[krismusic]

Somebody on here a while ago was saying that a headphone could be EQ'd to sound the same as any other headphone.
Presumably this only applies to the tonality. All other characteristics such as soundstage and detail retrieval would continue to differ?
The reason that I am asking is that I have EQ'd my IE8's to reduce the midbass hump and am very pleased with the result.
However, they do not have the detail and "presence" that I would like and that leads me to be interested in changing 'phones. Any opinions?

 

[El_Doug]

Somebody on here a while ago was saying that a headphone could be EQ'd to sound the same as any other headphone.
Presumably this only applies to the tonality. All other characteristics such as soundstage and detail retrieval would continue to differ?
The reason that I am asking is that I have EQ'd my IE8's to reduce the midbass hump and am very pleased with the result.
However, they do not have the detail and "presence" that I would like and that leads me to be interested in changing 'phones. Any opinions?

 
Sounds like you just need to up the super high frequencies in your EQ as well   Try 2db or so in the 14-18k range

 

[goodvibes]

For me, EQ is a parasitic disease.

 

[krismusic]

Well that's a bit extreme. goodvibes. The IE8's are much improved by cutting the over emphasised midbass.

 

[castleofargh]

I don't know the real difference between IE80 and IE8, I EQ down a little before 6khz for my IE80, not wide, there is just a little something that annoys me there(and obviously I also murder most of the bass and sub bass region), but looking at the IE8 on headroom's page, it actually shows it going down a little between 5 and 6khz. so I guess they're different IEMs in that respect. or maybe it's just something about my weird ears

.
but I know that I gave up on trying to make the IE80 to sound like my ideal target, because I couldn't get anything great and was losing some of the soundstage fun and rumble that IEM can give.
maybe you can try taking JoeBloggs's family hostage to get him or the guys at viper4android to get a target EQ for the IE8?

 
and no, EQ alone can't do it all on all IEMs. but you can find other dsp weapons if you're into that and encode the track with everything ready. I do that for a few selected IEMs that I really don't like as they are(like all etymotics).
 
 
Quote:

  For me, EQ is a parasitic disease.

I find that a little silly. where do you find something that doesn't change signature? where do you get a system that gives you the exact sound you like without adding just as much phase shift/distortion or whatever you're afraid the EQ would bring?
no headphone is flat, no speaker once in a room will be, how do you rectify that? with some lucky pick of colored source that might bring 10times the distortions while not even coming close to the precision of a good EQ?
and if it was so bad, don't you think the artists would make more albums without using EQ to make the masters? what an EQ can bring will completely overpower the small undesired stuff it might also add.
 
 
oh well I guess I'll always encounter people sharing your vision of EQ because of some mistaken "real sound" ideology. I already fight enough with people telling me that a real photographer shouldn't post process his pics... as if setting the white balance from a raw file was the same as being a HDR abuser or making madonna young again in photoshop. EQ is just the same, some uses are dumb, some actually help getting closer to the original record signal, or closer to your own personal preference. how could that be a disease?
 
extremists are always wrong!

 

 

[Bill-P]

Well, be that as it may, EQ still can't inherently "fix" the physical limitations and shortcomings of your listening device. It can only mask it so much.
 
Just like with a photo (I'm a photographer, by the way), one can only apply so many tweaks before they reach the limits of what information is stored in the photo, and what isn't.  By that, I mean... the camera can take a nice photo, yeah, but if it lacks the dynamic range to preserve information in the extreme white spots (highlights) and the extreme dark spots (shadows), then no matter what I do to the photo, I simply can't get those regions back.
 
I think EQ and post-processing can be used to "color" something a certain way that is more pleasing to the beholder, but it still won't get over the technicality of the gears involved.
 
But hey, I may be wrong.

 

[castleofargh]

  Well, be that as it may, EQ still can't inherently "fix" the physical limitations and shortcomings of your listening device. It can only mask it so much.
 
Just like with a photo (I'm a photographer, by the way), one can only apply so many tweaks before they reach the limits of what information is stored in the photo, and what isn't.  By that, I mean... the camera can take a nice photo, yeah, but if it lacks the dynamic range to preserve information in the extreme white spots (highlights) and the extreme dark spots (shadows), then no matter what I do to the photo, I simply can't get those regions back.
 
I think EQ and post-processing can be used to "color" something a certain way that is more pleasing to the beholder, but it still won't get over the technicality of the gears involved.
 
But hey, I may be wrong.

I agree totally with that. what is lost is lost, and you can't make a race horse with a donkey. EQ will merely help in some situations compensate for some other component's variations. and of course for some headphones, trying to push up some frequency will also drastically increase the headphone's distortions level. that's why we usually don't try to eliminate a strong roll off by EQ or pretend to turn an etymotic er4 into a basshead IEM ^_^.  EQ doesn't bypass the physical limitations of the gear.
 
 
the photography bit is just me whining, because I was lectured just today for suggesting to someone that I could maybe try attenuating some very nasty and obvious noise in DXO on the night shots he was showing to us. it ended up with me being a "cheater", and something about shooting in RAW that was admitting my lack of confidence

. supernatural conversation.
but I guess you also come across those guys who don't even know the C in color profile, but can argue all day long about how post processing is evil.

