Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Sennheiser Veil
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Sennheiser Veil - Page 18

post #256 of 263
Quote:
Originally Posted by JaZZ
I've also experimented with different headphones, and the DT 860 is definitely a candidate for EQing. The HD 650 on the other hand didn't benefit from EQing at all. But it does respond very well to different electronics.
Depends on what kind of sound you're after. I played around with the Senn 580 & 650 at the last meet and had them plugged into an amp fed from the Behringer EQ. I found they both sounded a lot better to me when I bumped up the 80Hz range by a few dB & did a couple other tweaks to make them sound more fun, like Grados. I like the stock Senn sound, but IMO it can be made better through EQ.
post #257 of 263
Quote:
Originally Posted by JaZZ
So why aren't you going to present the Behringer in the source forum as a low-price high-end alternative to all those Wadias, Meridians, Mark Levinsons...? Seriously, it would be interesting to see the reactions -- maybe some people own both, a high-end source and the Behringer, and just haven't discovered its true DAC capabilities.

the thing is, an eq is only going to help with attenuation wherever you like in the frequency spectrum. it can fake more soundstage through use of reverb, echo etc but it's not the same. same goes for detail. either something is more precise or it isn't - you can fake it by bumping the treble to hear more detail pop out, but again it's not the same. things like muted and cottony can be taken care of by the mids attenuation, but ultimately you have to say "what kinda signal am i getting here? is this DAC good enough to give me something to work with? and when it hits the can, are the physical limitations of the can going to be overcome by EQ?" not always. with an R10 i bet i could EQ all over the place and have a blast. but with a coby 5.1 surround sound can, there's only so much an eq can do. if you can tweak a DT770 to have less bass, or a K501 to have more, then it might be worth it. but don't expect a DT770 to turn into a Qualia or anything - or even a CD3K in terms of detail in the highs (versus sibiliance comparatively).
post #258 of 263
Quote:
Originally Posted by gsferrari
You have to realize that a dB scale is a logarithmic scale. Even a 1 dB difference is an AWFUL lot in terms of volume depending on the frequency.
Human hearing isn't linear. If it were, making a given sound 10dB louder would make it sound 10 times as loud, in actuality it roughly doubles the perceived volume.

I've done a lot of testing which involved matching volume levels before starting the test, once the difference is less than 3dB or so it becomes very hard to tell which is louder. Matching to within 1dB by ear is damn near impossible, and requires an SPL meter.
post #259 of 263
Quote:
Originally Posted by WmAx
As far as the 'reactions' on a forum such as this; it seems it would not matter what the actual performance may or may not be -- only the perception of such. I would never accuse head-fi to lack imagination.
Thanks! Are you trying to convert us to see the truth?

post #260 of 263
Quote:
Originally Posted by aerius
Human hearing isn't linear. If it were, making a given sound 10dB louder would make it sound 10 times as loud, in actuality it roughly doubles the perceived volume.
Well, it would sound about 3x louder if human hearing was linear, since we are referring to dB in perspective of amplitude(log20).

Quote:
I've done a lot of testing which involved matching volume levels before starting the test, once the difference is less than 3dB or so it becomes very hard to tell which is louder. Matching to within 1dB by ear is damn near impossible, and requires an SPL meter.
While it may be generally difficult to match 1dB, and this will be a very subtle(at best) difference - this 1dB difference is [1]demonstrated to be detectable almost all of the time in direct comparison of signals in controlled perceptual tests. Actually, significanlty lesser differences have been shown to be audible in such testing dependant on the program material(white noise being the most sensitive).

-Chris

Footnotes
[1]The Subjective Loudness of Typical Program Material
Gilbert A. Soulodre, Michel C. Lavoie, and Scott G. Norcross
AES Preprint: 5892
post #261 of 263
Quote:
Originally Posted by JaZZ
Thanks! Are you trying to convert us to see the truth?
The truth? Despite your apparent sarcasm, this is an interesting issue. The 'truth' has to be specifically defined. Perception is 'truth' if you mean truth to encompass all of the variables(which includes psychological components) and one's 'honesty' in giving their subjective opinion.

If you listened to a Behringer SRC2496 or DEQ2496 and found the sound to be lacking -- I would not question the honesty of your perceptions(since perception is dependant on more than just the base sensory data). I would have not problem in accepting this as a truthful evaluation.

Considering the above, I do not have a reason to doubt your truthfullness when you or any other audiophile describes differences in sound. But this is an entirely different issue as compared to actual audible signal difference(s).

-Chris
post #262 of 263
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jahn
the thing is, an eq is only going to help with attenuation wherever you like in the frequency spectrum. it can fake more soundstage through use of reverb, echo etc but it's not the same.
EQ's dont add echo or reverb that would be a digital effects box


Quote:
Originally Posted by Jahn
if you can tweak a DT770 to have less bass, or a K501 to have more, then it might be worth it. but don't expect a DT770 to turn into a Qualia or anything - or even a CD3K in terms of detail in the highs (versus sibiliance comparatively).
certain headphones have certain limitations, an EQ is more than likely not going to make your cans sound more detaild (it can, if some frequency is insanely exaggerated/missing)

but what an EQ can do best is make sure that the sound coming out of your headphones is true to the sound coming from your source...

for example i can have the behringer with the measurement mic make its own curve in the graphic equalizer to make the headphones almost perfectly flat... then in the parametric eq add/remove a little of whatever part of the spectrum i like/dont like...

it just gives you more control over how you listen to your music i guess
post #263 of 263
I find that with modern recordings, EQ is often necessary. I remember when I first got into music, I could set my amp and pretty much leave it, but now the engineering seems to be all over the map. I think a lot of that is due to the tendency to over-compress and to boost the midrange so music sounds louder (read: "better") than the music around it. I've even patched my peak expander back into my listening system. I used to only use that for hyper-compressed 78s from the WW2 era, but it's coming in handy now.

See ya
Steve
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Sennheiser Veil