Mr. Speakers ETHER Flow Headphone(?) Upgrade(?)

Sorry to take the thread off track but I do think the HD700 is amazing for classical for the price it is. It's cost me 300 in the UK. Owned it twice now.

(I'm saying this because the proms are on BBC)

 

Not sure if anybody else has noticed this, but this is Dan's response to the HF measurements - linked here: http://www.head-fi.org/t/814156/mrs...red-by-electrostatic-headphones#post_12721416

Or quoted below:

 

My question is ... If the HE560/HE-6 is of similar technical capability to the ETHER OGs than what technology, mods, or things can be done to it or the HE6 to get it to the same level as the Flow for even cheaper?

Could it be done?

Wish I had the drive/knowledge to tackle that.

Edit: loving the dislikes. See post below on how I worded this one wrong and didn't think it through.no room for error I see.

Wait its cause Im black lol. Just kidding.

Prob just cause its me.

Much love to all

 

Make it learn engrish

 

I was initially thinking about the he560 being brought up a notch with the same technology.

I like the he6 stock more than the ether.

I didn't word my post right and just threw the 6 in there as an afterthought.



BTW is there a trophy point for having over ten dislikes?

 

Well, he's started...

 

Hindsight is always 20/20?

 

when I look back to why I am hated here, I have no regrets.

Doesnt mean the hate is mutual though.

 

I don't really think you're hated here.

 

There was a visceral reaction to your HE-6 comment by HE-6 lovers. Don't read too much into it. If you check I also liked your post!

 

I actually kind of like @gbeast
We all can say things that sometimes rub people the wrong way. Humans make mistakes. Doesn't mean they should be hated for it. Forgive and forget...
Edit: more useless thoughts~ censoring yourself because of being afraid of how other people might react is something that is supposed to happen only in headfi and stay in headfi. I think superbestaudiofriends/changster actually represents the free speech without fear that is still left in headphonedum. Do not be afraid to speak your mind.

 

In other news, Koth has the SBAF modded HD 650 connected to the ZDS (and to Yggdrasil) and wondering why there is such a storm kicked up over the Ether Flow or a 650 successor!!

 

In case it gets deleted:


Originally Posted by ZGLISZCZ




Images I posted related to inside guide is something like starting point and it actually looked different at the end. You force me to find the post in which I was describing it and I will find it, maybe it was in priv message or different forum but I was describing and discussing that for sure. But for your attitude I think I might just patent my concept of outer-side guides based on separated funnels (yea I still got time for that) and you can be sure you will be the only person on this planet that I will chase for violating it. The second option might be selling rights to Fostex or HIFIMAN as both are using construction that can be improved that way (Audeze has their different approach to that technical issue and different vent structure) Heh I can even patent it, block it and release it for free with a shape that will fit your headphones (to be honest rails with magnets looks like complete ripoff from Fostex design so I guess I can just extend it, remove cuts designed for Fostex frame and thats it, I'll talk more about that later). I wanted to keep it free but now it really makes me angry when I see your attitude and that you still want to do this nonsense with patents. So you decided to charge 300$ more for a piece of plastic? (and what is funny people seems to cant wait for that, guess high price is prove of quality by itself in hi-fi world) And then:





And then you offering me link on your website? and maybe some diploma or glass beads? Sound like great deal, let me just drill my head like in Pi and were setup.



You see Im sure you are copycat and I'll show you something I noticed and mentioned in my previous post ( http://www.head-fi.org/t/814156/mrs...by-electrostatic-headphones/165#post_12723537 )



so lets have look at my baffle prototype with integrated waveguides (or should I call it "Guide Inteligent Maximum Movement Internal Coherent Kinetic™" (abbreviation: G.I.M.M.I.C.K.™). Just to note I did not made them during the night, its part of my headphones prototype pieces 3d printed in Shapeways around beginning of 2015 or bit earlier (and yea I got prove of that and more than 100 people already saw it in full glory)







































The most important pictures are the last 2 where I made also some notes.

That compromise funnel shape. I had my designs done with widening funnels after length of Fostex frame (yellow marks) It was too much hassle to completely remove their frame or remake whole enclosure that hold magnet structure but that was actually the plan and I wonder if I didnt mention that here also (but just in case you will think it will make it different to your design its just the matter of different funnel length and some published design have funnels growing in diameters from the beginning, yes I did lot of variations). I even contacted Fostex long while ago to ask them if they can sell me diaphragms or make custom one for me (or sell me drivers). So at the end I decided to use as much I can from their design. What is funny you have same compromise on internal side because your magnet rails looks exactly like Fostex design. On rear side you didn't had to make cuts for frames because there is no frames in your headphones. But on internal side it even has this funnel shape compromise that mine has to deal. And then if you will look on bottom side of my guide (green) then ta da... does that remind you something?



You see for me my concept was based on with what I needed to work (Fostex already legendary driver), in your case you used that idea because your magnet rails are almost the same... There are only Fostex and HIFIMAN that use this kind of classic-small-holes concept where Hifiman uses something more like bee hexagonal structure that are more vented but still would benefit from this kind of guides (especially some less vented models and I was planning to get one model to make that guide but at end got t50rp mk3) If you wouldn't copycat Fostex concept you wouldn't even think about mine.



Mr Speakers if you think that adding moustache to Mona Lisa is reinventing then whatever... Im sure it makes life full of surprises but you see, principles of physics are not selective, they are universal, sometimes you can just use intuition (beside science there is also alchemy in good sound, every DIYer knows that he he). Ways of fighting with things like diffraction are well known for ages, look at this photo and tell me what you see: http://travellingmoods.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/tower-bridge.jpg and this whole writing about "your" invention sound like you discovered gravity. Maybe I have issue with distinguish innovative ideas between obvious one or maybe Im to smart to not see things as sort of obvious but man there are so many analogies around us to try on different occasion. And do we need to patent each case?





Remember that what you are trying to do is complete lack of respect to sharing idea concept in diy community, especially in diy community surrounded around Fostex planar headphones. And that community raised you.

 

Completely off topic, but of equal importance (ok, maybe not), but why in God's name does he do that?? I was just reading on head-fi, of course he responded to one of my posts, with that "mmmm" nonsense, again. Why? Why? Why? Apparently, he is renting space in both of our brains.

@Hands I believe they are removing one patent, and further investigating to see if they used his other ideas.

 

What's the context here? Did Dan rip off the same design from a T50rp modder?

 

Anyone can file a patent app. The key thing most people don't realize about patents is that they don't have to be revolutionary. The use of a prior art in a new and unique way can often pass muster. Prior arts are referenced in the new patent. Now, if two theoretically identical patents are filed and would otherwise be granted a US Patent No, then deference is given to the earliest filed application. I'm not sure if the prior art search can access pending applications, but the USPTO seems able to sort it out.