[Twinster]

I notice a lot of you guys refer to EQ'ing your headphones, particularly portables...that probably accounts for some of the variations in the impressions people have of these (and other) phones. EQ, to me, is a bad word. I just have no desire to use it.  Seems like quite a few of you guys are really happy with the results you can get from it, though. 

I'm with you regarding EQ. I've tried EQ'ing but never got a result that I like. Specialy the EQ on the iPhone just $#%}. I also tried on my Clip+ and same unsatisfying result. My best result was with Foobar 2k but again it most be me but I always compare back to no EQ and seems to always prefer the later.

 

[AstralStorm]

Foobar's built-in EQ is also pretty meh - wrong frequency centers and no interpolation between bands. The latter causes artifacts.
Try foo_dsp_xgeq called Graphic Equalizer, available on plugins page.
 
About the slightly hollow feeling, I think it's true - there's a few dB dip around 160-240 Hz which sometimes causes this - easy to fix with an eq.

 

[Focker]

Quote:

I'm with you regarding EQ. I've tried EQ'ing but never got a result that I like. Specialy the EQ on the iPhone just $#%}. I also tried on my Clip+ and same unsatisfying result. My best result was with Foobar 2k but again it most be me but I always compare back to no EQ and seems to always prefer the later.

 
I don't even buy audio components (regular speaker audio) with tone controls...to me it's just one more thing in the signal path that can affect the quality of the sound. I was even really apprehensive about putting an active crossover in play with my Magnepan speakers...I had to do a lot of research to be assured that the one I chose was as transparent as possible and didnt impart it's own signature on the music quality. 
 
But yeah, I was surprised to see how many people use EQ'ing on here, cause in regular home audio you rarely will see that anymore. 

 

[roma101]

Actually I don't EQ as well unless a headphone really needs it (eg: K81DJ).

 

[Zombie_X]

Hi,
 
On the subject of EQ'ing, I don't do it as it colors the sound further. I want to hear the headphones as they are, not EQ them to sound as I think they should. I also don't like having an EQ on gear as I think it may degrade the audio.
 
Quote:

Actually I don't EQ as well unless a headphone really needs it (eg: K81DJ).

 

[robm321]

I never EQ. If the headphone needs EQ, I get rid of the them.

 

[roma101]

Agreed, zombie.

 

[AstralStorm]

Eh. Equalizing to "what I think it should sound" is wrong. I equalize so that all frequencies sound equally loud. Guess where did the word equalization come from.
 
Also, digital equalizers don't affect sound quality really, unless very badly programmed.

 

[autoexec]

I eq only my cheap phones like PX-100 II, but for these high-end stuff I let them sound on their own as Twinster's case, I also tend to go back to no EQ after trying to EQ them from time to time.

 

[OrbitingCow]

A decent EQ is not going to color the sound much at all. Media Player Classic has a good EQ. I don't find I need it really unless the music is unbearably compressed.

 

[roma101]

daveDerek pmed me last week asking for a little comparo between the portable headphones I own and he thought I should post my little write-up. Just my subjective impressions so take it with a grain of salt:
 
These are both very exceptional cans. I am actually on the fence still about the DT1350 but here's what I think in a nutshell:
 
ES10 - If Grado and Ultrasone had a baby the ES10s would be it. They're a slightly v-shaped, fun, unabashed party on your head. The decay on these is great but I found the tonality slightly unnatural. The bass depth and impact is a bass-lover's dream. Mids are clear but sound slightly distanced to my ears but I wouldn't call them very recessed at all. Highs are nice and crispy with no fatigue. Overall detail is great.  A big caveat for me, is while I appreciate the sound, more than anything I need isolation for listening on the go. Not suitable for public transport IMO. Also the sound was slightly more aggressive than I prefer. Sometimes I want a more laidback sound.
 
DT1350 - Very neutral although I think it's on the slightly warm side of neutral. These are a totally different hp from the ES10s. Way more reserved, more balanced to my ears, and very transparent to source. There is a quick decay which I find a bit unnatural. The overall PRaT is pretty good however. Detail and separation is AMAZING. Really impressive. Soundstage is not that big but not narrower than the HD25. The ES10 sounds bigger as well but not a huge soundstage on those either since they have a very forward signature overall. The DTs are laidback in comparison. The bass has deep impact but no where near the ES10 or HD25 (which I actually miss and hope to repurchase a pair to compare side by side with the DT1350). Vocals sound very natural and the mids are probably the best part of this headphone. Highs are extended and very smooth.
 
