Why don't more people use EQ to get the desired sound? - Page 18

@rpgwizzard

I  disagree, it's just that "sound professionals" and "audiophiles" are a different  "community".

I mean people from head-fi are not same people from kvraudio.

You'd see that some Eq  worth 1000$ (from algorithmix, and it's just a software) praised by some professionals.

Quote:

Originally Posted by extrabigmehdi 

I  disagree, it's just that "sound professionals" and "audiophiles" are a different community.

 

You'd see that some Eq  worth 1000$ (from algorithmix, and it's just a software) praised by some professionals.

I think he meant in guitar amps and mic preamps.  Tubes are still popular there.

Quote:

Originally Posted by maverickronin 

I think he meant in guitar amps and mic preamps.  Tubes are still popular there.

 

What I  said is that EQ  can be prestigious, at least from a professional point of view.

In my experience, EQ has the potential to make the sound more accurate. It also has a much larger potential of decreasing accuracy. If your the type that likes intentially artificial and colored sound, EQ is a must have. But if you simply want to use EQ to fix the flaws and colorations of your headphones/ear combination, it is a difficult thing to do properly. I never use EQ in my car, on my MP3 player, stereo receiver, etc... because those EQs are not parametric and end up messing up the sound. To do a proper EQ job takes a VERY good PMEQ, talent, and lots of time.  

 Another thing Ive been thinking about, is that coloration and resonance can be used to help things like timing and soundstage, trading one thing to help another, so the overall package is the best it can be. My car has a bassy factory audio system and sounds bloated when sitting at a red light. But when your driving and there is road and wind noise, the overdone bass actually helps cut through the ambient noise and it becomes more neutral sounding in that case. Im sure the engineers took that into consideration when they designed my car.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RPGWiZaRD 

 

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.

I might stop posting here, since I get the feeling no one reads my posts... I gave you a very logical reason, which apparently wasn't enough. EQ will never add detail, and I can assure you that if you're looking for something as natural-feeling as you can, that's a deal-breaker. It can make the sound more enjoyable, and the frequency response can indeed even be closer to what you think is natural, but you'll always trade-off something. The best you can hope for is that difference is so small that it's inaudible.

Also, people here like to point the finger at people who don't EQ and laugh. You keep saying "everything in the audio chain changes the sound, it's never natural" well what do you think alters the sound more: a cable or +3dB on the bass? The difference put by a decent setup on the sound is of course audible, but usually EQ changes it much more. And all in all, people are happy that way, let it be ^^

@lizarking

I don't see why, you tweak each frequencies band, and if it sounds worse just don't do it.

Yeah, and cables transmit the exact same signal that came in. In theory, that should happen, but usually there's a trade-off. Thing is you only realize it on quite revealing headphones.

I EQ because it can potentially give a better listening experience. If you take care EQ'ing it can make up for flaws in headphones, but of course you can't fix everything.

When I talk to people about EQ I constantly hear the counter-argument "It is not how the producer intended the music to sound". This is completely invalid. First of all it would require you to use the exact same gear that the producer used to experience exactly what the producer intended. Gear changes the sound more than EQ does, so that argument is shot down already, but I'd even go further and ask a more philosophical question as an argument in the discussion. If X could improve your listening experience, does it matter what the producer intended? X being anything from EQ to filters, to distortion. Even if others would call the music ruined, if you like it better that way, isn't that all that matters?

That is not to say that EQ is God's gift to music enthusiasts. It is not for all. If you like your gear exactly the way it sounds there is, of course, no reason to fiddle with EQ. But if you feel you could use some dB boost in a specific Hz range then why not? If it sounds better to you it should be all that matters.

Quote:

Originally Posted by LizardKing1 

 

I might stop posting here, since I get the feeling no one reads my posts... I gave you a very logical reason, which apparently wasn't enough. EQ will never add detail, and I can assure you that if you're looking for something as natural-feeling as you can, that's a deal-breaker. It can make the sound more enjoyable, and the frequency response can indeed even be closer to what you think is natural, but you'll always trade-off something. The best you can hope for is that difference is so small that it's inaudible.

 

Also, people here like to point the finger at people who don't EQ and laugh. You keep saying "everything in the audio chain changes the sound, it's never natural" well what do you think alters the sound more: a cable or +3dB on the bass? The difference put by a decent setup on the sound is of course audible, but usually EQ changes it much more. And all in all, people are happy that way, let it be ^^

See, you're using the typical audiophile thinking, for me it doesn't matter if it alters sound, it's the result what's heard that matters to me. I'm not even looking for perfectly "neutral" sound. I'm looking for what my ears enjoys the most and go by that. Still it sounds like you haven't used a high quality EQ, as they will alter the sound very minimally like it was a natural extension of the headphone itself.
 

How much it changes the frequencies or not, SO WHAT if it alters the sound but I like what I'm hearing so it's supposedly a good thing then. That argument is like "DITTO" to me and certainly not logical but perfectly understandable from a fellow audiophile's point of view but I'm NOT that. :D

I use EQ to compensate for the loss of certain high frequencies above 1 kHz. My left ear’s auditory canal is uncommonly curved.