 

[Bill-P]

Ah, yep. Seen and met those types too often.
 
I don't necessarily antagonize them, but when I know the discussion isn't going anywhere because they simply haven't experienced the same things that I did, I'd just... let it go.
 
Let them go about their way, and eventually, I think they'll see things the way I do, at least partially. All roads lead to Rome, right?
 
It's not like I don't understand their standpoint... of being absolute purists. I'm a purist myself, and I try not to tame the digital signal too much.
 
But that's not to say I don't think EQ and post-processing are not useful. I use them all the time to "mask" various things, and they do work well when a wow factor is necessary, but life is just so much more... various that way.
 
I still remember the first time I heard the Abyss AB1266. That bass, the clarity, the depth, the soundstage... none of that can ever be replicated by any amount of EQ or DSP. I may be wrong, but... that was a revelation. Around the same time, I was getting somewhat bored, thinking the hobby was just... all that. EQ and be done. But no, there is just so much more beyond that. So I decided to study up on it all, and... well, here I am, saying the complete opposite of what I believed to be true a while ago.

 

[goodvibes]

Well that's a bit extreme. goodvibes. The IE8's are much improved by cutting the over emphasised midbass.

True and the overall result is what matters in an imperfect world but I just stay away from things that don't sound right to me at the start.

 

[castleofargh]

well, headphones are crap. at least compared to the accuracy that amps, DACs, and digital supports can deliver. headphones are clearly the weak link. I always tell people who want to "upgrade" to put money on the headphone(and I say that while I spend my time buying loads of 50$ IEMs to find some cool sport buddies... do what I say not what I do ^_^). 
 
I suppose that technically we could emulate a lot in a headphone with proper analysis and the right DSPs. but just like DXO, the most impressive results are obtained with crap lenses. it would probably not turn a great headphone into an amazing one. but turning crap into a very ok headphone, I feel like I do it everyday. and being lucky to participate in this http://www.head-fi.org/t/726569/review-tour-somic-mh412-viper4android-the-put-up-or-shut-up-review-and-tour really convinced me that improvements could go pretty far when you know what you're doing(JoeBloggs knows a good deal now).

 

[krismusic]

I agree goodvibes. Just that I have the '8's. Having had a less than stellar experience with CIEM's I'm feeling a bit burned by the high end
I am wondering if I'm better making the best of what I already have.

 

[Bill-P]

  well, headphones are crap. at least compared to the accuracy that amps, DACs, and digital supports can deliver. headphones are clearly the weak link. I always tell people who want to "upgrade" to put money on the headphone(and I say that while I spend my time buying loads of 50$ IEMs to find some cool sport buddies... do what I say not what I do ^_^). 
 
I suppose that technically we could emulate a lot in a headphone with proper analysis and the right DSPs. but just like DXO, the most impressive results are obtained with crap lenses. it would probably not turn a great headphone into an amazing one. but turning crap into a very ok headphone, I feel like I do it everyday. and being lucky to participate in this http://www.head-fi.org/t/726569/review-tour-somic-mh412-viper4android-the-put-up-or-shut-up-review-and-tour really convinced me that improvements could go pretty far when you know what you're doing(JoeBloggs knows a good deal now).

Well, I never bought into high-end headphones myself. Heard the HD800 many times through many systems, trying to find that "large, impossibly big" soundstage, and could never hear it. Instead, I heard a lot of treble and some stridency/sibilance. So I thought people were just crazy.
 
Then I heard the Abyss, and I wished it was more... euphonic.
 
And then I heard the HE-560.
 
Now I have built a headphone system that when I put on, I honestly can't tell about 90% of the time whether sound is coming from my speakers, or from the headphone. And that's with minimal or no DSP at all (well, I guess my DAC has a DSP in there somewhere). It's crazy. I'm at a point where numbers have become meaningless, and I'm having fun discovering the fact that some of my recordings, even super old ones, actually do have soundstage and other cues inside. It's not a per-case basis. For recordings "with soundstage", the stage can get so large and expansive that it gets overwhelming. How a headphone manages to do this... I still have no idea. But now at least I can believe some when they say the HD800 has a big soundstage.
 
All that pretty much taught me to keep an open mind...

 

[krismusic]

Sounds like you just need to up the super high frequencies in your EQ as well   Try 2db or so in the 14-18k range

Finally got to sit down and try this. Liking the change so far. Happy Holidays

 

[vid]

 
Well, be that as it may, EQ still can't inherently "fix" the physical limitations and shortcomings of your listening device. It can only mask it so much.

 
I've already shown you this argument to be wrong, and it had a very weak basis to begin with. So why do you insist on it, and where's the proof?

 

[Bill-P]

   
I've already shown you this argument to be wrong, and it had a very weak basis to begin with. So why do you insist on it, and where's the proof?

Sigh... I decided not to answer you after all of that because I already know where the discussion will head.
 
All you showed is that your EQ made decay shorter at certain frequencies, but that's not all there is to it. If you look closely at the initial frequency response wall (time 0), the frequency curve is still not perfect. That's what I meant by "not overcoming physical limitations".