Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Computer Audio › Foobar2000 Dolby Headphone config - Comment & discuss!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Foobar2000 Dolby Headphone config - Comment & discuss! - Page 30

post #436 of 733
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tilpo View Post


Sure. But that's not really the case here, so a graphic equalizer good enough.
In case you do have something with narrow peaks/dips you can also just increase the number of bands.

 

It's not just about amount bands or how configurable it is, it's equally much about how well it boosts/cuts frequencies. Some graphic equalizers can do it better than parametric or vice versa, it doesn't really depend on the type there, it's more about how it's coded. So far I thought Electri-Q did this the best of all the freeware EQs I've tested. I'm used to critical listening on a daily basis for over several years almost so my ears is used to auditioning small differences in sound. :P I used to use graphic equalizer but then I switched to Electri-Q on the basis it produced a more natural sound when both EQs were using similar settings. Even Electri-Q doesn't compare to the 10-band EQ in he kX Audio drivers for Audigy cards though that I used before.

 

But yea just use whatever works best for you, if you like graphic equalizer then use it! I'd recommend to use my config as a starter tho to where it just restores balance from the Dolby Headphone plugin and then start EQing from there if you need to EQ your headphone with for example graphic equalizer or whatever.


Edited by RPGWiZaRD - 6/27/12 at 10:42am
post #437 of 733
Quote:
Originally Posted by RPGWiZaRD View Post

It's not just about amount bands or how configurable it is, it's equally much about how well it boosts/cuts frequencies. Some graphic equalizers can do it better than parametric or vice versa, it doesn't really depend on the type there, it's more about how it's coded. So far I thought Electri-Q did this the best of all the freeware EQs I've tested. I'm used to critical listening on a daily basis for over several years almost so my ears is used to auditioning small differences in sound. :P I used to use graphic equalizer but then I switched to Electri-Q on the basis it produced a more natural sound when both EQs were using similar settings. Even Electri-Q doesn't compare to the 10-band EQ in he kX Audio drivers for Audigy cards though that I used before.

But yea just use whatever works best for you, if you like graphic equalizer then use it! I'd recommend to use my config as a starter tho to where it just restores balance from the Dolby Headphone plugin and then start EQing from there if you need to EQ your headphone with for example graphic equalizer or whatever.
I'm still skeptical of there being differences, but let's leave it at that.

beerchug.gif
post #438 of 733
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tilpo View Post

Sure. But that's not really the case here, so a graphic equalizer good enough.

 

Yep that's true.  I just wanted to clarify about the situational dependency though.  Saying all you need is the same resolution as your ear's ERBs makes a lot of assumptions about not just your goals but also the frequency response of the system and the spectral content of the listening material.  For the most part it will really only hold true with pretty smooth frequency responses that don't have much in the way of discontinuity and listening material with a very even spectral distribution.  Even then a GEQ will work just fine in this application but there are other good reasons to use a PEQ or a paragraphic.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tilpo View Post

In case you do have something with narrow peaks/dips you can also just increase the number of bands.

 

You could in theory, but in practice I find it's way easier just to to sweep a peak or dip through a range of frequencies and then play with the bandwidth/Q on a PEQ rather than end up with some 256 band monstrosity or something.  PEQs take some time to get the hang of but after you do I find they're easier to use.

 

I've been using Voxengo GlissEQ recently.  It's got a lot of extra features that I don't really need or use but it's a well integrated package with a great and easy to use UI with is where most VSTs fail quite hard.

post #439 of 733

I've been comparing the new forward config with less reverb and I think I like it more. The reverb is less, but the soundstage doesn't suffer much at all, which is of course a good thing. I'm sticking with this one! L3000.gif

post #440 of 733
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackeShan View Post

I've been comparing the new forward config with less reverb and I think I like it more. The reverb is less, but the soundstage doesn't suffer much at all, which is of course a good thing. I'm sticking with this one! L3000.gif

 

Thanks for feedback! :P I will bring a slight update to it shortly where I EQ'd it slightly better. I'm not sure whether or not to make this the default "forward" config but I'd think it might be better as a default setting.


Edited by RPGWiZaRD - 6/30/12 at 8:19am
post #441 of 733
Interestingly I find this config also makes my nearfields sound significantly better in some regards.
It widens up the soundstage, though it does make it sound a bit blurry. I don't know which I prefer.
post #442 of 733
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tilpo View Post

Interestingly I find this config also makes my nearfields sound significantly better in some regards.
It widens up the soundstage, though it does make it sound a bit blurry. I don't know which I prefer.

