Click to view our Accessibility Statement or contact us with accessibility-related questions
mad_bird
40
Mar 22, 2016
fellow nuts: i own the d2000 and i listen to these black beauties every day through a little audioene d1, they have a billion hours on them and i have replaced the pads with as close to original as possible (and they are very close, if not identical) to my ears they are 100%comfy for long periods and they sound better than my denon d600, d7100, and fostex th600. i have dropped on the th00 and the emu teaks because i am chasing down my old reliable denon ah-d2000. whatever the shape, these are my absolute favs which cost $265 back in the day. it is beyond me why fostex cannot make me a delicious d2000 pie with all the same ingredients. THEY WERE $265 NEW, they have never broken, and they sound the best today-right now. of the th600, th00, and these teaks, someone will leave the fold - but it will never be my d2000
Sagacious
124
Mar 22, 2016
mad_birdmad_bird said: "it is beyond me why fostex cannot make me a delicious d2000 pie with all the same ingredients."
I believe within "Fjrabon" posts in this thread there is an answer... Fostex chose "Creative" over Denon. Denon likely owns the design of the D2000 and the differences seem to be more design(materials , chamber dimensions,pads, coil tuning spec. etc) than the couple of 50mm drivers Fostex makes. It seems Denons new driver maker isn't of the same caliber as the Fostex 50mm driver based on reviews. Spec wise it has slightly different FR and most notably phasing is different. The inherent problem is ALL headphone Frequency Responses are NON linear due to the HRTF compesnation curves designed in. Then factor in Frequency Volume sensitivity and "personal preference" for EQing and actual HEAD/EAR variance then it leads to which Headphone is BEST? That is why there whole sites dedicated to tuning Headphones especially the Fostex 50mm types. That said, after looking at the old AH-D2000 pre 2012 test response it is notably different than the the other 50mm Fostex variants. I would personally try an pre 2012 AH-d2000 if new but I missed that boat. More on subject though, this EMU (creative) has me interested as I personally like the CAL2's(edited: oops meant CAL original) which are loosely based on Denons type. Personally I find the age old "rock" EQ setting(V-shaped) sounds more balanced over an enhanced HRTF (midrange boosted) curve.
Borrego seems inclined this way intuitively to compensate but there isn't an actual Linear "Flat" headphone unlike now with Loudspeakers. On the other hand Hyde makes great points too "In this case you have to take a sacrifice either way but for my taste I end up choosing mid-forward over v-shaped (since I really enjoy the vocals)." This setup allows for "quieter" listening and a focus on the most sensitive part of the hearing frequency spectrum.
Side note: I do have the Hp-9500's and I find them notchy and when you mess with EQ with them they remind me of the analogy of home sub-woofers as being 1 note wonders. Harder to extract what is missing. Philips has used research to "design" a FR that they think "humans" like best. X2's are very popular for this reason. I also have the AKG 7xx and the BD DT-880 600ohms. (smoother detailed above 10k but very bright in the 4k-10k and the very lil bass - mid-bass a No-go for mixing) So far I would only use the AKG 7xx phones for rough mixing and no others. I don't however like their bass 70hz and below(not well defined) and above 10k response, they are missing detail and delicacy there.
It seems Fjrabon has given the best insight (study his words carefully) as to the speculative and subjective sound of the EMU's being slight V over the TH-X00. Factoring my experience with the CAL2's I should have tried the EMU "walnuts" which are likely a tuned wood version but I was asleep at the wheel because I anticipated the AKG 7xx's being better.
Of all the Fostex 50mm variants, this seems possibly the closest to my preference for slight V for strictly listening versus linear. (Not sure if I will encounter a proper Linear headphone enjoyable for listening in my time)
Since nobody has these "Teaks" yet we have to Guinea Pig em. $465 shipped is a Leap of faith. With the success of Fostex 50mm variants and this being the latest new tune.
Tempting very tempting.
fjrabon
456
Mar 23, 2016
SagaciousDenon doesn't own anything about the D2000, other than the D2000 name. Foster made the ***entire*** assembly for Denon back then. Denon just slapped its name on them and did the marketing, selling and distribution, at a substantial markup. If some manufacturer wanted to make a D2000 replicant, all they'd have to do was source the headphone from Foster's OEM catalog. To be honest I'm not sure why nobody is doing that right now, but it's still there, in the OEM catalog, #443742, just with different pads.
mad_bird
40
Mar 23, 2016
fjrabonmake it already. call it d2001
Sagacious
124
Mar 24, 2016
fjrabon(trying to fit 3 replies into one post)
Thank you Fjrabon for your ultra insight, This clears all the fog in regards to the Denons, TH-X00 and Fostex variants. Your perspective to the Foster/Fostex lines is what makes this forum awesome. Much gratitude!
