Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Why don't more people use EQ to get the desired sound?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Why don't more people use EQ to get the desired sound? - Page 11

Poll Results: Do you use EQ regularly?

 
  • 34% (81)
    Yes
  • 40% (95)
    No
  • 18% (44)
    Absolutlely not!
  • 5% (13)
    Of coarse!
233 Total Votes  
post #151 of 299
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMRaven View Post

Half-assed excuse to spend more money on an expensive hobby.  ;)


LMAO, you nailed it. xD

 

post #152 of 299

A little EQ can be a good thing.  I think many of the high-end headphones today have a high frequency emphasis which gives them a "detailed" sound. On some 'phones I like to soften the highs just a bit in certain ways.  Some phones I want to reduce the ~10  kHz range a little, on others I want to trim down the 6~7 kHz area a little.  

 

Some phones I want to add a dB or so at the very bottom and maybe 2 dB in the 40~60 Hz regime.  Some headphones I even want a dB or two boost at 125 Hz.

 

It all depends on the music and how it was manipulated in the studio, too. Some stuff is recorded with WAY too much treble. (And I think I know why- I know a well respected recording engineer and mastering dude, and his hearing is pretty bad above about 5 kHz.  Too much time listening to loud live shows and too much time in clubs with 10 kilowatt sound systems.  So ALL his mixes are way bright!  But he's got a Name in the biz and musicians and other music folk hear his work and think, hmmmm, this must be how it's SUPPOSED to sound.... nobody calls him on it. After all, he IS  "The Man," no?  I think a lot of rock/dance/hiphop and even some jazz producers and engineers have high frequency hearing loss from damage sustained at clubs, bars and shows.)

 

The key is A LITTLE boost or cut, when needed. Or, when wanted.

 

I think it's also good to reset the the EQ to "flat" often and evaluate the efficacy of your chosen frequency response adjustments.

 

What I find interesting is that on certain headphones a dB or two boost or cut is REALLY noticeable, and on other headphones it's much harder to hear.

 

Changing the frequency response a little can be useful.  But the quality of sound you hear from your system is about much more than just frequency response.  There's distortion of various kinds, there's noise, their's time-domain performance issues like overshoot, undershoot, ringing, decay, etc etc that you CANNOT fiddle using an EQ.  Good performance in these areas has to be built in to your listening hardware.

post #153 of 299
Quote:
Originally Posted by maverickronin View Post


The point is that you shouldn't wade into these discussions with some pseudo-moralistic argument about "neutrality" or "how the artist meant you to hear it".  That's hard enough with speakers and bringing headphones into the debate opens up a truck full of cans of worms.  Even if we can come to an agreement about what constitutes "neutral" it still doesn't really matter.  This is a forum about enjoying music, not producing it.  Different people have different preferences and you're essentially dumping on people for having a different favorite color than you.


That's very ironic and here's why: from the beginning, and more than once, I have admitted on this thread to often use EQ, and it's not even a very good one (DAP software). I have never said EQ was evil, I never insulted anyone for using or said it wrong to use it. Again, I use it very often. Since you accused me of that, I would really like you to quote the post where I said that, if you wouldn't mind. I really think you have a stereotype of what people who don't EQ all the time are like. I don't care if the artist gets offended that I EQ, I still use it.

 

All I said that got you all boiled up, was that if you have a very neutral headphone, equalizing it will probably get you further away from what your conjecture of what neutral and natural is, and also that, to my interpretation of what natural was (detailed), no EQ can increase that, since the detail is either already present in the recording, or it isn't.

 

It's probably the 3rd time I have to say this, since on the first 2 people have misinterpreted what I said, and I don't expect this time to be very different. I never said I knew what true neutrality is, I know there isn't a completely flat headphone. But if you want to be really Melvin about it, the sound our ears receive from natural sound, like from live music, isn't the same noise produced by the instruments. Wow, that sucks. Yes, there is never a 100% clear sound. So what? I like to believe was my RE-Zeros produce to be very close to reality, and like you said "this is a forum about enjoying music" and I enjoy knowing I'm listening to something close to real as my wallet can afford. On other occasions, I like something much different from reality, since detail on a Pendulum track isn't really enjoyable to me, and I equalize music to make me feel better.