Werner.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RPGWiZaRD 

See, you're using the typical audiophile thinking, for me it doesn't matter if it alters sound, it's the result what's heard that matters to me. I'm not even looking for perfectly "neutral" sound. I'm looking for what my ears enjoys the most and go by that. Still it sounds like you haven't used a high quality EQ, as they will alter the sound very minimally like it was a natural extension of the headphone itself.
 

How much it changes the frequencies or not, SO WHAT if it alters the sound but I like what I'm hearing so it's supposedly a good thing then. That argument is like "DITTO" to me and certainly not logical but perfectly understandable from a fellow audiophile's point of view but I'm NOT that. :D

 

You are absolutely right, I have never used a really good EQ. I understand that on some programs/physical EQs, the difference will be inaudible.

But the thing is, we have different notions of "enjoyable". I hate it when someone says that "people who don't EQ aren't getting the full enjoyment". And most of all, I don't think the concept of equalizers-vs-non-equalizers exists. I equalize Pendulum tracks to get the bass a bit punnchier on some tracks, and I equalize some White Stripes tracks to get a darker sound. That to me is enjoyable.

On Blue Train, I leave it exactly as it is, and I can assure you, it's very enjoyable. That's logical: I am happy as it is. Maybe I could get an even more natural feeling by adding like +1dB, but I think the difference is very minute and not worth the hassle. And I don't have an EQ good enough to make that +1dB worth the sax's detail I lose. And then yes, there's the psychological part of knowing you're listening to something as natural/neutral as you can afford, and that too is very enjoyable, but completely emotional. I guess I don't really disagree with you, I just don't think people need to be labelled as "equalizers" or "non-equalizers". I guess I'm bi-curious when it comes to equalizing...

Quote:

Originally Posted by JesperZ 

I EQ because it can potentially give a better listening experience. If you take care EQ'ing it can make up for flaws in headphones, but of course you can't fix everything.

 

When I talk to people about EQ I constantly hear the counter-argument "It is not how the producer intended the music to sound". This is completely invalid. First of all it would require you to use the exact same gear that the producer used to experience exactly what the producer intended. Gear changes the sound more than EQ does, so that argument is shot down already, but I'd even go further and ask a more philosophical question as an argument in the discussion. If X could improve your listening experience, does it matter what the producer intended? X being anything from EQ to filters, to distortion. Even if others would call the music ruined, if you like it better that way, isn't that all that matters?

 

That is not to say that EQ is God's gift to music enthusiasts. It is not for all. If you like your gear exactly the way it sounds there is, of course, no reason to fiddle with EQ. But if you feel you could use some dB boost in a specific Hz range then why not? If it sounds better to you it should be all that matters.

I believe the point of EQing is to let you add and take whatever you want, so if you add +12dB to a certain frequency, that will color it more than any gear you have. I mean it's not a fair comparison, when one of the things you're comparing was created to change the sound. And again, everyone knows you're not listening to what the producer intended, but as close as you could get on a fairly neutral setup. If you think you're way far off from the original, or if that experience is not your goal, sure, equalize.

I use this program called EQu for my IPhone 4 and it works great. I got it for free cause i jailbroke my iphone and use this program called installous.

Quote:

Originally Posted by LizardKing1 

I didn't understand. You say that there is much less of a present of that producer's signature, then how does it get messed with the most? I thought the mastering was the signature. Well I understand your analogy, but it's not really the same IMO, because you have to move around to see the whole sculpture, and the equivalent in sound would be to cancel out the other instruments and focus only on one.

 

I once read this analogy in an equalizing debate here on this forum: Imagine the recording as a painting, and the different colors as the different frequencies (not that far from reality, actually lol). Now some people bought the painting and then used their own touch on it: some liked a deeper shade of red and more proeminent blues, so they applied new paint and made those colors like they wanted them to be. Other bought the painting, hanged it and didn't touch a thing. I have nothing against either way, and I do both depending on the painting. I wouldn't touch a single color on some, while other really need a fresh touch to look good.

An EQ isn't the equivalent of repainting a painting a different color. It is much more precise than colored equipment. Repainting a painting is using a different headphone, such as a Grado. Grados repaint paintings to the colors of the sun. Actually all headphones are colored as hell so talking about keeping things accurate by not EQing is backwards thinking. You need to EQ to make your headphones accurate which is much more precise than throwing AMPs and DACs with various unique voicings which still won't match perfectly with the headphone in question. Of course, if you have the money and time, you could get the perfect AMP and DAC combination for every headphone you own (if it exists).

Quote:

Originally Posted by wind016 

An EQ isn't the equivalent of repainting a painting a different color. It is much more precise than colored equipment. Repainting a painting is using a different headphone, such as a Grado. Grados repaint paintings to the colors of the sun. Actually all headphones are colored as hell so talking about keeping things accurate by not EQing is backwards thinking. You need to EQ to make your headphones accurate which is much more precise than throwing AMPs and DACs with various unique voicings which still won't match perfectly with the headphone in question. Of course, if you have the money and time, you could get the perfect AMP and DAC combination for every headphone you own (if it exists).

x2

And that's why I own 3 headphones and continue to look for others. My "mood" headphones. My "classical" headphones. My "it's time to kick arse" headphones.