 

Yea the new EQ settings for the "less reverb" forward config which I posted some posts back should be better, I don't know which one you're using but the one in the first post is a bit different to what was posted here recently. The new EQ setting which I haven't yet added here to the experimental less reverby config has a bit better transparency as I noticed one of the bands both in the bass and midrange had a bit too high set bandwidth which lead to more smoothed out sound.

 

Here's a track I uploaded using the very latest config that isn't yet uploaded here:

 

320kbps MP3: http://www16.zippyshare.com/v/86507630/file.html (Note it's a FREE RELEASE so it's ok :P)

 

Here's a link to non-processed version for comparision http://soundcloud.com/djwildstylez/david-guetta-nicky-romero-feat

 

 

EDIT: Another upload that also uses the latest config:

 


Edited by RPGWiZaRD - 6/30/12 at 9:13am
post #443 of 733
Quote:
Originally Posted by RPGWiZaRD View Post

Yea the new EQ settings for the "less reverb" forward config which I posted some posts back should be better, I don't know which one you're using but the one in the first post is a bit different to what was posted here recently. The new EQ setting which I haven't yet added here to the experimental less reverby config has a bit better transparency as I noticed one of the bands both in the bass and midrange had a bit too high set bandwidth which lead to more smoothed out sound.
I modified the config in the OP to better suite my tastes, but I'll check out your newest one in a sec.

I think the main reason it sounds blurred is because the speakers I use are bookshelves from a $400 stereo set, meaning they aren't exactly hi-fi, nor meant for near-field configuration. They still do a pretty good job.
post #444 of 733
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tilpo View Post


I modified the config in the OP to better suite my tastes, but I'll check out your newest one in a sec.
I think the main reason it sounds blurred is because the speakers I use are bookshelves from a $400 stereo set, meaning they aren't exactly hi-fi, nor meant for near-field configuration. They still do a pretty good job.

 

Well this config was meant for headphone use not for speakers, but it's good that it works for speakers a bit too I guess. xD

 

For speakers the reverb was more of an issue with Dolby Headphone amplification set to 105%, the newer config uses 97% and other values slightly tweaked to match the change better. At 105% it definitely sounded too reverby for speaker use to what would be optimal but sounded quite good with headphones, barely any noteworthy added reverb while with 97% it starts working fairly good with speakers too I think so I guess that's one of the reasons I should also start using the 97% DH amplification config as default here.


Edited by RPGWiZaRD - 6/30/12 at 9:02am
post #445 of 733
Quote:
Originally Posted by RPGWiZaRD View Post

Well this config was meant for headphone use not for speakers, but it's good that it works for speakers a bit too I guess. xD

For speakers the reverb was more of an issue with Dolby Headphone amplification set to 105%, the newer config uses 97% and other values slightly tweaked to match the change better. At 105% it definitely sounded too reverby for speaker use but sounded quite good with headphones, barely any noteworthy added reverb while with 97% it starts working fairly good with speakers too I think.
I guess it works because both have minimal spatial cues on their own, since the primary sound is much louder than the reverb. Wouldn't work for speakers in a regular listening setup (more than ~1m separation between listener and speakers).


I reduced the amplification and it did indeed help significantly.

I'm liking what I'm hearing biggrin.gif
Edited by Tilpo - 6/30/12 at 9:04am
post #446 of 733
Thread Starter 

So here's the slightly updated "less reverb" forward config:

 

Pre-configured packagefoobar2000.v1.1.6.Dolby.Headphone.(Forward.Less.Reverb)-RPGWiZaRD

 

Manuall install fbcp filefoobar2000.v1.1.6.Dolby.Headphone.(Forward.Less.Reverb)-RPGWiZaRD.fbcp 

Use DSP chain serialization helper plugin to load the .fbcp file by holding down shift key while clicking the playback dropdown menu -> DSP chain serializer -> load.

 

PS, it's set to "DS: Primary Sound Driver" output device for compatibility reasons like usual, I usually use WASAPI myself.

 

Tell me what you think. :) I also tested it with the only speakers I have, crappy Logitech X-530 set hehe but at least on those speakers it worked very well too. :P But yea this config has mostly just been configured with my headphones, I've just out of curiosity tested it with the speakers every now and then but amplification 97% works very well for the speakers too while the old setting 105% sounded a bit odd with these speakers. This should have pretty good transparency and midrange clarity, more closer to stock foobar2000, there was almost no audible difference in terms of frequency response balance, only midrange sticks out ever so tiny bit more which is done on purpose for the "forward" config.