Alright so not much of a nutshell haha. They're both great cans with different sound sigs. I would consider the K181 a more fun version of the DT1350 (they have a similar warmish tone to my ears) with bigger soundstage but lacking in the refined separation of the DT1350. The ES10 is the HD25 on steroids to my ears.
 
All in all, I miss the HD25, even though I have a love/hate relationship with them. To me, they seem to be a can that's in between the sig of the ES10 and DT1350. YMMV. I am very curious to try the Amperior though. I should also add that I am a big fan of the M-80. It's got a big, balanced, smooth sound for such a small can.

 

[freakfingers12]

Quote:

 

Spoiler: Warning%3A%20Spoiler!

 
daveDerek pmed me last week asking for a little comparo between the portable headphones I own and he thought I should post my little write-up. Just my subjective impressions so take it with a grain of salt:
 
These are both very exceptional cans. I am actually on the fence still about the DT1350 but here's what I think in a nutshell:
 
ES10 - If Grado and Ultrasone had a baby the ES10s would be it. They're a slightly v-shaped, fun, unabashed party on your head. The decay on these is great but I found the tonality slightly unnatural. The bass depth and impact is a bass-lover's dream. Mids are clear but sound slightly distanced to my ears but I wouldn't call them very recessed at all. Highs are nice and crispy with no fatigue. Overall detail is great.  A big caveat for me, is while I appreciate the sound, more than anything I need isolation for listening on the go. Not suitable for public transport IMO. Also the sound was slightly more aggressive than I prefer. Sometimes I want a more laidback sound.
 
DT1350 - Very neutral although I think it's on the slightly warm side of neutral. These are a totally different hp from the ES10s. Way more reserved, more balanced to my ears, and very transparent to source. There is a quick decay which I find a bit unnatural. The overall PRaT is pretty good however. Detail and separation is AMAZING. Really impressive. Soundstage is not that big but not narrower than the HD25. The ES10 sounds bigger as well but not a huge soundstage on those either since they have a very forward signature overall. The DTs are laidback in comparison. The bass has deep impact but no where near the ES10 or HD25 (which I actually miss and hope to repurchase a pair to compare side by side with the DT1350). Vocals sound very natural and the mids are probably the best part of this headphone. Highs are extended and very smooth.
 
Alright so not much of a nutshell haha. They're both great cans with different sound sigs. I would consider the K181 a more fun version of the DT1350 (they have a similar warmish tone to my ears) with bigger soundstage but lacking in the refined separation of the DT1350. The ES10 is the HD25 on steroids to my ears.
 
All in all, I miss the HD25, even though I have a love/hate relationship with them. To me, they seem to be a can that's in between the sig of the ES10 and DT1350. YMMV. I am very curious to try the Amperior though. I should also add that I am a big fan of the M-80. It's got a big, balanced, smooth sound for such a small can.
 

 
 

Well said roma, it got me interested in the ES10. 

Thread gone quiet this couple weeks. 

 
Anyway, saw a comment on headphiles. 
 
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by edroc73rp
 
It's a shame we weren't able to compare modded, stock and recabled DT1350's at the Amorsolo meet. Would love to have compared the different iterations as well as find out about the reported variances in the quality issues (or lack thereof) in some batches.

In any case allow me to share how my Beyers responded to modding/re-cabling.  Headphones were converted to dual entry, with female 3.5mm connectors installed in each driver housing for a more direct connection and to allow for cable swapping. I used Cardas and Denko terminated with Lequn and Amphenol 3.5mm plugs on both ends, work was done by Sandmoose (I can't recommend him highly enough for this kind of work).

There were a number of things that I wanted to address with the stock cable DT1350's. First of all was the treble which at time sounded unnatural. I've heard people describe it as tizzy (over-excited, yes i looked it up), shrilly or metallic. Whichever definition suits you, i heard it too often and could not stand it. Then the mids at times sounded thin and recessed, even with the Beta22. The bass was there but nothing to be excited about.  

