Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › My attempt at removing the Sennheiser veil through equalization
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

My attempt at removing the Sennheiser veil through equalization - Page 2

post #16 of 186

Redacted


Edited by nikongod - 11/17/12 at 2:34pm
post #17 of 186
The sennheiser veil I think is an unfortunate meme that got started with the popularity of the k701 some time ago. Needless to say, I don't find it very veiled. Since you do however, the 120 and 250 cuts work out, provided that the graphic eq isn't a piece of trash. Pull up the 4k band for a bit of presence, which would most directly address your veil concern. The 31hz band isn't something you should bother with. Set it back to the usual state. The drivers in the 5xx/6xx series drivers naturally have mediocre bass extension and high bass distortion, increasing as we lower the frequency cycle. It would only be to your detriment.


http://www.independentrecording.net/irn/resources/freqchart/main_display.htm

As a loose guide for equalizing.
post #18 of 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by morijinal View Post

Not all, your feedback is welcome bigsmile_face.gif

 

When you say "going balanced", are you referring to a set of neutral headphones, or a flat EQ?

 

Going balanced is simply a superior way, IMHO, to connect and drive headphones vs single ended. This is usually reported to improve the sound. This can easily be verified by doing a search on this forum and reading the experiences of those who have gone from single ended to balanced operation. It has nothing to do with EQ. It is a basic and fundamental improvement and as such I think it is a more healthy way of removing veils, rather than applying EQ whereby the boosting of certain frequencys (making them louder) can make a headphone sound more detailed while in fact it is not. This is why it is called a band aid.

 

Single ended: Each can (right and left) has it's own hot cable but the earth is shared between the two. This is why single ended headphone plugs only need 3 connections.

 

Balanced. Each can has its own plus and minus cables and the headphone cable is shielded. To connect you need 4 connections (pins) and the shield may be connected to your amps ground and the headphone ground.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balanced_audio

 

  • The electromagnetic field around a differential line is ideally zero, which reduces crosstalk into adjacent cables, useful for telephone pairs.
  • Though the signal level would not be changed due to nominal level standardization, the maximum output from the differential drivers is twice as much, giving 6 dB extra headroom.[1] (If the amplifiers are identical, though, their output noise sums to 3 dB more than a single amplifier, decreasing dynamic range).
  • Increasing cable capacitance over long cable runs decreases the signal level at which high frequencies are attenuated. If each wire carries half the signal voltage swing as in fully differential outputs then longer cable runs can be used without the loss of high frequencies.[1]
  • Noise that is correlated between the two amps (from imperfect power supply rejection, for instance), would be cancelled out.
  • At higher frequencies, the output impedance of the output amplifier can change, resulting in a small imbalance. When driven in differential mode by two identical amplifiers, this impedance change will be the same for both lines, and thus cancelled out.[1]
  • Differential drivers are also more forgiving of incorrectly wired adapters or equipment that unbalances the signal by shorting pin 2.[1]

Edited by Hooster - 11/16/12 at 1:35pm
post #19 of 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hooster View Post

 

Going balanced is simply a superior way, IMHO, to connect and drive headphones vs single ended. This is usually reported to improve the sound. This can easily be verified by doing a search on this forum and reading the experiences of those who have gone from single ended to balanced operation. It has nothing to do with EQ. It is a basic and fundamental improvement and as such I think it is a more healthy way of removing veils, rather than applying EQ whereby the boosting of certain frequencys (making them louder) can make a headphone sound more detailed while in fact it is not. This is why it is called a band aid.

 

Single ended: Each can (right and left) has it's own hot cable but the earth is shared between the two. This is why single ended headphone plugs only need 3 connections.