Edited by RPGWiZaRD - 6/30/12 at 10:01am
post #447 of 733
Can't really hear the difference with the one in the OP with amplification set to 97% and the one you just uploaded.
Did you do anything other than adjusting that?

Disclaimer: this is with speakers, so subtle differences may be lost due to a lack of fidelity.
post #448 of 733
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tilpo View Post

Can't really hear the difference with the one in the OP with amplification set to 97% and the one you just uploaded.
Did you do anything other than adjusting that?
Disclaimer: this is with speakers, so subtle differences may be lost due to a lack of fidelity.

 

Chances are it's more difficult to hear with speakers or that you're not listening close enough. :P I hear them that been tweaking this config for like over a year and used to "A/B" small differences in the sound. The changes are very minor though but it should have slightly better transparency and better bass definition (better impact/sharper/separated versus just floating softly towards the mids) especially due to reduction in some of the peak filter's bandwidth setting which tends to warmen/smoothen/impact negatively on transparency (especially when going past 1.100).

 

Also with this config if you're not using WASAPI make sure you have windows vol slider at 100% (doesn't matter what it is set to if used WASAPI from my testing, it still won't impact on sound quality) or you'll get some loss in dynamic range, I'd still recommend using WASAPI just in case if you're able to use it. With say 50% windows vol and using DirectSound output it'll lead to a noticably more laid-back treble in complex/busy tracks, you hear a very noticable difference swapping between DS and WASAPI output in foobar2000 while playing some very complex tracks where both bass and mids/highs are being utilized heavily at the same time. Comparing to stock foobar2000, the mids/highs actually get a bit more subdued with DS output under those more complex passages in songs with this config but with WASAPI it gets a little more forward, it's such a big difference. It's been tweaked to sound optimal when using WASAPI. Since I never use 100% windows vol I can't speak for how 100% windows vol + DS output compares to using WASAPI though, if it even at 100% vol leads to more laid-back mids/highs that I haven't compared. Optimal tracks to compare this with is some hardstyle tracks as those are mastered very loudly with very heavy bass + mids used at the same time especially in the climax parts, that's where I'm usually checking that.

 

BUT, to avoid this you can also convert the music files using foobar2000's handy "convert" function when right clicking on tracks in the playlist and go to convert and using the Dolby Headphone config ("Balanced (Less Reverb)" and then you don't have to have the DH config loaded when listening to the songs as it already has it applied on the file itself (will obviously sound weird if you have it on when listening to an already converted file). This way you won't get any slightly more laid-back mids/highs in busy tracks even when using DS (DirectSound) output. This is also a convenient way of being able to listen to "dolby headphone" with any portable device as well. :P


Edited by RPGWiZaRD - 6/30/12 at 11:01am
post #449 of 733
Thread Starter 

OK, did another small update to my new "forward" config, I'm really starting to think this config starts sounding rather perfect now. :) Will have to update the config in the first page at some point.

 

 

Pre-configured packagefoobar2000.v1.1.6.Dolby.Headphone.(Forward.Less.Reverb)-RPGWiZaRD

 

Manuall install fbcp filefoobar2000.v1.1.6.Dolby.Headphone.(Forward.Less.Reverb)-RPGWiZaRD.fbcp 

Use DSP chain serialization helper plugin to load the .fbcp file by holding down shift key while clicking the playback dropdown menu -> DSP chain serializer -> load.

 

PS, it's set to "DS: Primary Sound Driver" output device for compatibility reasons like usual, I usually use WASAPI myself.

 

 

Here's a fresh upload using the latest config \o/


Edited by RPGWiZaRD - 7/2/12 at 3:39pm
post #450 of 733
Thread Starter 

I may start a new youtube channel (maybe something like DolbyHeadphoneUploads) dedicated to Dolby Headphone uploads of various songs from very various genres, could be anything from music like above to latest B.o.B feat Taylor Swift. :P Problem is that I'm involved in too many things atm, I'm a mod tester for a rather big Skyrim mod, I keep a Hardstyle music upload dedicated youtube channel, I'm a bit involved with a DJ friend of mine to give him feedback on his productions as well as mastering his tracks etc. :P Why can't days be 36 hrs? Luckily I got holidays atm, feels like I got enough work at home already. ^^


Edited by RPGWiZaRD - 7/2/12 at 4:00pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Computer Audio
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Computer Audio › Foobar2000 Dolby Headphone config - Comment & discuss!