Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Westone ES-5: Chasing Neutral Eq settings - updated 5.7.13
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Westone ES-5: Chasing Neutral Eq settings - updated 5.7.13 - Page 2

post #16 of 35
Thread Starter 

tweaked the easy-q settings..   lots of new testing with my a/b switch has helped me determine that the easy-q settings were slightly off from the accudio setting, even though they used the exact same parameters across the board..

i have slightly adjusted the easy-q to compensate and now it matches the accudio setting to the point that i dont think anyone could tell the difference.

 

is there anybody out there even using this information?  biggrin.gif

post #17 of 35

I tried out the rockbox EQ for about 30 mins today - the -7.5 dB drop at 200 seems a little drastic and makes my headphones sound a little thin

post #18 of 35
Thread Starter 

I'm not at all surprised to hear you say that.  I felt the same way at first.

its funny like that.. once I got  used to the neutral sound and I went back to the stock sound all i could hear was how bloated the bass was and how it ruined the whole frequency range.  all my music turned to undefined mud (and i'm not being dramatic about that)... but honestly thats how they sounded to me from the get go, which is why i started eqing them in the first place.

 

a lot of people have said the es-5's sound rolled off in the "highs" but they actually are not rolled off very much, its mostly the overblown bass masking everything. 

 

true neutral is a tough sell and i get that.  Its very easy to get accustomed to a certain sound signature, no matter how far from neutral it may be.  From there everything that doesn't sound like what you are used to sounds off.  

 

the only way to get accustomed to a neutral sound is to give it time. or to go to a studio that has excellent gear and hear perfect music reproduction. either way you have to let your brain re-adjust. for example almost anyone who hears true neutral at first will say he where's the bass.  God knows i had that issue, i used to be a huge bass head.  until i got more accustomed to balanced sound, and learned to hear how too much bass can cover up the rest of the sound signature.   Being a musician and having some experience with live mixing, and studio mixing and recording helped with that too. 

 

it became obvious quick when i posted the accudio thread and saw how few people responded that a neutral sound signature is not very popular around here.  Even though a lot of people say that is what they are after... hearing the music as it was supposed to be heard and what not, in the end its not what people want...  oh well.  ;-)

post #19 of 35
Tried the updated settings, love them. This is the best I've gotten it to sound through my rockboxed clip zip.
post #20 of 35
Thread Starter 

yeah!

post #21 of 35
Two things i would like to add. I assume in thr updated settings you have the gain on your low shelf set to zero, is this correct? second, i know on my clip zip i have an advanced eq setting where i can set the gain, frequency and q numerically instead of graphically. That way you know where it is as opposed to using the graphical eq that doesnt show the entire number when adjusting.
post #22 of 35
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maximus504 View Post

Two things i would like to add. I assume in thr updated settings you have the gain on your low shelf set to zero, is this correct? second, i know on my clip zip i have an advanced eq setting where i can set the gain, frequency and q numerically instead of graphically. That way you know where it is as opposed to using the graphical eq that doesnt show the entire number when adjusting.

any of the parameters not mentioned, such as low shelf, are set to zero which means they are not being used.

 

I'll have to try other eq formats.  I have only ever tried the graphic eq b/c I am able to process what I am looking at better when i used the graphics. 

post #23 of 35
I am interested in these. Heard good things about the es5 and am interested in the hard shell + soft tip form factor but don't like anything but neutral.
post #24 of 35

Just tried it. The sound is a bit more transparent but not as fun. I do like what I hear though. Will let my brain burn in for a while cool.gif

post #25 of 35
Thread Starter 
the more used to neutral i get, the more i realize how imbalanced the es-5's are. they really only have one flaw that really does them in, and its way too much mid bass which drowns out all the highs

however they respond so darn well to eq that i stop listening with them. i love these headphones!!
post #26 of 35
Thread Starter 

Updated the rockbox settings today

 

Rockbox folks broadened their q parameters at my request which allowed me to directly translate the accudio eq settings, allowing the rockbox version to be identical.

I dont think it is going to sound any different than it did, but none the less, its technically more accurate now.

 

thanks

post #27 of 35

Kept trying out your ES5 measurements for a little more than a month - I like what you did with the rockbox.

