[arnyk]

   
I think you guys are technically right but you're complicating something that should be very simple.
 
Just curious, is there something wrong with a......

 
It must be nice sitting in that char, prognosticating about a simple thing like you are some kind of authority, arguing with and insulting people have have actually gotten their hands dirty...
 
 

No. Nothing wrong with that.

But using PEQ to smooth the frequency response by ear is a LOT harder than using a measurement mic with some kind of software like REW to do so. Read this Head-Fi EQ tutorial (there are several posts) to see how difficult it is: http://www.head-fi.org/t/615417/how-to-equalize-your-headphones-advanced-tutorial-in-progress

 
Agreed that the more intellectual means involving measuring is actually the far easier method.
 
What's wrong is the suggestion that there's something wrong with people who have actually tried it both ways, and know from personal which one is actually the easier .

 

[cel4145]

Agreed that the more intellectual means involving measuring is actually the far easier method.

What's wrong is the suggestion that there's something wrong with people who have actually tried it both ways, and know from personal which one is actually the easier .

I also think there's a difference, too, between

"I played around with my EQ for a couple of hours and found some settings I liked."

AND

"I worked to really smooth the frequency response of my headphones" (or speakers), in the way that Joe Bloggs describes.

 

[castleofargh]

  I think you guys are technically right but you're complicating something that should be very simple.
 
Just curious, is there something wrong with adjusting the EQ until, what ever it is your listening to, sounds good (to you).......  then listen to the music......

sadly it's very hard to do right for the layman. most obvious example, when you rise your EQ +3db somewhere in the bass and listen a little.  going back down -3db will for a time feel like you went too low and lack bass. it's pretty hard to just move up and down until we hit the jackpot because that will tend to make us go up a lot more than we need. if only for the fact that "louder is better". 
I'm very sure practice makes things better, as I'm way better than I was 1 or 2 years ago at this little game and I don't move each slider aimlessly anymore. but I'm still no sound engineer ^_^.
 
with measurements, if you can trust them, then you can see objective variations from headphone to headphone, and start to get ideas about what you like or don't like and maybe what to change on one headphone to get it to sound good to you. I'm just beginning with crappy and badly calibrated measurements, but just by comparing several IEMs, I went and applied some EQ that ended up close or slightly better to me than what I had done with joebloggs method(I'm a fan and abused his method on most of my IEMs but it's really no fun at all to do. and you rapidly discover that test tones aren't the most relaxing of sounds). but I arrived their so much faster with a crappy mic and bad calibration! so it may very well depend on the individual experience, both with interpreting graphs, and know where to go by ear. the ear part is still necessary at some point obviously.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
also thank you guys, I was writing a pretty stupid question, and just by trying to figure out how to explain it to you guys, I came with the answer. can't beat that answering speed, you guys are the best.

 

[RRod]

What would you recommend for someone who just listens to CD and SACD? I think putting microphones in the headphones and measuring the sound makes sense-but the ear and the headphone interact making a simple microphone less effective. I think RROD is on to something with the 3D scan of the ears, etc

 
Give the EQ-by-ear thing a try as a first shot; there's nothing to lose.
 
Here are two ways I can think to find a target for your own headphones' response that involve measurement (via binaural mics) rather than listening+EQ:
a) measure response at the eardrum in a listening room that you like (basically what the Smyth Realiser works with)
b) measure response at the eardrum from a set of headphones that you like
 
Then you make ratio filters based upon the eardrum response of your own headphones. All of this is non-trivial, but I've been playing with the headphone→headphone option and results are promising; I'll be posting the whole sordid affair soon. All of this of course means you have to have a target in the first place.

 

[sonitus mirus]

What would you recommend for someone who just listens to CD and SACD? I think putting microphones in the headphones and measuring the sound makes sense-but the ear and the headphone interact making a simple microphone less effective. I think RROD is on to something with the 3D scan of the ears, etc

 
Ha!  I don't actually EQ.  I'm not a critical listener.  I enjoy what I have now, but I don't know if it measures flat or looks like a roller coaster.  I don't even listen to CDs, just Google service.  In short, I have no idea.  
 
