Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Sennheiser HD 600 Impressions Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Sennheiser HD 600 Impressions Thread - Page 242

post #3616 of 8487
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lorspeaker View Post

I guess most people are trying to listen to what s in the original music,
Via an instrument which hopefully can reproduce it reasonably faithfully.

EQ is modulating a particular band of frequencies " artificially" ...to one's taste.
nothing wrong, if u can convince yourself it's "better".wink.gif


+1

post #3617 of 8487
Quote:
Originally Posted by vid 
I'm not an instrument tech, but isn't that exactly what the outcome of tuning is - changing the volumes of particular frequencies?
Not at all... Tuning involves the variation of a particular pitch created by the amount of tension on a stringed instrument or the length of a horn. It has nothing at all to do with volume. The timbre may alter with the volume of the playing or setup of an instrument but that is not tuning per se.
post #3618 of 8487

Right, so by tuning you shift the frequency peaks up or down along the frequency range. In simple terms, you change the volumes at particular frequencies, no?

post #3619 of 8487
Drawing a Loooong bow there. You are asserting that every string plays every frequency at different volumes. Wrong. The frequencies are not sounding simultaneously at different volumes. The tone frequency is unique to the specific tension on the string. It is one tone for each variation. Unrelated to volume. Sorry.

Let's move on.
post #3620 of 8487

Not at all. A string will produce sound at certain frequencies. In a silent room, the other frequencies will be silent. Record the sound in your room as you play the string and you'll see peaks in your spectrum. Go back, tune the instrument, pluck it, record the sound, and look at your spectrum. Now the peaks are elsewhere. Hence, as far as the sound in the room goes, volume at x Hz was louder than at y Hz before you tuned.

 

But even that is missing the point of what I said originally. You tune your string so it produces the note you want. You tune your headphones so they produce the desired spectrum. You may misuse EQ and you may tune drunk or at random, both cases probably producing substandard results, but you wouldn't look at the results then and say that tuning and EQ should be avoided.

post #3621 of 8487
If you have a hi-fi system that costs six figures, it probably doesn't need EQ cuz it's about as perfect as it gets lol. You don't use EQ to alter the sound balance of the original recording - you use it to compensate for colourations, lack of extension, and other deviations from neutrality that you get with lesser gear so that you can hear the original recording more accurately. Using an extreme example, you would never need to EQ a Stax 009, but if you have a pair of Beats (God forbid) you would need some serious EQ to hear anything remotely close to the original recording. But I do agree that a lot of equalizers have a negative impact on the sound, especially software-based DSP.
post #3622 of 8487

If you need to eq a system for it to sound good then it is not a good system.

post #3623 of 8487

And then you have a cheap system that sounds good.

post #3624 of 8487
Right. But not everyone can afford a really good system.
post #3625 of 8487
Quote:
Originally Posted by blueangel2323 View Post

If you have a hi-fi system that costs six figures, it probably doesn't need EQ cuz it's about as perfect as it gets lol. You don't use EQ to alter the sound balance of the original recording - you use it to compensate for colourations, lack of extension, and other deviations from neutrality that you get with lesser gear so that you can hear the original recording more accurately. [...]

 

Actually, just about all recordings are being processed in the studio using equalizers, compressors, or whatnot so the result sounds "right" to the person who is doing the mastering (which does not necessarily equate the wish of the artist, if the latter cares about it at all). Because of this there is no "pure", unaltered sound that you could spoil by using an equalizer. In some cases, it is even possible to achieve a more natural sound by using an EQ - for example, if a recording has been mastered with strongly boosted bass, reducing it by EQ can actually improve it.

In the end, if it sounds good to the listener, it is good, with or without equalizer.

 

That being said, I've never felt the need to equalize my HD600, even though I've tried it.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by hentai View Post

If you need to eq a system for it to sound good then it is not a good system.

 

Nonsense (see above).

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by vid View Post
You may misuse EQ and you may tune drunk or at random, both cases probably producing substandard results, but you wouldn't look at the results then and say that tuning and EQ should be avoided.

 

Very true! Equalizing should be done in small measures, too large alterations can quickly spoil the result. If it's done right, there should be no audible degradations in sound.

post #3626 of 8487
+1

Right on Mad Dude.
post #3627 of 8487

I read a mini-review once of some audio equipment, I think it was an amplifier/dac and the reviewer started the review by saying that the track he listened to sounded really good, warm with little to no harshness in the treble, nice midrange. Then he stated that the system was in fact garbage because he was the one who produced that track and he KNEW it wasn't really supposed to sound that way.

 I really liked that review and still remember it to this day for that very reason. We don't really know what any given cd or track is supposed to really sound like. All we know is if WE like it or not. If it is really how it was recorded or not, only the people who engineered it know for sure and they usually aren't around for comment. SO it is all just conjecture after all.

post #3628 of 8487

i am gonna shape my earwax to my sonic preference... beerchug.gif

post #3629 of 8487

HD600 with the Bottlehead Crack has quite a bit of sub bass.  I've never really wanted more bass than the 600 puts out.

post #3630 of 8487
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lorspeaker View Post

i am gonna shape my earwax to my sonic preference... beerchug.gif

 

You joke, but it's a serious issue. Our hearing varies greatly with seemingly minor things like earwax. I had no idea until I had an ear irrigated about 10 years ago so I had no wax whatsoever in that ear. Holy **** I could hear things I never imagined it was possible to hear, especially in the high frequencies. Distant footsteps, distant conversations, every little detail. Of course that went away over time as my ears went back to normal. I'm assuming headphones are tuned assuming a normal amount of earwax :D
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Sennheiser HD 600 Impressions Thread