 

Balanced. Each can has its own plus and minus cables and the headphone cable is shielded. To connect you need 4 connections (pins) and the shield may be connected to your amps ground and the headphone ground.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balanced_audio

 

  • The electromagnetic field around a differential line is ideally zero, which reduces crosstalk into adjacent cables, useful for telephone pairs.
  • Though the signal level would not be changed due to nominal level standardization, the maximum output from the differential drivers is twice as much, giving 6 dB extra headroom.[1] (If the amplifiers are identical, though, their output noise sums to 3 dB more than a single amplifier, decreasing dynamic range).
  • Increasing cable capacitance over long cable runs decreases the signal level at which high frequencies are attenuated. If each wire carries half the signal voltage swing as in fully differential outputs then longer cable runs can be used without the loss of high frequencies.[1]
  • Noise that is correlated between the two amps (from imperfect power supply rejection, for instance), would be cancelled out.
  • At higher frequencies, the output impedance of the output amplifier can change, resulting in a small imbalance. When driven in differential mode by two identical amplifiers, this impedance change will be the same for both lines, and thus cancelled out.[1]
  • Differential drivers are also more forgiving of incorrectly wired adapters or equipment that unbalances the signal by shorting pin 2.[1]

well my opinion about eq tuning is like fine tuning the of fuel-air ratio/ transmission/suspension of the car, its just optimizing the system to suit one's taste and compensate any flaws in the system, going balanced however is like replacing the intake manifold/exhaiust system, nothing wrong about both, just that eq is free and going balanced is more troublesome plus expensive

post #20 of 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hooster View Post

Going balanced is simply a superior way, IMHO, to connect and drive headphones vs single ended. This is usually reported to improve the sound. This can easily be verified by doing a search on this forum and reading the experiences of those who have gone from single ended to balanced operation. It has nothing to do with EQ. It is a basic and fundamental improvement and as such I think it is a more healthy way of removing veils, rather than applying EQ whereby the boosting of certain frequencys (making them louder) can make a headphone sound more detailed while in fact it is not. This is why it is called a band aid.

 

There are good ways of using EQ and there are bad ways of doing it, like stv014 pointed out. Going balanced by wiring the left channel into both drivers and shorting out the right one is hardly going to improve the sound - and would not make a good basis for an argument on the effectiveness of balancing.

post #21 of 186
If you have to ever consider balancing by rewiring and such then just
Get new headphones with sound you like. In this day and age hacking headphones to that degree is ridiculous.

Also buying £600 cables for your headphones is totally unnecessary. Would be cheaper to buy new cans. If someone wants to enlighten me then go ahead send me some cables and I'll do a review.

As far as Eqing - first flatten the response using the frequency response graph then tune to your liking. Most headphones can be pushed so well you never need to get anal about rewiring/balancing.
post #22 of 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by vid View Post

 

There are good ways of using EQ and there are bad ways of doing it, like stv014 pointed out. Going balanced by wiring the left channel into both drivers and shorting out the right one is hardly going to improve the sound - and would not make a good basis for an argument on the effectiveness of balancing.

but the HD558's 2.5mm end of the cable is alredy split into 4 parts, so balancing should not be too hard, though somewhere along the way the 2 earth wires combine into the main earth wire we see at the6.3 mm end of the cable

post #23 of 186

It's so nice with these Senn models that they are wired to each cup separately and going to balanced wiring is straightforward.  No need to disassemble the headphone cups and re-solder.

 

Of course there is still the substantial expense of going to balanced amplification and sources.  So it *is* an expensive option... but fun.

post #24 of 186

In practice, balanced headphone outputs make little difference, and single ended is good enough (to the extent of switching to balanced not even making a real audible difference) if properly implemented. Then again, there are many people who believe in them, just like in "high end" aftermarket cables. But in reality they do not fix multiple dB frequency response errors (unless switching from a poorly implemented single ended output to a good balanced one, but then the improvement is not because of it being balanced).

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hooster View Post

 

  • The electromagnetic field around a differential line is ideally zero, which reduces crosstalk into adjacent cables, useful for telephone pairs.

 

High quality headphones already have differential wiring (4 wires in the cable), only at the TRS connector are the two ground wires connected. With a decent headphone amplifier, crosstalk should not be audible. For example, the $150 O2 has -65 dB crosstalk at 10 kHz driving a 15 Ω load (that is the worst case), and that is not high enough to be an issue. If you do not believe that, it can easily be simulated in software, and tested with an ABX comparator.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hooster View Post

 

  • Though the signal level would not be changed due to nominal level standardization, the maximum output from the differential drivers is twice as much, giving 6 dB extra headroom.[1] (If the amplifiers are identical, though, their output noise sums to 3 dB more than a single amplifier, decreasing dynamic range).

