Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › If you still love Etymotic ER4, this is the thread for you...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

If you still love Etymotic ER4, this is the thread for you... - Page 277

post #4141 of 4678
Quote:
Originally Posted by Francisk View Post
 

 

Everything is well and good above but you have overlooked the most important part. What good is an EQ if it introduce distortion to the music you're listening to (even worse if it's a piece of music you're mixing or mastering on). Instead of boosting, it's a much better practice to cut, unless you really don't have any other choice. That way you can avoid unnecessary distortion eg. If you want to boost 10dB at 20Hz, invert the boost by cutting the other frequency bands by 10dB and retain the 20Hz at 0dB. That way you can be sure that you won't be introducing any distortion to the signal path.

That's what the preamp setting is for.

post #4142 of 4678

Preamps however good they are cannot undistort a signal that have already been distorted by EQ. What we really need is a pre EQ gain stage in order to avoid distortion but unfortunately I haven't come across any iDevice EQ app that does this yet. If someone knows an iDevice EQ app that does this, please point us in the right direction.

 

The only ones that I know of are the EQ plugins for Digital Audio Workstations on OSX and Windows.

post #4143 of 4678
Quote:
Originally Posted by Francisk View Post
 

Preamps however good they are cannot undistort a signal that have already been distorted by EQ. What we really need is a pre EQ gain stage in order to avoid distortion but unfortunately I haven't come across any iDevice EQ app that does this yet. If someone knows an iDevice EQ app that does this, please point us in the right direction.

 

The only ones that I know of are the EQ plugins for Digital Audio Workstations on OSX and Windows.

That's what I meant, I used the wrong term.

 

By the way Equalizer on iOS has this feature. Same with the Golden Ears app.

post #4144 of 4678

Thanks for pointing out higbvuyb, Accudio Pro by Golden Ears does have the pre EQ gain stage.

post #4145 of 4678
with digital eq technology, cutting something 10db and boosting everything else 10db are the SAME exact thing audibly as long as you precut the gain to match a boost. You'll see i mentioned this a bunch of times posting my eq. "Make sure you precut the gain..." There is no more or less distortion either way. Do drivers have limitation? sure. But you obviously have only one goal in mind here. And i don't think you've even tried this eq. I won't be private messaging you, nor will i continue in this sort of discussion. You ignore some things i say and then attack me on others, which would be irrelevant if you had read it all and understood my meaning. This is an er4s thread. Let's talk about the er4s and things related to it. If you don't agree with me that's fine, and i don't mind your opinion, but it would be better if you just stated your opinion and left it at that.
post #4146 of 4678
That's what I meant with pre EQ gain stage and like I said, I've learnt to be realistic and I can now live with the limitations of my ER4PT and I definitely don't want to turn my ER4PT into an Alesis studio monitor. I rest my case. Let's move on.
Edited by Francisk - 3/19/14 at 10:57am
post #4147 of 4678
Last word. wink.gif
post #4148 of 4678

Hey luisdent, what's your reasoning behind boosting at ~7k? It seems to be that most plots show a peak around there (might be a ear canal resonance from what I understand). I'm sure you're familiar with the Linkwitz recommended EQ:

 

http://linkwitzlab.com/reference_earphones.htm

post #4149 of 4678
Quote:
Originally Posted by OJNeg View Post
 

Hey luisdent, what's your reasoning behind boosting at ~7k? It seems to be that most plots show a peak around there (might be a ear canal resonance from what I understand). I'm sure you're familiar with the Linkwitz recommended EQ:

 

http://linkwitzlab.com/reference_earphones.htm


I've seen that page before (wanted to make a physical filter like he did), but I really don't know why his peaks are so large.  The most common reason for peaks that large is improper insertion depth.  You can see here from rin's post that the treble past 4khz starts to peak greatly with shallow depth and the er4s:  http://rinchoi.blogspot.com/2010/05/how-deep-do-you-insert-you-er4.html (all er4 share a similar peak with depth issue)

 

Perhaps he has a shallower fit than some?  Perhaps he is more sensitive to that region to begin with?  I'm not sure. And most users will corroborate that the peaks usually go away with depth.  This is why custom sleeves for the er4s so often don't sound as good.  He also used a lot of his own reference material as a basis for his eq.  He might prefer those areas cut more for other reasons...

 

With a deep fit giving you the best response, most graphing systems show there is a slight dip at the 5-8khz region.

 

In the headroom graph for the dip is closer to 5.5 khz

 

 

Rin's is closer to 8khz (grey line)

 

 

In the goldenears graph, the dip is closer to 7khz

 

 

My listening tests fit more closely to the goldenears graph.  They also use the +6db bass rule, which is why they show a larger drop in the bass.

 

Anyhow, the 7khz is what sounded more natural.  However, as gnarlsagan found, these points may not match everyone's perception. With the 2khz area for instance, he preferred to move the 2khz area up a bit to 2.4khz.  I've gone back and forth. The curves I chose are a balance between covering the desired frequency range in an averaged way, and not overdoing anything.

 

In that example, there is a peak around 2.4khz indeed, but if you look at the graphs the "main" overall dip starts at 1khz and ends at 3khz.  So, while 2.4khz might be the precise "peak", creating a single eq point based on that point will generate a boost from 1.4khz to 3.4khz for instance if the q width is reasonably accurate.  Therefore, my 2khz peak covers the actual dipped region perfectly, but simply won't have the exact highest peak centered. However, this is where listening came into play.  I found that centering the peak at 2.4khz personally caused to much emphasis with some things.  Instead, using the 2khz overall dip center point provided a very close approximation of the overall problem area.  And by not overdoing the cut, it's like I covered the fix 80% without accounting for the highest peak, which would still be reduced though.  And I'd rather cover 80% without accounting for the small remaining peak than cover the peak, but have areas left unadjusted or adjust areas that shouldn't be adjusted...  You could be more accurate and use multiple points to cover each part individually, but I chose to try and balance accuracy and simplicity.  5 to 6 eq points is reasonable.  I originally started with 8 myself.  I could probably easily make a more accurate eq with 12 or more.  Or better yet, using an eq plugin in logic that lets you actually shape the eq better.

