Why don't more people use EQ to get the desired sound? - Page 17

Quote:

Originally Posted by tbritton 

Lately I've been messing with the dolbyheadphone stuff that RPGWiZaRD brought to us. It is definitely another direction altogether for me. Check it out - I think you'll like it!

http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/555263/foobar2000-dolby-headphone-config-comment-discuss

Will the heresy never end! 

I've been using Isone recently but I'll have to try out that dolby headphone scheme.

Both analogies are nice ones. I definitely like yours.  (BTW - Solex sells more 2800K lamps to museums than any other temperature for that "warm" look to paintings - thinking like an old Luxman tube amp!)

With Jazz, I lightly touch the trebles to give the cymbals some sizzle, but agree it is very mid-centric as a genre. It is almost like there isn't supposed to be hardly any bass in a Jazz recording!

Terry
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by LizardKing1 

I don't mean to sound arrogant, but I think my analogy (copied from someone else, so not actually mine) portrays EQ better. A different light makes you see the entire painting differently. Applying fresh paint on a painting makes just those colors - frequencies - stand out. I actually think it's very relatable, even more so by the fact that both colors and sounds are waves with a certain frequency.

 

Just a question: what kind of EQ do you guys apply for jazz? I think it's a very mid-centric genre, but apparently a lot of equalizers boost the treble.

Very sane, my friend! Very sane! ;-)

Terry

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ak-Boss 

I am always playing around with my EQ for each individual song. But half the time when I can't be bothered I just used preset itunes EQ's. Bit of treble booster when I want to hear everything really clearly, R&B when I want the additional bass for hip-hop/rap/grime etc. It really does bring the song alive when you give it the right EQ.

I already have the "dolby headphone" thing on my soundcard, and I didn't like much the result.

RPGWiZaRD has included some optimal configurations for the plugin in the foobar player that are worth looking into. He is constantly improving it.

http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/555263/foobar2000-dolby-headphone-config-comment-discuss

Terry
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by extrabigmehdi 

I already have the "dolby headphone" thing on my soundcard, and I didn't like much the result.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roller 

EQs can boost or reduce any part of the FR, where did you get that EQs boost treble alone?

I meant how do you equalize ti. My bad :p

Wow I just checked out that Dolby thing. I realize it uses multichannel audio, but what does it do exactly? Is it like Isone, a crossfeed-king of plugin to give you a spatial imaging of the sound? I guess that with many channels must be awesome, since you can get each instrument playing in a corner of your head room.

I think Sheppi is fine to be used like a "crossfeed" plugin.

I don't have "multichannel music", but if it's just about giving a more "comfortable" stereo , I prefer Sheppi to "dolby headphone".

Yes, this Sheppi thing is very nice.

http://dallashodgson.info/articles/OpenAmbienceProject/

Terry
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by extrabigmehdi 

I think Sheppi is fine to be used like a "crossfeed" plugin.

I don't have "multichannel music", but if it's just about giving a more "comfortable" stereo , I prefer Sheppi to "dolby headphone".

Quote:

Originally Posted by tbritton 

RPGWiZaRD has included some optimal configurations for the plugin in the foobar player that are worth looking into. He is constantly improving it.

http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/555263/foobar2000-dolby-headphone-config-comment-discuss

Thanks for mentioning, I'd appriciate if you check this post for the latest config as the opening post hasn't included the latest config yet (the preconfig is updated but not the pictures in the "manual install" section) since I'd like to get more feedback whether using this config with VST host + Electri-Q posihfopit instead of the 31-band EQ plugin works great for you or not. For me using the Electri-Q config it crashes if trying to load the included EQ presets (using the DSP chain preset list) too many times or bringing up the Electri-Q window more than once or twice or so (without having closed foobar in-between). For me that's not much of an issue as I always plan on using the "default" EQ preset myself and will use my soundcard's EQ to tweak whatever headphone needed an EQ adjustment from there but if it also crashes for other people I'm unsure what to do. But I'm certain it brings a VERY noticable improvement over using the 31-band EQ non-VST plugin though so that's why I'd like to use this instead.

PS, I'm really enjoying this tweaked dolby headphone config to death. ^^ I couldn't imagine going back to stock config anymore. It's like you almost get in a trance state with the sooooo much added depth and width to the music, it's impossible to not get moved by the music.

It's not a multiple choice poll, so I can't vote.

I rotate between the RS2i and HF2 at work, and I don't feel the need to EQ either one of those.

But at lunch, I use PX-100's, and I do dial down their low end.

Or even better, use a different headphone for each tracks.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RPGWiZaRD 

 

PS, I'm really enjoying this tweaked dolby headphone config to death. ^^ I couldn't imagine going back to stock config anymore. It's like you almost get in a trance state with the sooooo much added depth and width to the music, it's impossible to not get moved by the music.

I entirely concur with you on that. You have achieved a master stroke with this one! I compared it (this most recent version of your config) with the Sheppi plugin, and while that offers some interesting improvements, your offering is simply much more profound in very many ways. I really think you have gotten to it. The fact still remains that the rear volume is a subtle tweak each user with their differing DACs will have to manipulate to taste, but that's the only consideration. Very nicely done - I am so glad I gave your project here a chance!

