrong. Yet again, I would be interested to see how they compare objectively.
Personally, I do not care about whether a set of headphones has ridiculous stickers or not, if they look superb or not. It is the sound (plus comfort maybe) that matters. And, I am a 100% open to good headphones, be they Paradox or Mad Dogs. I would be really happy to see the Mad Dogs measure nicely on the same system on which the Paradox were put to the test. Although I do own and happen to appreciate the Paradox, I am not on a crusade to defend them.

Yes, hopefully purrin will be interested in measuring them at some point.

I've noticed that Dan's measurements tend to look similar to Tyll's in many ways. I've been watching the progression of the MDs for a while now, including measurements Dan puts out for them. I think his most recent measurements of the MD look similar to how the Paradox measures on Tyll's setup. Again, I know you can't make direct comparisons like that, but at least a bit of information can be gained. I do need more data to confirm or deny my claims, though!

CCS · « **Reply #33 on:** December 11, 2012, 01:20:31 AM »

Tyll has measured a pair of Paradox as well as (I believe a slightly older revision) MDs. Minus some poor driver matching, the MDs seem to perform quite well, and have a relatively similar frequency response. Bit of a weird rise from 50Hz-100Hz, but everything else looks pretty good. Also pretty poor THD performance at 100 dB, but I almost never listen that loud and its 90 dB distortion looks much better, below 1% throughout and often reaches down to 0.5%. Not too bad, I'd say.

P.S. Not sure which Paradox is the correct one, so I included both the w/ socks and w/o socks models. I would be interested to see the more recent Mad Dog w/ Dog Pads graph to compare. I would like to believe that it performs better than the one presented here, but I couldn't say so with any certainty.

http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/MrSpeakersMadDogA.pdf

http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/FostexT50RPDIYModifiedLFFnosocks.pdf

http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/FostexT50RPDIYModifiedLFFwithsocks.pdf

Edit: As far as I can tell, the only thing that is really detrimental to Mad Dog's performance here is the poor driver matching in the bass, as hans and I have mentioned. The person who runs the service and performs the mods has addressed the issue, and it sounds as if this problem is not something that most users will have to deal with. The Mad Dogs probably do not outperform the Paradox, and may even be slightly inferior, but it does not seem that they are too far behind... It would seem, therefore, that the Mad Dogs are not a bad choice for those whose budget cannot handle the Paradox. Thoughts?

Hands · « **Reply #34 on:** December 11, 2012, 08:04:28 AM »

Yes, that should be an older version with the 840 pads. I also believe Dan said that particular pair had issues in the bass. I should probably dig through the MD thread on HF for old and new measurements Dan put out.

Deep Funk · « **Reply #35 on:** December 11, 2012, 03:53:01 PM »

I give a headphone a try for a day or two, just listening. If you don't like the headphone you'll take it off and ignore its existence.

Of course measurements do add...

Valentin Hogea · « **Reply #36 on:** December 19, 2012, 12:00:35 PM »

Just received my Paradox... Very-very impressed. Impressions after longer listening to follow in 4-5 weeks.

stratocaster · « **Reply #37 on:** December 19, 2012, 06:05:09 PM »

I do like the Paradox. I bought a used pair (#27) and I am quite satisfied with it, as I already pointed out in various threads. this has not changed.

There is just on thing I am wondering about. I recall LFF mentioning that the Paradox are hermetically sealed, this being a prerequisite of perfect performance. But when I blow through the cup vents of my P., I notice that air is entering the cups and exiting through that little hole on top of the cups (the one through which the small cable that connects the cups enters). In addition the baffle bass vent is open. Conclusion: I am wondering why LFF says they are hermetically sealed. At least MY baffle vents are open, the cup vents (must at least partially be) as well.

Maybe LFF can clarify.

Hands · « **Reply #38 on:** December 20, 2012, 02:07:35 AM »

Quote from: stratocaster on December 19, 2012, 06:05:09 PM

I do like the Paradox. I bought a used pair (#27) and I am quite satisfied with it, as I already pointed out in various threads. this has not changed.

There is just on thing I am wondering about. I recall LFF mentioning that the Paradox are hermetically sealed, this being a prerequisite of perfect performance. But when I blow through the cup vents of my P., I notice that air is entering the cups and exiting through that little hole on top of the cups (the one through which the small cable that connects the cups enters). In addition the baffle bass vent is open. Conclusion: I am wondering why LFF says they are hermetically sealed. At least MY baffle vents are open, the cup vents (must at least partially be) as well.

Maybe LFF can clarify.

I can verify that mine are the same way. Pair No. 18. Got them new closer to the beginning of this year. There is also no resistance if you lightly blow through the 3.5mm jack (lips sealed around it). I can't tell if my baffle port is sealed or not. No sealant over it like the screw holes, but I looked in it with a flashlight, and I looked like there might have been something in it. Too hard to tell, didn't mess with it any further than that.

Valentin Hogea · « **Reply #39 on:** December 21, 2012, 08:41:42 AM »

They're not too shabby looking either...

Author Topic: Fostex T50RP Paradox, LCD-2, LCD-3 Frequency Response (Read 29920 times)

Hands

Re: Fostex T50RP Paradox, LCD-2, LCD-3 Frequency Response

stratocaster

Re: Fostex T50RP Paradox, LCD-2, LCD-3 Frequency Response

Hands

Re: Fostex T50RP Paradox, LCD-2, LCD-3 Frequency Response

CCS

Re: Fostex T50RP Paradox, LCD-2, LCD-3 Frequency Response

Hands

Re: Fostex T50RP Paradox, LCD-2, LCD-3 Frequency Response

Deep Funk

Re: Fostex T50RP Paradox, LCD-2, LCD-3 Frequency Response

Valentin Hogea

Re: Fostex T50RP Paradox, LCD-2, LCD-3 Frequency Response

stratocaster

Re: Fostex T50RP Paradox, LCD-2, LCD-3 Frequency Response

Hands

Re: Fostex T50RP Paradox, LCD-2, LCD-3 Frequency Response

Valentin Hogea

Re: Fostex T50RP Paradox, LCD-2, LCD-3 Frequency Response

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Author Topic: Fostex T50RP Paradox, LCD-2, LCD-3 Frequency Response (Read 29920 times)