With the Cardas cable, I did not expect to have so much success addressing these issues! We expected the warmth, as this is characteristic of cardas cables, but to have the smoother highs and better defined bass both integrating well was a real surprise. All tests with classical music so far. The highs remained extended, more true to the Beyer sound sig now, although not exaggerated as is the case with some models, allowing for incredible detail and airiness. The bass is the real treat. I feel I've always been a closet basshead, I can't have enough of it with this version of the DT1350's. Not subwoofer type which is dis-integrated but certainly of such quantity.  It's more of the three-way full range type. Very well defined and very low, I just love it with the Harry Potter and Inception OST's. The Beta22 had a lot to do with this though with the new output caps (more on this in another section), I've had similar results with the ALO Rx but with not as much weight nor midrange presence (it sounded like a very good portable still).

Unfortunately, I have nothing to report on the Denko cables yet. I'm afraid I've not been able to set aside the Cardas cables ha ha. Also, i fear I may not get as good a result as this one, I hope I'm wrong. Hopefully something different at least, not necessarily better. Stand by...

 
Seems re-cabling could sort out a lot of issues. Wonder if it's better to invest in amp/dac or recable my future DT1350's. Anyone else re-cabled theirs? 

 

[daveDerek]

Quote:

daveDerek pmed me last week asking for a little comparo between the portable headphones I own and he thought I should post my little write-up. Just my subjective impressions so take it with a grain of salt:
 
These are both very exceptional cans. I am actually on the fence still about the DT1350 but here's what I think in a nutshell:
 
ES10 - If Grado and Ultrasone had a baby the ES10s would be it. They're a slightly v-shaped, fun, unabashed party on your head. The decay on these is great but I found the tonality slightly unnatural. The bass depth and impact is a bass-lover's dream. Mids are clear but sound slightly distanced to my ears but I wouldn't call them very recessed at all. Highs are nice and crispy with no fatigue. Overall detail is great.  A big caveat for me, is while I appreciate the sound, more than anything I need isolation for listening on the go. Not suitable for public transport IMO. Also the sound was slightly more aggressive than I prefer. Sometimes I want a more laidback sound.
 
DT1350 - Very neutral although I think it's on the slightly warm side of neutral. These are a totally different hp from the ES10s. Way more reserved, more balanced to my ears, and very transparent to source. There is a quick decay which I find a bit unnatural. The overall PRaT is pretty good however. Detail and separation is AMAZING. Really impressive. Soundstage is not that big but not narrower than the HD25. The ES10 sounds bigger as well but not a huge soundstage on those either since they have a very forward signature overall. The DTs are laidback in comparison. The bass has deep impact but no where near the ES10 or HD25 (which I actually miss and hope to repurchase a pair to compare side by side with the DT1350). Vocals sound very natural and the mids are probably the best part of this headphone. Highs are extended and very smooth.
 
Alright so not much of a nutshell haha. They're both great cans with different sound sigs. I would consider the K181 a more fun version of the DT1350 (they have a similar warmish tone to my ears) with bigger soundstage but lacking in the refined separation of the DT1350. The ES10 is the HD25 on steroids to my ears.
 
All in all, I miss the HD25, even though I have a love/hate relationship with them. To me, they seem to be a can that's in between the sig of the ES10 and DT1350. YMMV. I am very curious to try the Amperior though. I should also add that I am a big fan of the M-80. It's got a big, balanced, smooth sound for such a small can.

 
 
thanks for posting this nice little write-up, Roma. the comparisons with other cans, especially long time stds such as the hd25, and stratifying them as you do, gives useful info about their sound signatures, and where they stand relative to other similar devices. perhaps you can also comment on the sony mdr z1000, a can that was very popular not long ago but seems to have, in typical head-fi fashion, been forgotten about as other things appear on the scene.

 

[OrbitingCow]

While it is nice to hear that cabling may play a small part I simply don't believe half of that LOL. That doesn't mean it could not be true it's just I have heard a lot of cables and many of them never translate to the hyperbole in words. That is my opinion.
 
There is already tremendous bass on these things. I highly doubt new cables are going to supply so much more as to be of concern. Really, the highs are not shrill at all if the recording is not shrill or compressed to hell. I don't believe cables are worthless but usually a manufacturer uses a certain cable for a reason in many headphones.
 
By any measure if you are choosing cabling over an amp you have entered the true audiophile cult hahahahaha. I mean unless we found the cable in these things to be absolute garbage which I highly doubt.

 

[daveDerek]

Quote:

I don't believe cables are worthless but usually a manufacturer uses a certain cable for a reason in many headphones.

 
and more often than not the reason the cable is chosen is dictated by cost, then marketing and styling, rather than engineering or audio considerations, i'd hazard to speculate.