However, when using your EQ settings with better source such as my desktop setup (Audio-GD DI-V3>Anedio D1), I still think you are forgetting to attenuate frequencies past 4000Hz. There is a huge dip between 4k Hz and 4.7k Hz and a couple of peaks surrounding it.

Unfortunately, there is quite a bit of variation between ES5s in the higher frequencies.  In fact, in my ES5 alone, my repeated measurements consistently show that I get drastically different results for my left and right channel (left channel dips around 4215 Hz while right channel dips around 4415 Hz).

However, these phenomena can be seen in the Golden Ears graphs for the ES5 too - both the left and right channel discrepancies as well as the dip at around 4.4k Hz and the peaks around it.

This high range (maybe around 3.5k Hz to 10k Hz) is critical for both a transparent soundstage and a natural tone (I'm too lazy to get citations, so you'll just have to trust me here).

Thus, by ignoring the 4k Hz+ range that has full of problems, the highs on the headphone sound "warped" and veiled.  This is not a problem with the Rockbox could never do crystal clear highs anyway.

 

What equipment are you using with your ES5 btw? (Esp. your desktop setup)


Edited by Zalken - 3/20/13 at 3:22am
post #28 of 35
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zalken View Post

Kept trying out your ES5 measurements for a little more than a month - I like what you did with the rockbox.

However, when using your EQ settings with better source such as my desktop setup (Audio-GD DI-V3>Anedio D1), I still think you are forgetting to attenuate frequencies past 4000Hz. There is a huge dip between 4k Hz and 4.7k Hz and a couple of peaks surrounding it.

Unfortunately, there is quite a bit of variation between ES5s in the higher frequencies.  In fact, in my ES5 alone, my repeated measurements consistently show that I get drastically different results for my left and right channel (left channel dips around 4215 Hz while right channel dips around 4415 Hz).

However, these phenomena can be seen in the Golden Ears graphs for the ES5 too - both the left and right channel discrepancies as well as the dip at around 4.4k Hz and the peaks around it.

This high range (maybe around 3.5k Hz to 10k Hz) is critical for both a transparent soundstage and a natural tone (I'm too lazy to get citations, so you'll just have to trust me here).

Thus, by ignoring the 4k Hz+ range that has full of problems, the highs on the headphone sound "warped" and veiled.  This is not a problem with the Rockbox could never do crystal clear highs anyway.

 

What equipment are you using with your ES5 btw? (Esp. your desktop setup)

 

I did not put any of my own adjustments into these curves.  I simply copied the accudio curve, so I dont know what to say about your observations of the 4k range. I'm not skilled enough to pick out further possible improvements by ear.   The accudio curve is the best i've heard for these headphones and frankly if something better came along i dont even know if i'd be able to tell for sure which one was better.  Comparing two "good" sounding curves and trying to say which one is more neutral without a definitive benchmark can be very challenging.. at least for me anyway.  That said, If you have some ideas on how to improve the curves I made i'd certainly like to hear them.  I'm always open to further improvement.

 

also given Golden ears explaination (which i included in the OP) of why they dont "perfectly neutralize" their headphones   I dont know how much more improvement could be made here without doing more harm than good.  but hey i really dont know.

 

 

99% of the time when i listen to music i use my es5's straight into a rockboxed clip zip.  Occasionally i use my computer rig: foobar with easy-q, o2/odac.   I've owned some of the best desktop and portable gear in the past but in the end i've been most satisfied with the clip zip.   Its a perfect impedance match for the es-5's and given its excellent measurements i'm not surprised that i've never heard anything that topped it despite rampant claims otherwise in these forums.

post #29 of 35

Hi,

 

I've recreated the settings in the OP in foobar, and it sounds great. Unfortunately I cannot duplicate them exactly on my rockboxed clip zip because the EQ doesn't allow q values below 0.5. How did you accomplish this?

post #30 of 35
Thread Starter 

update your rockbox.

 

I have improved the settings.  Lunatique was right (as usual).  It can be done better, and I believe I have done so.   I will post the new ones asap.

 

thanks

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Westone ES-5: Chasing Neutral Eq settings - updated 5.7.13