Originally Posted by gnarlsagan
Originally Posted by luisdent
ER4S Green Filter EQ - URF (Uber Reference Flatness) ;-)
Finally put some greens in and tried your eq. Damn. It's like having the body of the reds with the clarity of the greens. Without EQ the mids are just slightly too forward for me, but taking just a dB or so off of 2k makes it perfect. I see exactly what you're doing here. Mids are pulled back slightly, treble is pushed forward a bit, and it shows. It's a subtle difference, but instruments are clearer sounding, and mids aren't masking detail quite as much.
Why did you take 1dB off of 320Hz though? Was it to even out the boost and low q value at 50Hz and 40Hz? Also, why the -1.5dB at 2k instead of closer to 3k? Just curious is all.
Overall I'm really enjoying this setup. It really squeezes out the last bit of quality from these things. I'll have to compare the reds with their simpler eq, but I think they might not sound quite as clear.
I found the red not as smooth and clear overall in some ways. The green have the boosted mid treble area, but they are overall "smoother" in the treble. Without eq what the reds do is lower some key treble ares (in a good way overall), but leaves the upper treble where it is with the greens, which was is pretty flat. This makes it relatively higher in comparison to some of the lowered red treble. In essence it almost makes a higher spike (small, but uneven nonetheless). Believe it or not I cut the 320hz area because I hear the slightest bit of veil their (-1db :-P ). this is probably because of the bass eq points, however, I don't find it absolutely necessary. it's just the result of hours and hours of listening and tweaking. It sounds "just right" like that for me. But if there was one band i had to get rid of it would be that.
As for the 2khz area, when I was originally looking at the different graphs out there to start with to narrow down the areas i would later tweak, I found most graphs show it precisely between 2.2khz and 2.6khz depending on the graph. however, I found there was very very little difference at that level between the settings, but overall to my ears cutting the 2khz area actually sounds a bit more neutral. Cutting the 2.6khz for instance is almost more brightness lost, but the difference is so very slight I would think most people wouldn't readily hear it. Either one you pick i think it would fit the overall eq "profile" the same and have the same general effect. For me I just settled on 2khz.
Again, give it some real time and difference music. I find it is so incredibly satisfying to listen to, that I have had my er4s in my ears more lately than ever. I don't ever want to listen to my mh1 despite the better comfort. And every time I hear the er4s treble I hear the flaws in the mh1 treble more. I still highly praise it for it's value and place it with the best, but the er4s is that much better no question. The depth of the er4s with this eq is so flat that it blows my mind how some songs are just unbelievably spacious, but not thin at all. You can just hear so deep into the atmosphere of the song it's like you get lost in it. To me that REALLY makes me want to listen to music and draws me in. The overall presentation is just so smooth with these dang earphones it's crazy. And the bass adjustment just gives everything the realistic, more studio quality, low foundation for the music to stand on. If etymotic made an er4 earphone with the sound i get with this eq (without using eq) I would pay a TON of money for it. haha :-P
One other note. Apparently the mac has a better eq built-in. I just found it searching through the presets.
MUCH easier to have all the bands in one audio unit. Same exact sound quality and settings, again verified with my ab switch. Loving it!
Edited by luisdent - 1/29/14 at 9:09pm