Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › LCD-2 Equalization -stalking the wild neutrality
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

LCD-2 Equalization -stalking the wild neutrality - Page 3

post #31 of 43
9/15/11 at 2:20am
Quote:
Originally Posted by olor1n View Post

Man, Lunatique, you are without doubt amongst the more enlightened members on these forums. Head-Fi so much richer for your contributions.


Thank you for that. Unfortunately, there are segments of the head-fi community who see me as an annoyance, such as what recently transpired in the thread Mini-Review: digiZoid ZO "portable subwoofer" 

 

Some people want to enjoy their subjective biases and intentional coloration, and they don't want to told there are better alternatives, or making an effort to learn stuff beyond their current limited understanding can be very rewarding and fulfilling. I'm like the preachy killjoy that goes and pisses in their cornflakes. :D But perhaps the context of that thread was just not the kind I should have stuck my nose in, even if I meant well and was trying to convert a few over to the side of accuracy/neutrality.


Edited by Lunatique - 9/15/11 at 2:21am
Reply
post #32 of 43
9/15/11 at 2:31am

I think we're all guilty of trying to impose our will on others. Trying to convert people is such a futile endeavour here. Just get your views out there, and be content you've at least tried to educate the uncouth masses. beerchug.gif

Reply
post #33 of 43
9/15/11 at 8:46am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lunatique View Post


That is why you need to have an accurate/neutral reference to base your tests and comparisons on. It is also why I rely on my Klein + Hummel O 300D's, because I have painstakingly over the years adjusted to almost perfection by building a studio around it with acoustic treatment, the ARC System, and additional EQ so it measures as flat as possible with testing gear (this is important--you must utilize measuring gear because you cannot fully trust your physiological and emotional biases). Because my reference monitors have been measured as close to my acceptable range of accuracy/neutral, I know I can fully trust it as the control element in all my audio gear comparisons. This is an advantage that a pro audio guy has that the typical consumer don't have--because we take this stuff incredibly serious and live and breathe it, as well as spend most of our income on perfecting our studio's signal chain with the goal of the utmost accuracy/neutrality we can afford.

 

I can tell how your EQ curve will sound just by looking at it, due to the experience I have working with EQ's as a composer/sound designer who has to mix/master his own stuff all the time. But just to indulge your curiosity, I went ahead and replicated your EQ curve, and sure enough, it's really skewed and imbalanced. 

 

Part of learning about accuracy/neutrality is to unlearn all the biases you've built up in your life time before you discovered what accuracy/neutrality really means, and how it's the only standard to judge by. An overwhelming percentage of the population have never heard accurate/neutral audio reproduction their entire lives, and they carry all sorts of biases in their heads--this includes a large percentage of members here at head-fi--people who pride themselves on knowing better than the average folk. Even something as simple as the common fallacy of referring to live performances as a benchmark of accuracy/neutrality is rampant around here, because people just don't know any better, as they are not audio professionals.

 

It takes a lot of time, money, hard work and a mountain of patience to research, purchase, borrow, rent, learn, test, compare, and refine to the point where you gain adequate understanding to really know what the hell you're doing, and be able to engage in these types of discussions with an authoritative confidence that you are not grossly mistaken. I can't tell you how many weekends I've spent driving around to different pro audio shops to do comparison tests for the entire day in the last decade or so, and the time I spent reading books on audio mixing, mastering, studio design, construction, acoustic design, and then applying all that knowledge to real world situations where I'm putting all that theory to practice in my own productions, as well using that knowledge to test audio gear. 

 

If you're serious about attaining the next level of understanding, just buckle down and learn, starting from the basics of audio production. I can give you some excellent recommendations for books that have audio CD's if you're interested. 

 

 

 

 



I appreciate your input..  You are teaching me a lot already.

I dont know that I am interested in persueing this subject to great lengths, but certainly will continue to stay open and see what unfolds.

 

I certainly agree that live sound as a base for neutrality is just bonkers..  even though i dont have your level of expertise, i had enough experience and understanding to be utterly dissapointed by probably 85% of live shows i saw growing up because of how horribly they were mixed or sounded.  Of course its not always the engineer's fault.  The circumstances and influences on live sound are vast, and often extremely imbalanced to the side of working against the sound engineer.

 

 

thanks again.. this thread certainly de-railed in a good way .. should probably re-work the OP.

Reply
post #34 of 43
9/15/11 at 10:00am

All good info here, and I’ll add another since we are talking headphones and canal/pinae resonance comes along with the package…head over to:

 

http://www.linkwitzlab.com/reference_earphones.htm

 

and read what Siegfried Linkwitz has to say about beneficial headphone EQ. Note his remark about actual values being “…determined empirically by adjusting them for a constant amplitude sound while a sinewave  generator's frequency is changed.” Siegfried’s well known for his crossovers & speaker designs and ain’t no punter when it comes to beneficial EQ.

