Azathoth
Active Member
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2020
- Messages
- 121
- Likes
- 274
It's light and stiff.Can anyone remind me what are the benefits of using beryllium both as the material for diaphragm/driver and as a coater?
From Wikipedia:
The modulus of elasticity of beryllium is approximately 50% greater than that of steel. The combination of this modulus and a relatively low density results in an unusually fast sound conduction speed in beryllium – about 12.9 km/s at ambient conditions.
To stiff it up, they even showed animation of it in promo material and already posted hire. Of course except obvious positive side's (more control - less distortion...) there are and some down sides as time domain (so you bias between how stiff cone should be and how long response it would have in lows [that's why coted only in this case]).Can anyone remind me what are the benefits of using beryllium both as the material for diaphragm/driver and as a coater?
The FD5 is the closest to the Harman curve based on Crinacle's measurements. But unsure about other aspects of it.The FD7 is more expensive and has 100% beryllium diaphragm, but they don't provide the FR of this model, perhaps it performs worse than the FD5.
Please don't 'Goodbye' me yet. We are not finished yet.@Earfonia that's just it you really don't understand. You can not influence how loud (some mid point progeme loudness of let's say 85~86 dB [from where slope of ±12 dB will stay in ±3 dB difrence range for most listening devices, did mixing - tone mastering when I whose younger] is recommended for mixing and as you can influence that well that's the target when mixing down) or with what (bad equipment/deficit space in over 90% cases) someone will really listen to your mix but you need it to translate good to anything and anyone, won't tell you how to get there either. Frequency response in lows will change with different loudness level's (equal loudness normalization in ISO 226 [last revision preferably]).
Please do this part (equal loudness normalization) thoroughly (regarding both learning about it and implementing it at both ends separately [RBA 128 on pre baked material and ISO 226 regarding actual analog listening device you use]).
I didn't call you anything, every uncomplete - lacking measurements are delusional.
I have three pairs of Aurvana Air (old one that died, pair I use last two years so far and spare new ones), which are far better made (craftsmanship/material's and cable). They are my favorite on the go (when I really don't need good sound isolation) but of course I won't use them for mixing (it's possible when you really know them and there for what you are doing and as speakers instead of hedaphones replacement but they are very fit - placement dependant) and goodbye.
The cable is replaceable, it uses MMCX connections to the earphones, so you can use whatever cable you want, terminated however you want. Not uncommon for higher-end earphones to come with cable terminators that are a bit fancier/bulkier though.Rather beefy jack connector. I saw the same for the 64 Audio earlier. Is that usual for IEMs? I always assumed that IEMs are designated more for mobile applications, where, I thought, smaller connector would be more convenient.
Now we want to know how close the FD3 is for 1/2 the price.![]()
It could be great if Amir reviews the Shure KSE1200 someday.