Terry

Hmm, today while cutting some hedges at work I spent like the whole time thinking about this subject meanwhile doing the work. Yea head-fi hasn't only gotten me interested in headphones/sound but also philosophy apparently, I like get interested in knowing why people think like they do. :p

While I've spent my time on head-fi as well as reading through this thread it's become quite apparent that we're dealing with quite a psychological hobby. I think you can divide people into 2 major categories (probably many subcategories as well but that's irrelevant for now):

Audiophile

Typical audiophile thinking seems to be a person with a strong belief in theories. Theories that sorta has become like a standard in music production set mostly by different pioneers in music recording and otherwise famous/well-regarded producers etc. The way the audiophiles think can be briefly summarized with:

It has to be done theoretically correct, otherwise it can't sound good.

If you read through this thread you'll realize there's no logical answer made from a person not EQing why he/she thinks EQing is something bad. It's either physiological in the same sense why a certain person's favorite color might be blue or he/she refers to for example "you alter the sound, hence it doesn't sound anymore like intended by the producer". The answers usually refer to the theories or they are simply physiological. In the theories for example common things which would include audiophilia thinking would be "neutral" sound of which basic meaning is a flat response (although this is a subject that can be interpreted in so many ways so I will stop here before I get sidetracked) which should always be pursued. Another thing would be EQing for example which is looked bad upon as it alters the sound and altering sound by the theories is usually something that should be done as a last resort or to as small extent as possible. For true audiophiles it doesn't matter if a headphone would start sounding subjectively better, it goes against the typical thinking to EQ a headphone and therefore it's not an option that feels great to use. You can't either force some1 with the favorite color blue start suddenly liking the color black for example, you can't really give any logical answer to it either, it's just how it is, it's psycologhical. Price also has a greater influence on these people.

The other category of people I can't really put any certain name on, but here the subjective opinions/taste/prefers is the way how these people think. It could be briefly summarized like:

It doesn't matter how it's done, it's what's heard (the result) that matters.

These people don't care much about the theories that the music industry has put up nor have any strong desire to follow these rules. No these people are the ones searching for the best possible result on a subjective basis, by their own ears. These are the kind of people that are tweaking around with settings, try out different sound "enhancing" plugins and what not as well as EQing. They don't care how the producers wanted it to sound like (or they might, can be a different subcategory in this case) but the main thing is the result, what's heard. Since the theories might not always reflect what you personally prefer or concidered being optimal, why should these be followed? In this category you can also fit people that might prefer a fun/colored sound, bassheads, treble (grado) heads etc. The goal here is maximum enjoyment which is pursued on a subjective basis, not theoretical. The price has a less influence on these people in reaching satisfaction.

Then obviously things like lack of experience of a good quality EQ how much of an improvement it can bring or lack of skill in EQing by ear etc which I posted about in my first post in this thread on the first page may help drag people towards either category of thinking. For example I may have not become such a person that really go on a subjective basis if I hadn't discovered this awesome hardware DSP EQ I'm using. But if we are to discuss and understand why these different people have their different ways of looking at it then the psychological and theoretical point of views got much relevance in this subject IMO. 

Well this is just a brief extract of what I was thinking of, probably forgot a some important points, need to go sleep now anyway as it's like 3:30 AM here in europe where I live. :p

That's pretty interesting, but there are plenty of "audiophiles" who hate EQ but love to tweak and are just obsessed with subjectivity.  They'll spend thousands of dollars tube rolling, trying different cables, and buying intentionally colored amps and DACs.  They don't care that their multi-kilobuck DAC measures worse than an E7 or that nobody has ever ABXed two competently made headphone cables or ICs that weren't super long and hooked to a phono cartridge because subjectively it sounds good to them.

IMO they don't have a coherent position, philosophical or otherwise.

On the other hand, I love using EQ and DSPs to enhance my listening experience but I'm also big on measurements and objective testing.  I simply view it practically.  The gear with the least coloration will have the best genre bandwidth and allow me to tweak the sound in software in ways that are far more precise than assembling static pieces of hardware.

I learned that the hard way.  I have two tube amps sitting around here that I barely use anymore.  Sometimes they're magical, sometimes they're crap.  I've decided I'll split the difference and go with something that's more consistent.

Quote:

Originally Posted by maverickronin 

That's pretty interesting, but there are plenty of "audiophiles" who hate EQ but love to tweak and are just obsessed with subjectivity.  They'll spend thousands of dollars tube rolling, trying different cables, and buying intentionally colored amps and DACs.  They don't care that their multi-kilobuck DAC measures worse than an E7 or that nobody has ever ABXed two competently made headphone cables or ICs that weren't super long and hooked to a phono cartridge because subjectively it sounds good to them.

 

IMO they don't have a coherent position, philosophical or otherwise.

 

On the other hand, I love using EQ and DSPs to enhance my listening experience but I'm also big on measurements and objective testing.  I simply view it practically.  The gear with the least coloration will have the best genre bandwidth and allow me to tweak the sound in software in ways that are far more precise than assembling static pieces of hardware.

 

I learned that the hard way.  I have two tube amps sitting around here that I barely use anymore.  Sometimes they're magical, sometimes they're crap.  I've decided I'll split the difference and go with something that's more consistent.

Yea I know but like I said there can probably be many subcategories made too and I just added price into the mix as well as it's fairly relevant and I forgot that. For audiophiles higher priced equipment has more of a value than for those people who wouldn't concider himself like that and can reach similar kind of satisfaction with less money spent.

Tuberolling for example are also something very well regarded even within music industry because the guys who make them usually knows a thing or two as well. There's more prestige in these things than EQs if you talk among people in this business.

But it's for sure that the great hardware EQs haven't got much attention either.