Why don't more people use EQ to get the desired sound? - Page 19

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).

You don't believe that even yourself. xD Trust me. So I NEED to EQ to make my headphone accurate? How am I supposed to know when it's accurate? Do I EQ for every song separately because I have music recorded and mixed by hundreds of different people, everyone with a different view of "accuracy"? You're just wrong, nothing more. Of course I can make listening a complete hell, or I can sit back and enjoy the sound I'm used to.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheOtus 

Quote:

You don't believe that even yourself. xD Trust me. So I NEED to EQ to make my headphone accurate? How am I supposed to know when it's accurate? Do I EQ for every song separately because I have music recorded and mixed by hundreds of different people, everyone with a different view of "accuracy"? You're just wrong, nothing more. Of course I can make listening a complete hell, or I can sit back and enjoy the sound I'm used to.

As far as I know and heard, no headphones are neutral enough, but I don't necessarily HAVE to EQ all the time to enjoy music. The more money you pay, the more neutral headphones get, but headphones still don't get as close to speakers. The closest I've heard to neutral is Stax 007 on a Blue Hawaii. On THAT rig, I probably wouldn't EQ, but on almost any other rigs I've heard, the system usually have something off with the bass, mids, and/or highs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by wind016 

As far as I know and heard, no headphones are neutral enough, but I don't necessarily HAVE to EQ all the time to enjoy music. The more money you pay, the more neutral headphones get, but headphones still don't get as close to speakers. The closest I've heard to neutral is Stax 007 on a Blue Hawaii. On THAT rig, I probably wouldn't EQ, but on almost any other rigs I've heard, the system usually have something off with the bass, mids, and/or highs.

Feel free to explain to me how speakers are now more neutral, as headphones are also speakers?  Speakers are also affected by the listening environment, so it's practically impossible for them to sound as intended in the first place.

If you know a system close to neutral. I suggest you to buy it instead of messing around with EQ.

And this all is still about your own opinions, nothing valid on the issue about not to or to EQ.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheOtus 

Quote:

Feel free to explain to me how speakers are now more neutral, as headphones are also speakers?  Speakers are also affected by the listening environment, so it's practically impossible for them to sound as intended in the first place.

 

If you know a system close to neutral. I suggest you to buy it instead of messing around with EQ.

 

And this all is still about your own opinions, nothing valid on the issue about not to or to EQ.

I did buy it, I have an 007 but waiting on an amplifier. My post was not in regards to perfect reproduction. I was saying headphones usually don't even get close to accurate without EQ.

Let's not get into discussion of semantics. Speakers/monitors are more neutral for the money, however, I'm not in a situation where I can use speakers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheOtus 

Quote:

Feel free to explain to me how speakers are now more neutral, as headphones are also speakers?  Speakers are also affected by the listening environment, so it's practically impossible for them to sound as intended in the first place.

 

If you know a system close to neutral. I suggest you to buy it instead of messing around with EQ.

 

And this all is still about your own opinions, nothing valid on the issue about not to or to EQ.

How about you share your enlightened opinion instead of bashing someone who did state how and why EQ works for said situations?

the way i look at it 

source > headphones > dac > amp > eq > cables <<<pulled this out of my ass

i cant believe 40 percent regularly dont use eq .  at all??

Speakers/monitors have their own sound signature to be sure and mine change when I toe-in the speakers for just an inch. They are 8 feet apart and 8 feet away from the sweet spot on my couch in an 14'x15' room. I've spent hours just moving those speakers around the room to shift the sound to the way I like it. Certainly a high-end EQ would have been easier--physically shifting the speakers is the cheaper alternative though.

Quote:

Originally Posted by wind016 

 

Speakers/monitors are more neutral for the money, however, I'm not in a situation where I can use speakers.

I sure want a pair of those speakers.
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roller 


How about you share your enlightened opinion instead of bashing someone who did state how and why EQ works for said situations?

I think I've shared some already, and I'm not bashing anyone, only commenting on very strong opinions.

No it's 60%, you must add answers "No" & "Absolutely Not"

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheOtus 

 

I think I've shared some already, and I'm not bashing anyone, only commenting on very strong opinions.

I've been following this thread from the beginning, and you just posted today, namely replying to wind016, and stating that he's wrong, on how you don't believe that EQing makes sound more accurate (which I'm still on the fence about such description), never supplied an argument of your own.

If you had OCD, you would EQ every song and perhaps even parts of the song. The point is that just like you prefer not to EQ and just listen to music, other people prefer to EQ their gear in order for it to sound optimal to their preferences and listen to music from that point onwards.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheOtus 

Quote:

 

I sure want a pair of those speakers.
 

What? Have you heard a decent set of speakers? Neutrality is much easier achieved through a set of speakers than two headphone drivers, especially dynamic headphone drivers.

I am also not against coloring music if you haven't noticed. Headphones like the HFI 580 just can't compete with some of the other basshead headphones without a good EQ.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roller 


I've been following this thread from the beginning, and you just posted today, namely replying to wind016, and stating that he's wrong, on how you don't believe that EQing makes sound more accurate (which I'm still on the fence about such description), never supplied an argument of your own.

