i remember seeing this pair in a post by the creator of the headphones a couple years ago when it was in its very early stages and i commented that the diaphragm choice was possibly a mistake because all planar drivers use a very thin sheet of non-elastic plastic some sort with some metal deposited on the surface acting as an inductor over all resulting in a very light weight and rigid diaphragm. these headphones are the complete opposite the diaphragm is very heavy and elastic which results in huge resonances within the structure leading to the need for EXTREME eq and the dedicated amp. i have no qualms about the design of the rest of the headphone but the design of the diaphragm shows a complete lack of understanding.
I think that at some point during design a decision had to be made regarding the ease of assembly as a DIY project, and the foam + driver flex board is a relatively fool-proof solution that allows some clumsiness during assembly. That said, I do believe there's more left on the table and the design can be improved.
nice video! i agree on some of your sentiments about the sound quality on these. I found the overall spectrum to be lacking and i had weird usb issues with mine. You should check out the Capra Audio stuff next if you want to print more headphones!
Been really curious about these so thanks for the thorough review! DMS's project omega, a 3d printed dynamic driver headphone, is supposed to get open sourced at some point in 2025 as well I believe.
Ouf, peaks that reach 12DB!! One cant eq those out perfectly. I had a bad peak on my 400se too. After a year of eq I gave up and bought the Sennheiser 590s. Those have no sharp peak just a forward sound which can easily be removed by a mild/broad notch filter. EQ works perfectly here. Peaks often indicates an undamped resonnance wich stays in time. EQ doesnt fix those problems perfectly so avoid them if you can when purchasing headphones. 590s headphones might look generic but super light, good sens and precise enough for direction ques in gaming. The biggest drawback is shallow earcups wich might be a dead stop for many.
i remember seeing this pair in a post by the creator of the headphones a couple years ago when it was in its very early stages and i commented that the diaphragm choice was possibly a mistake because all planar drivers use a very thin sheet of non-elastic plastic some sort with some metal deposited on the surface acting as an inductor over all resulting in a very light weight and rigid diaphragm. these headphones are the complete opposite the diaphragm is very heavy and elastic which results in huge resonances within the structure leading to the need for EXTREME eq and the dedicated amp. i have no qualms about the design of the rest of the headphone but the design of the diaphragm shows a complete lack of understanding.
I think that at some point during design a decision had to be made regarding the ease of assembly as a DIY project, and the foam + driver flex board is a relatively fool-proof solution that allows some clumsiness during assembly. That said, I do believe there's more left on the table and the design can be improved.
nice video! i agree on some of your sentiments about the sound quality on these. I found the overall spectrum to be lacking and i had weird usb issues with mine. You should check out the Capra Audio stuff next if you want to print more headphones!
You should try out the Headamame headphones. They’re also 3D printed Headphones but not fully open source like the Ploopy
Interesting, will take a look!
@@EIGAtech Yes please do a video on them!!
Been really curious about these so thanks for the thorough review!
DMS's project omega, a 3d printed dynamic driver headphone, is supposed to get open sourced at some point in 2025 as well I believe.
Thanks for the comment, appreciate it. I didn't know about DMS's project omega, but will look into it for sure.
Ouf, peaks that reach 12DB!! One cant eq those out perfectly. I had a bad peak on my 400se too. After a year of eq I gave up and bought the Sennheiser 590s. Those have no sharp peak just a forward sound which can easily be removed by a mild/broad notch filter. EQ works perfectly here. Peaks often indicates an undamped resonnance wich stays in time. EQ doesnt fix those problems perfectly so avoid them if you can when purchasing headphones. 590s headphones might look generic but super light, good sens and precise enough for direction ques in gaming. The biggest drawback is shallow earcups wich might be a dead stop for many.
Great videooo
9:44 is that a Voron 2.4 or a Trident? Looks pretty cool.
there's a belt in the back corner for the Z-axis which means it's a V2.4, the trident uses rods for the Z-axis