 

Still waiting on that quote of me dumping on people...

post #154 of 299

IF, after reading this thread, you STILL want to play with your DAP's,  iPod's or Desktop's EQ, here is a way to overcome over-driving the EQ input stages and thus the amp's input stages by adjusting the volume level your MP3 or AAC files decompress to. (That's right, not volume leveling at the output amplification stage, but at the decompression stage pre-EQ!)

 

Enter MP3Gain and its sister, AACGain.

 

http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/200539/why-your-awesome-iems-sound-bad-from-your-ipod-and-what-you-can-do-about-it/75#post_2569980

 

Virtually all MP3's have volumes set too high internally that results in clipping after the decompression takes place. This gets rid of it. It also shows which of your files have this clipping problem. Whether you EQ or not, you might want this issue dealt with. Those using lossless files, of course, need not worry as much, though those still could be over-driving the input stages of your EQ (however, this is not the tool for those).

 

Terry


Edited by tbritton - 6/24/11 at 9:24am
post #155 of 299
Quote:
Originally Posted by LizardKing1 View Post

Still waiting on that quote of me dumping on people...


Maybe I'm misunderstanding your tone.  If I am, I'm sorry.

 

post #156 of 299

not very familiar with it

post #157 of 299
Quote:
Originally Posted by tbritton View Post

IF, after reading this thread, you STILL want to play with your DAP's,  iPod's or Desktop's EQ, here is a way to overcome over-driving the EQ input stages and thus the amp's input stages by adjusting the volume level your MP3 or AAC files decompress to. (That's right, not volume leveling at the output amplification stage, but at the decompression stage pre-EQ!)

 

Enter MP3Gain and its sister, AACGain.

 

http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/200539/why-your-awesome-iems-sound-bad-from-your-ipod-and-what-you-can-do-about-it/75#post_2569980

 

Virtually all MP3's have volumes set too high internally that results in clipping after the decompression takes place. This gets rid of it. It also shows which of your files have this clipping problem. Whether you EQ or not, you might want this issue dealt with. Those using lossless files, of course, need not worry as much, though those still could be over-driving the input stages of your EQ (however, this is not the tool for those).

 

Terry



Why exactly WOULD people avoid playing with EQs, be it on DAPs or desktop EQs, after reading this thread?

 

It's already been abundantly clear of the advantages of EQing, and also what could go wrong when people go overboard with it or just don't know what they're doing.

post #158 of 299

Yes, I am a huge fan of using EQ. I was just kinda kidding that perhaps this thread had not been effective enough... yet... for some! :-)

 

Some EQ's (particularly in DAPs) have trouble with the high signal levels that come about during the compression process in MP3s and AAC files. So, what I was pointing out is a way to optimize your files so that you are delivering the best signal levels to the input front end of your EQ circuitry or software. It is still a mistake, for instance, to expect an iPod Nano 4th generation to do anything but distort when the EQ is turned on without taking these measures. But once this gain control has been done, even that EQ is quite useable.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roller View Post





Why exactly WOULD people avoid playing with EQs, be it on DAPs or desktop EQs, after reading this thread?

 

It's already been abundantly clear of the advantages of EQing, and also what could go wrong when people go overboard with it or just don't know what they're doing.



 


Edited by tbritton - 6/24/11 at 6:07pm
post #159 of 299
Quote:
Originally Posted by tbritton View Post

Yes, I am a huge fan of using EQ. I was just kinda kidding that perhaps this thread had not been effective enough... yet... for some! :-)

 

Some EQ's (particularly in DAPs) have trouble with the high signal levels the come about during the compression process in MP3s and AAC files. So, what I was pointing out is a way to optimize your files so that you are delivering the best signal levels to the input front end of your EQ circuitry or software. It is still a mistake, for instance, to expect an iPod Nano 4th generation to do anything but distort when the EQ is turned on without taking these measures. But once this gain control has been done, even that EQ is quite useable.
 


 

Ah, I see.

 

At this time and age, one would expect DAPs to come with EQs that have some quality, as software went a long way since digital EQs appeared.