Though, with headphones, you could generally rely on the FR charts, as there is no room interaction to worry about, which is a major reason for EQ with speakers.  Maybe a foam head with an open hole running through it from the left ear to the right, where a microphone can be inserted into a separate hole in either the front, back, or underneath that could be centered between the 2 headphone speakers?

 

[Ruben123]

I too care less and less about my equipment. If it sounds good, whatever?! currently loving the #### out of my Sansa Clip+ and KZ ED9 or Sennheiser HD439. The earphones might not be the best, but hey, Mozart's piano concertos and Bob Dylan SHINE. Isn't that what matters? Audiophiles only listen to their equipment which is a shame. Even more so when they actually hear things that there are not -or could not hear when blindly tested. It's about the music and if you enjoy it, it's totally OK!

 

[cel4145]

I too care less and less about my equipment. If it sounds good, whatever?! currently loving the #### out of my Sansa Clip+ and KZ ED9 or Sennheiser HD439. The earphones might not be the best, but hey, Mozart's piano concertos and Bob Dylan SHINE. Isn't that what matters? Audiophiles only listen to their equipment which is a shame. Even more so when they actually hear things that there are not -or could not hear when blindly tested. It's about the music and if you enjoy it, it's totally OK!

No doubt.

My first portable player was one of these:



Had some crappy foam ear headphones that would sell now for about $2 or $3 if they were made today. And of course cassette tapes :rolleyes:

My Clip Zip with high bit rate mp3s and decent headphones is orders of magnitude beyond that in SQ, and yet I was able to enjoy the music with that 2nd generation Walkman setup. I use that to remind myself about the extremely diminishing rates of return I get from higher priced gear (not that I don't have any). It is REALLY important to stop and enjoy the music and forget about the equipment.

 

[icebear]

LOL time travel

I couldn't afford a Sony at that time
I had an AIWA which had auto reverse - talk about cutting edge technology!

- and a pretty decent battery life if I remember correctly but that is like 30+ years back ... and yes I also enjoyed listening to the music on that nowadays p.o.c.!
 
edit: was missing a word

 

[Thad-E-Ginathom]

I eventually got the leather-clad Sony Walkman Professional, a great little poclket-sized deck, and... a couple of months later, moved to minidisc, leaving all that tape hiss behind.
 
Mind you... a decade later, I do still occasionally use the Walkman Pro as a deck, but I haven't touched a minidisc in a long, long time. 

 

[analogsurviver]

  I eventually got the leather-clad Sony Walkman Professional, a great little poclket-sized deck, and... a couple of months later, moved to minidisc, leaving all that tape hiss behind.
 
Mind you... a decade later, I do still occasionally use the Walkman Pro as a deck, but I haven't touched a minidisc in a long, long time. 

WMD-6(c) ( aka Sony Walkman Professional ) is a GREAT deck - too bad great cassette tapes are $o expen$$ive today ...

 

[DreamKing]

Originally Posted by upstateguy /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 
Yes you do.

 
Do what? 
 
Edit: nevermind lol tired, didn't read that right

 

[cel4145]

LOL time travel
I couldn't afford a Sony at that time
I had an AIWA which had auto reverse - talk about cutting technology! - and a pretty decent battery life if I remember correctly but that is like 30+ years back ... and yes I also enjoyed listening to the music on that nowadays p.o.c.!

I had an Aiwa tape deck at one point. I think it was even a dual deck. Been so long, and who really wants to remember cassette tape usage, I don't know. :etysmile:

 

[cjl]

  WMD-6(c) ( aka Sony Walkman Professional ) is a GREAT deck - too bad great cassette tapes are $o expen$$ive today ...

Why would you want cassettes though? They're worse than CDs in every way except portability, and worse than digital players in every way.

 

[cel4145]

Why would you want cassettes though? They're worse than CDs in every way except portability, and worse than digital players in every way.

Why would you ask him "why?" It can't possibly be an answer you'll agree with. Well, unless it's so he can listen to that mixed tape he made for his girlfriend in middle school

 

[Exacoustatowner]

Why would you ask him "why?" It can't possibly be an answer you'll agree with. Well, unless it's so he can listen to that mixed tape he made for his girlfriend in middle school

Nostalgia for wow, flutter, and tape hiss?