 

But my goal was to create an eq that anyone could use.  This is a simple parametric eq.  No shelving, no special filter shapes, just q and bandwidth values that nearly anyone could find an app to use with.  Regarding precut, boosting and cutting don't make a difference, as we mentioned, as long as you match the precut to your greatest boost amount.  Generating an eq of only cuts would require a lot more points and a lot more work and wouldn't make sense in this application, since there's no quality difference.  And not every eq app is created equally.  This is designed for apps that allow precise value input.  For instance the denon app doesn't work well (although you can make a comparable eq with different values), whereas the accudio eq app's custom eq is excellent, allowing exact bandwidth and frequency values.  There are mac audio units that are free and precise quality and windows apps that are free and precise as well.

 

So, back to the 7khz, feel free to move it around and see if any change works better for you.  My choice was one of balance and "averaging" with a lean towards the ge and rin graphs.  It's no secret around here that I like ge graphs. :-P  But as you can see, with the bass rule taken into account, the ge and headroom and rin's graphs are actually all very similar.

 

So, while these peaks/dips might vary slightly depending how you want to account for them with a simple eq point, they are all subtle changes and designed to nudge the sound in the right direction.  Hence the very small values.  And an easy way to find which point you prefer is to try them for a bit with material you a familiar with.  Shift the eq point up or down a bit and relisten for a while.  When treble is more "flat" you should hear more naturalness and details should be easy to resolve as there is less masking.  I find masking is the easier way to determine if something is relatively flat.  Brightness can give the illusion of detail, but when you become familiar with how details relate to frequency response you can more easily identify when details are "actually" more resolvable.  You can try tone testing, but that gets even more complicated, as you need to take into account target curves and have an easy to use tone system that not everyone has access to.

 

Anyhow, let me know if that didn't answer your question. :-)


Edited by luisdent - 3/19/14 at 12:22pm
post #4150 of 4678

luisdent - i am using the red filters... do you mind offering a comparable set of eq settings assuming the red filters. thanks

post #4151 of 4678
Quote:
Originally Posted by groovyd View Post
 

luisdent - i am using the red filters... do you mind offering a comparable set of eq settings assuming the red filters. thanks

 

I'd have to see if I have any red filters left.  Luckily the red filters do some of the work already:  http://rinchoi.blogspot.com/2012/08/the-effect-of-acoustic-dampers-on-iems.html  You can see by the graphs that the red take down the 2-3khz a bit.  Without hearing them right now and just using these graphs as reference, it looks like the 7-8khz or so is unaffected, so you could use the following points:

 

ER4S (Red filters theoretical)

Hz

20

350

x

7200

13000

dB

10

-1

x

2

-1

BW

3

1.9

x

.4

.89

Q

.4

.7

x

3.6

1.6

 

Keep in mind, this is based off of a very very quick glance at the filter graph.  If I have red filters I'll try to see how they sound and tweak this further.  I think I might be out though.  I went through my filters like a bandit. haha :-P

post #4152 of 4678

Having enjoyed the brilliant ER4P/S for many years , unfortunately the cable has thrown in the towel , most likely near the y splitter (Yes i have replaced the filters) which means i have only the faintest sound coming thru

 

So i assume i need a new cable , can anyone offer a suggestion on the options available ?

 

Very interested in others experience as i am sure i'm not the first er4p/s with this Cable problem

 

Thanks for any input )

post #4153 of 4678
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2jono View Post
 

Having enjoyed the brilliant ER4P/S for many years , unfortunately the cable has thrown in the towel , most likely near the y splitter (Yes i have replaced the filters) which means i have only the faintest sound coming thru

 

So i assume i need a new cable , can anyone offer a suggestion on the options available ?

 

Very interested in others experience as i am sure i'm not the first er4p/s with this Cable problem

 

Thanks for any input )

Westone + ebay adapters is an excellent upgrade.

post #4154 of 4678
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2jono View Post

Having enjoyed the brilliant ER4P/S for many years , unfortunately the cable has thrown in the towel , most likely near the y splitter (Yes i have replaced the filters) which means i have only the faintest sound coming thru

So i assume i need a new cable , can anyone offer a suggestion on the options available ?

Very interested in others experience as i am sure i'm not the first er4p/s with this Cable problem

Thanks for any input )
Etymotic offers reasonable repairs. If you want a different cable though you should crack open the resistor y-split first, maybe you can repair or replace that section for fun.
post #4155 of 4678

Well, I can't say my experience gels with those plots. To my ears, the ~8k-ish peak is there regardless of insertion depth. The peak above that (10-13k) is most likely a measurement/coupling artifact, because I don't hear it. Or at least not to that degree. I don't hear much "air" or high treble with the ER4S regardless.

 

I hear the ER4S more like the InnerFidelity plots to be honest (similar to the headroom). The 2k bump doesn't bother me so much with the ER4S; guessing it matches well with my HRTF or whatever. 8k peak is there, but the treble is still fairly smooth despite it. Bass deficiency is there, but I feel it manifests itself more as a lack of "punch" rather than an outright lack of volume.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › If you still love Etymotic ER4, this is the thread for you...