 

As an aside, here's the current setting for correction of my Etymotic ER•6 though, to some degree, this curve benefits all headphones:

 

SonicEQ-ER6.png

 

From the screenshot, you should be able to read the filter’s values. Of the six sections, 3 are bypassed. This filter grouping immediately clears up the upper mid stridency I perceive, smoothing the cans’ response dramatically. Of course, have an excellent, linear phase EQ helps.

 

As usual, haven't had the time to tweak these to the nth degree, just went with Siegfried’s recommended settings. BTW, the 1st order low shelf (+2.2 at 38 Hz, Q of 2) is purely a subjective/euphonious correction!


Edited by omasciarotte - 9/16/11 at 4:26pm
Reply
post #35 of 43
9/15/11 at 10:36am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lunatique View Post




It's definitely an improvement over the previous curve. :)

 



 

well with fresh ears , i have spend a brief period comparing my new setting from last night, to your settings, and its clear that yours are better, and for now your settings have become my default, and i am very grateful to you for your insights in this regard.

 

its funny how perspective can change so quickly when you're not being stubborn about it.  I can see now that  my original settings, and even my new ones definitely veiled the sound among other things.    Though i have to admit, that at the time my settings really did seem "correct" to me, these new settings certainly sound much more so, especially when i quickly a/b back and forth. 

 

its almost like having new headphones to discover and enjoy all over again.. what fun!!

 

 


Edited by Br777 - 9/15/11 at 6:43pm
Reply
post #36 of 43
9/15/11 at 10:43am
Thread Starter 

I have updated the title, and added an introduction to this thread to reflect its new direction.

 

 

Reply
post #37 of 43
11/28/11 at 7:05am
Thread Starter 

Over two months with lunatiques LCD-2 settings and still dumbfounded at the perfection he achieved.

Thans again!

Reply
post #38 of 43
12/1/11 at 11:53pm

I'm really liking the EQ setting, it gave my LCD-2 more of a bite/edgy sound witch is what I like. It also removed the veil I was hearing.

Reply
post #39 of 43
12/2/11 at 12:05am

You guys might want to check out the totally updated EQ curve I have now, and new instructions on how to achieve the IDEAL frequency response for any headphone:

http://www.head-fi.org/t/551426/my-eq-curves-for-lcd-2-hd650-m50-and-007mk2

Reply
post #40 of 43
12/2/11 at 1:06am
I have no doubt your EQ settings worked perfectly for you, but it doesn't mean it'll work for everyone and any pair of LCD-2s. For a start, no 2 pairs of LCD-2s have exactly the same frequency responses, secondly, we all have ears of different sizes and shapes, which affect the sound characters of headphones, probably the main reason why people have such different opinions on headphones.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lunatique View Post


That is why you need to have an accurate/neutral reference to base your tests and comparisons on. It is also why I rely on my Klein + Hummel O 300D's, because I have painstakingly over the years adjusted to almost perfection by building a studio around it with acoustic treatment, the ARC System, and additional EQ so it measures as flat as possible with testing gear (this is important--you must utilize measuring gear because you cannot fully trust your physiological and emotional biases). Because my reference monitors have been measured as close to my acceptable range of accuracy/neutral, I know I can fully trust it as the control element in all my audio gear comparisons. This is an advantage that a pro audio guy has that the typical consumer don't have--because we take this stuff incredibly serious and live and breathe it, as well as spend most of our income on perfecting our studio's signal chain with the goal of the utmost accuracy/neutrality we can afford.  

 


Edited by Danz03 - 12/2/11 at 1:09am
Reply
post #41 of 43
12/2/11 at 1:21am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lunatique View Post

You guys might want to check out the totally updated EQ curve I have now, and new instructions on how to achieve the IDEAL frequency response for any headphone:

http://www.head-fi.org/t/551426/my-eq-curves-for-lcd-2-hd650-m50-and-007mk2

 

oh is that so? Well I will test it first thing in the morning with some fresh ears.
 

 

 

Reply
post #42 of 43
12/2/11 at 1:57am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danz03 View Post

For a start, no 2 pairs of LCD-2s have exactly the same frequency responses...

Did you read the latest updated instructions on how to achieve the ideal response based your own LCD-2's individual response graph that came in the box with your LCD-2? 

Reply
post #43 of 43
12/2/11 at 2:30am
I don't need to anymore, I got the A8 Realiser to tune my LCD-2 to exactly how my mixing room sound already. smily_headphones1.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lunatique View Post



Did you read the latest updated instructions on how to achieve the ideal response based your own LCD-2's individual response graph that came in the box with your LCD-2? 

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › LCD-2 Equalization -stalking the wild neutrality