 

The HD558 is fairly sensitive and easy to drive, you do not need the extra power. If single ended power amplifiers can drive passive loudspeakers, why would you need balanced for headphones that require only a small fraction of the power ?

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hooster View Post

 

  • Increasing cable capacitance over long cable runs decreases the signal level at which high frequencies are attenuated. If each wire carries half the signal voltage swing as in fully differential outputs then longer cable runs can be used without the loss of high frequencies.[1]

 

Headphone cables have varying capacitance, but an estimate of ~1 nF for a typical 10 ft cable is probably reasonable and not too low. With an amplifier output impedance of 100 Ω (which is unacceptably high for the HD5xx, but I want to show a pessimistic estimate), the "roll-off" at 20 kHz would in theory (ignoring cable inductance and other factors) be less than 0.001 dB, but definitely not something to be worried about. In any case, the second sentence in the quote above is not true, the attenuation is not a function of voltage, only impedance (voltage dependent attenuation implies non-linear distortion).

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hooster View Post

 

  • Noise that is correlated between the two amps (from imperfect power supply rejection, for instance), would be cancelled out.

 

It is entirely possible to make a single ended headphone output with inaudible noise floor. Balanced cables are useful for microphones (very low signal level), very long cable runs, or to reject common mode (usually ground) noise on interconnects. However, a balanced amplifier output is unnecessary for headphones.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hooster View Post

 

  • At higher frequencies, the output impedance of the output amplifier can change, resulting in a small imbalance. When driven in differential mode by two identical amplifiers, this impedance change will be the same for both lines, and thus cancelled out.[1]

 

The output impedance of a balanced amplifier is the sum of the impedance of both outputs. Therefore, balanced outputs actually have higher impedance, and cause more frequency response issues.


Edited by stv014 - 11/17/12 at 9:46am
post #25 of 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by Z3disD3ad View Post

If you have to ever consider balancing by rewiring and such then just
Get new headphones with sound you like. In this day and age hacking headphones to that degree is ridiculous.
Also buying £600 cables for your headphones is totally unnecessary. Would be cheaper to buy new cans. If someone wants to enlighten me then go ahead send me some cables and I'll do a review.
As far as Eqing - first flatten the response using the frequency response graph then tune to your liking. Most headphones can be pushed so well you never need to get anal about rewiring/balancing.

 

What are you so afraid of? Re cabling your own headphones is in most cases easy unless you are a total klutz. I have already done a pair myself and will be dong more soon. Good quality materials such as Neutrik connectors and mogami cables are actually quite cheap. Less than $50 for a re cable and an adapter cable should you sometimes wish to use a single ended amp.

 

I agree that throwing vast sums of money at snake oil merchants is a waste. 600 pounds for a headphone cable? Is it made of gold?


Edited by Hooster - 11/17/12 at 11:39am
post #26 of 186

so back on topic for eq, just play with the knobs, slide a knob up then down then up again, then adjust until you get your result you want, repeat for all knobs, then repeat again by redoing all knobs, all in the name of fine tuning. if done properly the difference and improvement is substantial, if done poorly the result is uhh... poor sound. takes experince and practice still easier than balancing imo. 

for the graph part, do not USE the rf graph, only use the graph as a LOOSE GUIDE, do the majority of the tuning by ear, afteral its your ear that we are tying to please, not our eyes.

and for the cable part, well tyll did mention of a cable that cost about $500 that he uses for his HD800, no idea how it became so expensive. almost as much as gold in weight it seems
 

post #27 of 186

If you want to remove the veil, switch to a Q701. That is what i did.

post #28 of 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by jasonb View Post

If you want to remove the veil, switch to a Q701. That is what i did.

 

LoL. Good idea k701smile.gif

post #29 of 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hooster View Post

 

LoL. Good idea k701smile.gif

well but kind of a little more expensive isnt it?

post #30 of 186

you can get the Q701 for $240. 

Quote:
Originally Posted by streetdragon View Post

well but kind of a little more expensive isnt it?

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › My attempt at removing the Sennheiser veil through equalization