I admit I sometimes get a bit over speculative and did not do enough due diligence this time. The pricing structure makes more sense now. I did discover the difference between the Denons and others is the Denons had microfiber diaphragm vs bio-cellulose. I can not say I have personally heard microfiber before. I have a personal bias for kevlar for mid drivers because they have the light transient ability and rigidity yet have natural damping of cone resonance. So I wonder what the characteristic of microfiber is. Bio-cellulose seems like a hybrid paper and many successful designs have been done with hybrid papers.
I did also find the Fostex 50mm driver design isn't fully sealed but has a hybrid controlled damping design that effectively allows a high degree of tuning with the 50mm driver. This definitely explains why different chamber pieces have variance.
Chan_EMU: Thank you for such a quick response and for the frequency plot of all 3 woods. Is this the raw response or HRTF (head-related transfer function)compensated plot? Is the test plot on a static bench or a Test dummy head?
The offering of detachable cables and separate cups is turning the "Teak" into possibly the most flexible Fostex variant yet. Your openness for ideas so far is already is excellent. I apologize to you if I came off a lil harsh. I sometimes get a bit grumpy when I think I hear colorful sales pitches I have heard over the years. Using words to describe sound can sometimes be helpful but can also be persuading. Technical plots based on interpretation and experience help. One needs both sometimes to extrapolate the sum. A daunting task when not actually "heard".
Another question "Are these the standard Fostex pleather ear pads?" (I and others in the house find the CAL ones to be very comfortable and easy to clean)
Does anybody have any experience with "Angled ear pads" and the Fostex 50mm's? I know some headphone designs benefit from angling the driver. (intuitively seems correct)
fjrabon
456
Mar 24, 2016
SagaciousThe Denon drivers also had bio-cellulose drivers. Bio-cellulose is a type of micro fiber.
Sagacious
124
Mar 24, 2016
fjrabonOk obviously my sources of info maybe were mislead or too speculative "http://www.head-fi.org/t/595683/fostex-th900-impressions-discussion-thread/570" and also Tyll calls it microfiber with the Denon series. This happens on the internet. Got caught up on the term versus the objective material composition. Marketing terms gets the best of us. Microfiber is a vague term but typically synthetically derived versus biologically like bio-cellulose. Very interesting material after further reading as it reminds me of kevlar properties.
More importantly, are the diaphragms exactly the same material/design (not coil spec) in the Denon older series pre 2012 as the latest Fostex X variants including the TH-X00 and "Teak" "bio cellulose?
chan_emu
511
Mar 24, 2016
SagaciousWe are operating within the Singapore time zone (GMT+8), and my engineer is currently not available to clarify the matter.   As such, I will try my best to answer your queries.
1. The plot is a raw response. 2. On static bench with fixtures 3. The test is conducted without the ear pads. 4. The test equipment used is the ETANI S-265
Both the Teak and Walnut headphones use standard Foster ear pads. We find the quality satisfactory and up to our expectations.
fjrabon
456
Mar 24, 2016
Sagaciousyes, they've been using the same kind of bio-cellulose since the very first Denon D series. Sony also used Bio-Cellulose (they called it Bio-Dyna, I think, but it's the same thing) in their legendary R-10 series, which many believe are among the 5 best headphones of all-time, regardless of price.
Sagacious
124
Mar 25, 2016
fjrabonOk thanks for the clarification, of course design implementation makes a difference as well as electrical coil spec. Which leads me to ask, how is the "Teak" all that much different than the TH-X00 mahogany or purple heart or Denons for that matter. Is the coil elec. spec and material build using the same driver? (being a bit lazy not reading the 2000 posts in TH-X00 thread). I fell for the hysteria of the AKG -7xx, not anxious to do it again. Since these can be ordered by catalog design, is there elec. coil spec/material choices for the 50mm driver used? I hesitated on these as I am looking closely at a couple planar designs in same price range. Chan_EMU is getting the specifics of the bench testing for us soon. I just saw Purrin post his test results. I know he is a respected tester in other forums. I believe his tests are on a head fixture.
Thanks for your input so far.
chan_emu
511
Mar 26, 2016
SagaciousHi, can i have your email address ? I believe that you are also a wood lover, and just wanted to share with you my collection.
PRODUCTS YOU MAY LIKE
Trending Posts in Audiophile