 

Your idea on managing gain is very good, though it won't necessarily help for bad recordings, which many people still use, unfortunately. But overall, it's quite a good idea.

post #160 of 299


      In my opinion, these type of folks are "Brand Heavy" meaning they bought that "Grado" so they want the "Grado" purity.  As for me, I build my own CIEMs and I EQ them too....  Thank you DSP!!!
 

      

Quote:
Originally Posted by RPGWiZaRD View Post




+1 It really gets clear of how unfamiliar people here on head-fi are with equalizers/equalizing.

 

I thought more people around here would be the "tweaker" kind of guy just spending lots of time adjusting whatever they can to get to a better subjective result while typical non-audio/headphone enthusiasts would be the ones that don't bother with such but it have turned out to be the opposite when I've spent my time here.



 

Dr. John Moulton

Here at Noble, we craft some of the finest universal and custom in-ear monitors available today. 

Reply
post #161 of 299
Quote:
Originally Posted by Markon101 View Post
 
( I know that it can sometimes always reduces the quality a bit)
 


 

post #162 of 299

 

A few months ago, I began to fiddle with parametric equalization for all my headphones in order to achieve the most tonally transparent response possible (a perceivably flat tonal response from the lowest to the highest tones I can perceive and/or my headphones can output) and quickly discovered how powerfull and important this tool is, if used right.

Now, I'm a proponent of equalization. To me, it's an essential tool.

 

I'm copying a post from this great thread.

 

It would be good to see more mid-high end headphones equalization curves (more than 1 per headphone, preferably) so that people could get a better idea of each headphone's voice/tonal character.

Generally, I don't find written descriptions to do it with enough detail (understandably).

 

Here's my current EQ curve for the German Maestro GMP 450 Pro:

 

Equalização German Maestro GMP 450 Pro1.png

 

 

The GMP 450 Pro has a midforward character.

As you guys can see, I tried to cut much more than boost.

I tried to match all the frequency spectrum loudness to the least loud tone(s), the frequency extremes, but I'm worried that this might not be the best approach to do it...

With this curve, I have to raise the amplification power a bit on my Dac/Amp, won't the noise floor of the music be raised by doing so?

What do you guys think?

 

This curve is still improvable, the sub-bass might be to prominent and the upper treble section probably doesn't need such boost up to the 20KHz, since I don't hear much above 18 - 19KHz..

post #163 of 299

active v/s passive a good read

http://sound.westhost.com/biamp-vs-passive.htm 

Dr. John Moulton

Here at Noble, we craft some of the finest universal and custom in-ear monitors available today. 

Reply
post #164 of 299

In recording school they taught us that EQ, while integral and important, should always be the last resort. You should strive to get your audio sounding as perfect as it can without EQ, and then EQ the bare minimum amount and not any more in order to sculpt the sound the way you see fit.

 

I see a lot of judicial EQing going on, which may be fine if you are stuck with one particular setup, but it would seem to me from a purity standpoint you would want to change something in your signal chain before resorting to EQ to fix it. For instance if your signal is too bright, switching to a darker pair of headphones or a darker amp would yield richer results as opposed to EQing the crap out of it.

 

In photography (which is my profession now) its the same way. When you take a photo you want it to be as perfect as possible right out of the camera. Any post Photoshop work should be subtle and minimal. Photographers who go overboard with Photoshop editing are trying to cover up a bad photo. It's the same with audio.


Edited by sesshin - 6/25/11 at 9:54am
post #165 of 299

Photoshop might not be as good an example as dodging and burning in the dark room.  And dodging/burning is usually always encouraged-- not because you have to, but because you want to.  Of course you'll want to have the best photography to work with, but instead of an elitist purist standpoint, there's nothing wrong with taking a perfectionist standpoint and dodging/burning your already good photograph to perfection based on your likings and/or other people's likings.

 

At the end of the day, it really is a purist attitude mandating whether you're for or against EQ (crappy EQs aside).  Even a friend of mine, who doesn't consider himself an audiophile at all, is very much against using any EQ because he said it "wasn't what the artist intended."  Even though his pair of Skullcandy Aviator aren't perfectly flat, he still approaches EQ in the same purist manner.  Right then I knew that a good part of bias against EQ because of purism like that was full of hot air.  (Not saying all is)

 


Edited by TMRaven - 6/25/11 at 10:08am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Why don't more people use EQ to get the desired sound?