Converting David Clark Headsets to Audiophile Earphones?

[Arkay]

Today I was in a local "junk shop" and found a headset (headphones with attached microphone). Normally I ignore those, but these looked extremely well-made. I put them on, and their noise-blocking ability was significant. They were very solidly made, with chromed metal parts, and looked a step (or twelve) above the usual headsets. I decided they were too cool to pass up.

The guy asked $25 for them, but after some haggling I got them for about $15.

Came home and looked them up. They're David Clark headphones, used by airline pilots and the military for years. No wonder they're so solidly built! Despite a design that looks 30+ years old (something I consider a big plus), they are still in production, and sell for $3XX to $8XX , so I think I got a bargain.

While for the most part they'll probably outlast my grandkids, foam and gel parts might not, but every part of them is still available as a new replacement part in any case, so that isn't a concern. (I think I'll replace the gel earpads, just for maximum sonics and hygeine reasons. I'll also have to replace or use an adaptor with the original plugs, as they are different from the usual hi-fi/audiophile types.)

I was thinking about removing the original drivers and replacing them with hi-fi/audiophile guts, perhaps something planar magnetic (the obvious easy choice being Fostex drivers), in an attempt to get superb sound with the durability, appearance and noise-cancellation of the original shells. I love my carefully and painstakingly-modded Fostex T50RPs, but I think these David Clarks might beat them for outside noise cancellation; if I can tweak the shells to work as well as the original Fostex ones sonically, they might even sound better than the modded Fostexes, because of that.

Looked online, and found this site, not using Fostex drivers but thinking along the same lines: http://www.instructables.com/id/Build-the-Best-Sounding-Headsets-that-money-can-bu/?ALLSTEPS

I've found several other pairs of industrial noise-cancelling things and headsets used on ships, etc... over the years and thought about and even experimented a little (crude prototype/proof-of-concept stage stuff), but nothing that looks as good as these. I think with a little work (a vivid metallic paint job, perhaps? Ferrari anthracite? Maybe black leather coverings?) they could look VERY nice, something that can't be said about most such headsets/headphones. Might be worth the work to do them right.

Has anyone here done this? That is, has anyone here converted a pair of these to anything approaching "audiophile" status? If you have, PLEASE share details or provide a link. (I searched AK using "David Clark" and found references to the guy, but not to these headphone projects). Thanks!

 

[capt.chaos]

I have been flying with David Clark headsets for over twenty years. They are top notch. Why not sell them and buy a pair of audiophile headphone? It seems like a shame to destroy a good headset. The time and money it would take to convert them would be better spent on a set of audiophile cans.

 

[Arkay]

They ARE top notch, which is part of their appeal. They are top notch in the quality of materials, and the solid, durable way in which they are put together. They are top notch in their passive sound isolation; they reduce background noise as well as all but the very best earplugs. They look good, too, at least in my opinion.

They are top notch in reproduction of the human voice under noisy conditions, in a way that makes the voice intelligible. They do this with a different kind of driver design, one that electro-mechanically emphasizes the midrange frequencies most critical to understanding the human voice.

For full-range music, however, they, well, SUCK!

There's the rub. In general, I am all for preservation, and hate to see good things ruined by thoughtless re-purposing. I hate to see consoles gutted for their tube amps and discarded, or vintage televisions turned into fishtanks, or vintage speakers painted and glued together into "art"', or anything like that. By nature, I'm more of a preservationist. In that sense, I can understand where you are coming from.

But a couple of thoughts:

1. Changes like (possibly) painting the headphones are purely cosmetic, and don't change anything about its function. Afterwards, they can still be used as aviation headphones, if desired (assuming nothing else is changed). Just classier, personalized aviation headphones. Besides, the previous owner/user had a sticker adhered to the cups with his name on it; peeling it off has revealed that the color of the cups has faded/oxidized a bit, and I'm not sure that I can fully restore that. Painting them would restore a uniform appearance. I might not paint them if I can get them fully restored to the original color, though; I sort of like the original green, too.

2. Most/all of the other changes I have in mind would still be 100% reversible, if desired. An adaptor would be used to mount the new driver. Remove the adaptor, and the original driver could be re-inserted. If you look on eBay, the guy talking about this in the link I gave above is even selling kits for making this conversion. His kits use adaptors and hole plugs that are all completely reversible. In fact, David Clark even sells some audio upgrade drivers, for people using their headphones in other applications, and they'll work with people who want to mod their headphones. I will carefully keep all the original parts, should any future owner wish to reverse the changes I made (I always keep such parts, anyway).

3. The end product would be as good as the original in most respects, and better in some. The value of the headphone is not really reduced; it's enhanced, if anything. I haven't decided whether to remove the headset microphone or not; if I do, it will be kept for later restoration, or perhaps sold to an owner who needs a replacement.

4. While these aren't commonplace among the general population, they've been the standard in aviation for 40 years, and a LOT have been sold. The model I picked up is the most common one of them all, the H10-13.4. Although a military/helicopter version would be better for my purposes, it's still very good, and hardly a rare version. In fact, it's THE most common David Clark headset, as far as I can tell. ALL parts are still available. It's not as if I'm taking something rare, and increasingly so, and destroying it.