 

If you had OCD, you would EQ every song and perhaps even parts of the song. The point is that just like you prefer not to EQ and just listen to music, other people prefer to EQ their gear in order for it to sound optimal to their preferences and listen to music from that point onwards.

I even reasoned my opinion quite well. I'll write it again: EQing and stating how it makes the sound more neutral and accurate is ridiculous unless you magically know when the sound is truly the best possible. And you still have to EQ every album separately, as said. For example in my car, the adjustments aren't even enough to make the sound good on every song, there's so much variation.

And thank god, I have no OCD. Yes, that's the point, some prefer EQ and I don't. My point is still the above one. It doesn't work that way. I EQ the sound to my preferences, while it most likely goes for worse with some other album. So I'm not regretting that I just let my brain adapt a bit and I enjoy every album with zero hassle.

Quote:

Originally Posted by wind016 

 

What? Have you heard a decent set of speakers? Neutrality is much easier achieved through a set of speakers than two headphone drivers, especially dynamic headphone drivers.

 

I am also not against coloring music if you haven't noticed. Headphones like the HFI 580 just can't compete with some of the other basshead headphones without a good EQ.

 

I have a pair of Wharfedale Diamond 10.7, they costed noticeably more than my headphones. They can't even be compared really. Obviously those might just be awfully bad speakers, and I'm nowhere near to have heard every speaker, but neither are you. I've also heard a set of about 14 000€, kinda underwhelming experience at that too. And the total for the system was obviously lot more... I admit that it wasn't my type of music, but I can still say if the sound was bad, good or amazing, it wasn''t amazing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheOtus 

I even reasoned my opinion quite well. I'll write it again: EQing and stating how it makes the sound more neutral and accurate is ridiculous unless you magically know when the sound is truly the best possible. And you still have to EQ every album separately, as said. For example in my car, the adjustments aren't even enough to make the sound good on every song, there's so much variation.

 

And thank god, I have no OCD. Yes, that's the point, some prefer EQ and I don't. My point is still the above one. It doesn't work that way. I EQ the sound to my preferences, while it most likely goes for worse with some other album. So I'm not regretting that I just let my brain adapt a bit and I enjoy every album with zero hassle.

 

Hope you realize that what you're saying sounds like if EQ can't reach perfect neutrality/accuracy, then it's worthless, when getting close to such concept for the listener in question (important point) is an admirable achievement. What I believe is being said by some people here is that non EQed gear can sound further away from what would be considered neutral and accurate, though it can never be a rule of thumb given the sheer variety of recordings, mastering and whatnot.

Thankfully I limit my EQing to a few settings, rather than going through and nitpicking every track as a separate instance.

So, there is:

- global EQing, one setting to adapt to everything

- entertainment EQing, intentional emphasizing of certain areas of the spectrum

- situational EQing, with different EQ settings applied to different tracks/albums/genres

- "healing" EQing, going with the intent of balancing the sound of the hardware on which the EQ is being used on

This wasn't classified properly, but more for giving an idea of a few different EQ usages out there.

My point ever since this was debated is that I don't find EQing or not EQing to be superior or inferior in any way, only different preferences for different people. No harm there, as long as both sides respect each other without bashing due to preconceived ideas of what's "right".

i thought everyone eq'd

so the people that don't eq, they pick "flat" eq on their ipods and zunes?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roller 

Hope you realize that what you're saying sounds like if EQ can't reach perfect neutrality/accuracy, then it's worthless, when getting close to such concept for the listener in question (important point) is an admirable achievement. What I believe is being said by some people here is that non EQed gear can sound further away from what would be considered neutral and accurate, though it can never be a rule of thumb given the sheer variety of recordings, mastering and whatnot.

 

Thankfully I limit my EQing to a few settings, rather than going through and nitpicking every track as a separate instance.

 

So, there is:

- global EQing, one setting to adapt to everything

- entertainment EQing, intentional emphasizing of certain areas of the spectrum

- situational EQing, with different EQ settings applied to different tracks/albums/genres

- "healing" EQing, going with the intent of balancing the sound of the hardware on which the EQ is being used on

 

This wasn't classified properly, but more for giving an idea of a few different EQ usages out there.

 

My point ever since this was debated is that I don't find EQing or not EQing to be superior or inferior in any way, only different preferences for different people. No harm there, as long as both sides respect each other without bashing due to preconceived ideas of what's "right".

If we're keeping it real, of course well done EQ CAN improve the sound of clearly flawed headphone or record. (Obviously it can also dramatically reduce sound quality.) The point is, why buy such headphone? Same can't be said about records, it's just something to be tolerated in my opinion. Also seems that people do overrate the EQ quite a bit. I haven't tried any high end EQ programs so who knows how amazing they are. I still don't find them needed in my case, and just getting used to the sound still has many obvious upsides. I don't want to fight about this at all, and you clearly got my points too, no harm.

Quote:

Originally Posted by n-phect 

i thought everyone eq'd

 

so the people that don't eq, they pick "flat" eq on their ipods and zunes?

What do you think? I rather pick "flat" and use some decent headphones instead of suffering from awful distortion, as that's what happens with iPod's EQ.