Ether-C Flow Measurements and Impressions

FWIW, there was definitely a clear lower mid dip in the Ether C flow I heard from HKAV back in August, so ultrabike's FR measurements on Page 2 are pretty believable to me.

 

Zach from ZMF has talked about the need for vents to allow for better driver matching on closed designs. I would assume this is the same case here.

 

TBH when he discussed this (with Tyll) he was discussing his new dynamic driver based headphones.. Although he does seem to be talking about all his headphones (dynamic and ortho)



start at about the 3:30 mark

 

I had a look around when I received the headphone and I did not notice the difference as shown here! Interesting how something so "simple" can alter the sound sig and response. Now, this is definitely something that Dan and his team should work on because I for sure did not mess with it which means, it either moved during shipping or it was not properly checked when assembled. I didn't even know they had a screw in there for that! If the purpose is to be fully closed, or mid, or open, etc., then I think they should just glue it in place or else, every one will hear things differently (which is probably what's happening now...)

Thanks ultrabike and marv!

 

I'd think simply a spot of threadlock would do the job on those screws to prevent them from moving in transit.

I was also very surprised at the tuning of the Ether C Flow I tried at a couple of shows & agree that it was lacking in weight, I think mostly due lack of lower mids.

 

Yeah I was at a Chicago meet earlier this year and agree that I really didnt like the Ether C Flow.. Notice this is coming from someone who owned the Ether C and now owns the Ether Flow. (liked the Ether C and love the Ether Flow)

 

I'm curious, does anyone know why the null for the C Flow is so much bigger than it is for the C? Here are Dan's measurements for the C (from Head-Fi, 5 or 6 different measurements were taken):



It does appear a null is still present around 100-110Hz, just not nearly as present as it is for the C Flows. Is that due to the different tuning, or is there another explanation?

 

A friend of mine has the Ether-C which he recently sent in for the flow upgrade. In regular form I just couldn't get into it. Yeah I could recognize that it was reasonably competent for a closed can, but something in it was just... lacking. It should be mentioned that I've never really been a fan of Dan's headphone tunings though, going back to his mad dog days.

Anyhow, so up the flowbee upgraded Ether-C comes in and I give it a listen. I'll admit it's a bit better, seems smoother at least in meet conditions, but... it's still lacking. It's like I can tell it's a closed headphone, but not in the usual way. Most closed cans have this midbass emphasis and often distortion rides along with it. Like a kind of honkiness. The Ether-C-Flow (I'm gonna call it the Fleather-C from now on) feels like it takes the honk and spreads it around, disguising it. It's now more of a wonk than a honk.

Great fit, great isolation, good aesthetic, arguably good sound for a closed can, but that wonk just clouds it for me. I'd still rather take an Oppo PM-3 over the Fleather-C.