5. While I no longer believe that an owner has any right to do whatsoever he/she pleases with any property at all [Did the Taliban really have the right to destroy the millenia-old statues at Bamiyan? Legal technicalities aside, are we not mostly just caretakers? Even legally, do you have the right to burn down your own home?] I do have some right to modify these, since I own them. Is it immoral, particularly when the end product is something that functions in many ways better than the original? This is, at best, a grey area.

6. Your suggestion of selling these and buying audiophile headphones is a good one in theory, but falls a wee bit short on two counts:

(A) the money I could get for these might buy me another pair of Fostex cans to modify, but it wouldn't be enough to buy better audiophile cans than that. Only a tiny handful of cans sound better than those Fostexes after mods, and they are all $1000 or more.

(B) Even those that sound better would not be as durable, and almost certainly not as effective at isolating background noise, as the David Clarks. In effect, I don't think I could buy better headphones than what I'd convert these to, for the money I would get by selling them, and certainly not as silent and durable. The mods I have in mind would produce headphones that would sound amazingly good, AND which should last the rest of my lifetime and beyond, without problems. I like top-notch things, especially when they can be obtained on the cheap. This would definitely score about as high as one could hope for, on both counts.

++++++++++++++

I'm not defending my decision with any degree of obstinacy; I do see where you are coming from, and partly agree with it. However, I do think if I do this in a reversible manner (except possibly for the paint job), it's not an unreasonable step, and the end result would be a thing of real value that I would treasure for a long time, and which would probably be treasured by others in the future. It might even have greater value than just another set of relatively commonplace aviation headphones would.

The only real negatives I could see from this would be if I decided to wear them outside as portable cans, which I might from time to time. That might look a bit silly for one thing, but I don't really mind that; some people might be intrigued and it might even start a few conversations, perhaps help me meet other people interested in headphones. More importantly, though, the degree of sound isolation these achieve could be dangerous. I might not hear the bus that was about to run me over! But with awareness, that's not an issue that would entirely stop me from wearing these at times. Just not when casually crossing a road!


Just my opinion. I'll give a bit more thought to your suggestion, though, before proceeding with any serious modifications.

 

[GP49]

It's funny...most of you are too young to know that David Clark was an audio engineer who originated A/B/X listening comparison testing, and that in the 1970s, Clark made and sold HI-FI headphones. They were contemporary with the Koss Pro-4AA (the FIRST version) and the Sharpe HA-10 models (most of you never heard of those, either).

Both the Clark and Sharpe headphones were totally competitive with the Koss and both were constructed better. The Sharpes had earcups similar to Koss, and similar liquid-filled earpads. The David Clarks had better isolation than Koss and were more comfortable, which one would expect from hi-fi headphones made by the builder of communications phones used in the private propeller aircraft of the day, worn for hours on end.

Koss had a bigger advertising budget so that's all that is remembered now. The next generation of "audiophiles" will probably remember only Beats By Dr. Dre.

 

[RamblinE]

The next generation of "audiophiles" will probably remember only Beats By Dr. Dre.

No. They'll remember the ATH-M50.


Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4

 

[GP49]

No. They'll remember the ATH-M50.

That's how we'd LIKE it to be. But come back in forty years and see! ATH-M50 will be just a string of long-forgotten letters and
numbers. As much as we like to look down upon Beats by Dr. Dre, the brand has character.

Actually ATH-M50 will probably be forgotten much sooner...starting as soon as something better comes along, which is inevitable.

 

[1tumbleweed]

It's funny...most of you are too young to know that David Clark was an audio engineer who originated A/B/X listening comparison testing, and that in the 1970s, Clark made and sold HI-FI headphones. They were contemporary with the Koss Pro-4AA (the FIRST version) and the Sharpe HA-10 models (most of you never heard of those, either).

Both the Clark and Sharpe headphones were totally competitive with the Koss and both were constructed better. The Sharpes had earcups similar to Koss, and similar liquid-filled earpads. The David Clarks had better isolation than Koss and were more comfortable, which one would expect from hi-fi headphones made by the builder of communications phones used in the private propeller aircraft of the day, worn for hours on end.

Koss had a bigger advertising budget so that's all that is remembered now. The next generation of "audiophiles" will probably remember only Beats By Dr. Dre.

When I was in college in the '60s, a dorm-mate had a pair of David Clarks. They were dreadful. I don't think it was Koss' ad budget that did Clark in, it was their sound. Well made, yes, but no way up to the level of a Pro4AA, or the Superex's I had at the time. Plus they were even more oppressive on your ears than the Koss (subjective, I know).

I was the only person I knew that had the Superex...everyone else was pretty much married to Koss - mostly the crappy SP-3.

 

[RamblinE]

I would probably take Beats over most vintage headphones that are out there. There's a few models that seem to stand out and defy their age but I've noticed that most anything with a paper cone driver in it sounds positively horrid.

 

[transmaster]

Instead of spending the money to mod' these aviation headsets why don't you go to e-Bay and purchase the David Clark audio headphones there are several there to be had. You could mod these if you want and you will not have the wiring for the microphone to deal with. Sell your headsets to an aviator or a hamradio operator.

 

[RickB]

why not sell them and buy a pair of audiophile headphone? It seems like a shame to destroy a good headset. The time and money it would take to convert them would be better spent on a set of audiophile cans.

+1 :thmbsp:

.

 

[tjohnusa]

Is that the same guy from "The David Clark Five"?....hehe

 

[GP49]

When I was in college in the '60s, a dorm-mate had a pair of David Clarks. They were dreadful. I don't think it was Koss' ad budget that did Clark in, it was their sound. Well made, yes, but no way up to the level of a Pro4AA, or the Superex's I had at the time. Plus they were even more oppressive on your ears than the Koss (subjective, I know).

I was the only person I knew that had the Superex...everyone else was pretty much married to Koss - mostly the crappy SP-3.

At least you REMEMBER and are aware of the David Clarks. And of the Koss SP-3, which I agree was crappy.

 

[KentTeffeteller]

David Clark headsets were not made for Hi-Fi, they were made for voice communications. You see lots of them used for aircraft radio use, and for other radio communications.

 

[Brian]

Has anyone listened to the 10S/DC, the company's newest stereo listening phone for audio?

No one up here stocks them to listen to. Been told they do not use the same driver with midrange emphasis as the communications version.

I prefer a closed ear headset but looking for something more comfortable than my Koss ESP-9b phones that are less comfortable the the Pro4 series.

 

[68custom]

I have installed a bunch of david/clarks stuff in emergency vehicles, it.s great quality stuff and they really isolate you from outside noise which is very important when you're in a helicopter or next to a fire truck with a big diesel motor and a 1500 gph pump cranking out a lot of noise. hey you got a great deal and I say open em up and see if you can replace the drivers and if so go for it! some only have one speaker these are meant for the driver, not sure when used in the air.

 

[Pilot]

Everyone I knew flew with David Clarks so just to be different I got a Telex headset. Just as good. And when I managed to break the mic boom they sent me a new part for free. Can't beat that kind of service.

 

[wualta]

I missed this thread the first time around, but I'm glad some folks still remember Sharpe headphones and that they were related to the David Clark line. Back in radio when we had to record in the field, I needed near-anechoic isolation from the environment so I could tell what my mics were picking up. My Sharpe looked like a black version of the 660 or Model 9 or Mk II, but I don't remember the specific model number. I learned to have audio fed to them as I was putting them on, because they made the world go away otherwise. And yes, they sounded terrible (no bass or even lower midrange), but they were perfect for the job. I'd call them non-modifiable. Not that I didn't try.
.

 

[bare]

Everyone I knew flew with David Clarks so just to be different I got a Telex headset. Just as good. And when I managed to break the mic boom they sent me a new part for free. Can't beat that kind of service.

TRY! David Clark Service
Friend dropped his 25 yr old set into a frozen lake. Fished them out in the spring. He sent them in for repair evaluation.
David Clark immediately sent him a Free replacement set.
Identical to the ruined set he sent them.
Many similar tales are floating about in crew rooms.
Clarks' 'service' is THE gold standard. There is Reason people love 'em.

 

[podbaydoors]

It's funny...most of you are too young to know that David Clark was an audio engineer who originated A/B/X listening comparison testing, and that in the 1970s, Clark made and sold HI-FI headphones. They were contemporary with the Koss Pro-4AA (the FIRST version) and the Sharpe HA-10 models (most of you never heard of those, either).

Both the Clark and Sharpe headphones were totally competitive with the Koss and both were constructed better. The Sharpes had earcups similar to Koss, and similar liquid-filled earpads. The David Clarks had better isolation than Koss and were more comfortable, which one would expect from hi-fi headphones made by the builder of communications phones used in the private propeller aircraft of the day, worn for hours on end.

Koss had a bigger advertising budget so that's all that is remembered now. The next generation of "audiophiles" will probably remember only Beats By Dr. Dre.

My mom got me a pair of the 1971 models with S&H green stamps!

 

[jdcarlson]

My first headphones were Koss 4s. I do not remember if 4A, 4AA, or 4AAA. But they had extremely good sound.
The closest I ever got to David Clard 'phones was seeing coaches wearing them at the sidelines during TV broadcasts of football games.
But, I could immediately recognize the "shell" of the earcaps.
At the time (60s &70s) the top Koss 'phones were generally highly rated in audio publications.
However, heaphones have improved greatly in the past 60 years.
I agree with the poster who said get modern phones. I have Sennheiser HD600s an HD580s with balanced cables. They are a substantial improvement over the old Koss phones. Currently they are rather inexpensive on internet aution sites.
If you like the pride of ownership of having and older piece of gear that was "the best" in the past (which is one peraonality trait I have) it would seem good to at least contact the David Clark company and inquire about wht pieces you would need to bring them back to their original state - or if the company would re-build them and at what cost.
I did that with KLH Model Nines (40 year old full range electostatics - I had them rebuilt), and the results are fantistic.
Thanks for listening,
Jim