[O.D]

One thing I am realizing is sound is highly, highly preferential. The "best" cans will get plenty of complaints...so on and so forth. This makes searching for headphones somewhat difficult when you can't listen to them pre-purchase and don't want to go into a vicious cycle of buy/sell/buy/sell/buy.

A common complaint. Sibilance. "too bass heavy"....etc.

So there is EQ. Many people swear buy it. It almost seems like a no brainier. So I have a few questions here:

Why not EQ?...and good reason not to?

For those who are experienced in EQ'ing higher end (and lower end) headphones to their liking, when you set your eyes on a pair of headphone you like and when your reading about their sound. In the higher end range, where does the line get drawn in terms of...choosing cans with a certain native sound and eq'ing it to your liking.

What I mean is...(and I'm inexperienced) why can't you just get any high end can and EQ it to sound how you want to to. Lets say for this examples sake...a high end can that you know has what it takes to perform well from low to high. Where is the line drawn? maybe there is a pair of headphones you really really like...but you hear that they run a bit siblant. In what situation do you say "I'm not gonna get those"...or "im gonna get those and eq them to my liking". Sorry if this is coming out a bit messy. I am just trying to understand the relationship between a high end cans "native sound" and the implementation of eq'ing.

A personal scenario for me is. I've spent so much time researching cans for the past few days, looking for something I am really going to enjoy in my price range. I listen to mostly hip hop, but I listen to many other genres also. EVERY can has a major downside to SOMEONE. So at some point the leap has to be taken. Reviews just won't do it. I really like the reputation that the dt770 pro's have and they are in my price range. Everything about them sounds good except for.......plenty of people have said they can be sibiliant and fatiguing in the high end...which I don't like. If I turn in another direction and choose another pair of headphones, there will be another major downside. So I just basically spending wayy too much time reading about headphones, and I'm not an audiophile (but i appreciate quality sound). And its 5 am.

So yes. Lots of questions. All feedback is welcome.

 

[Dulalala]

EQ has it's limitation. I think EQing a headphone slightly to get rid of a small issue is useful but to EQ a headphone to the point where it sounds completely different is too much. It's much better to buy a headphone you like, and if you need to, tweak it a bit rather than to buy a headphone you don't like, then EQ the hell out of it till you like em. On the other side though, some people are just purist and don't like EQ. I personally don't like EQ, I've tried it many times but I just can't get rid of that odd feeling that I altered it digitally, not quite sure why I feel like that but I only ever purchase headphones that I am completely satisfied with so it doesn't bother me that much. But basically, TLDR, EQ is good but only in small amounts as it isn't a perfect solution.

 

[castleofargh]

half the IEMs I own, I would throw away if I didn't have EQ. I also can't stand how the sound of one ear doesn't reach the other ear, it's something that never happens in real life or on speakers and completely changes the position cues for the instruments. I try to reduce that error inherent to playing albums mastered on speaker and played back on headphone with crossfeed and other digital processing. if a song has way too much sibilant for me on a voice, I will edit it with a dehisser or other form of local compressor and maybe EQ.
so to me digital processing is a precious and versatile tool. I absolutely do not agree with the so called purist idea that EQ is bad. it would take the most amazing luck for a headphone to be tuned exactly the way a person hears flat. so the starting point is that the headphone doesn't have the right signature. and adjusting the signature with EQ to get closer to what a listener should get can absolutely be an objective and/or subjective improvement. the idealistic vision that EQ degrades sound is based on the misconception that everything else will be tuned perfectly. that includes being tuned to your very own head and ears.

now EQ is not magical and it's an actual job to know how to use one skillfully. as an amateur it will take time and dedication to become better at using an EQ. the good part is that even a small improvement is an improvement, so we can start getting benefits from EQ fairly fast even without doing everything exactly right.
but any change anywhere has consequences. there are many EQs digital and analog, digital EQ nowadays is IMO superior as it offers pretty much the same as analog(often better) and many more options like different types of filter. one way to change the signature will create a delay(phase shift) where you apply the EQ. another way is to delay the entire signal so that phase stays as it was(which isn't necessarily flat in headphones). the downside of the second solution is that if you're EQing a movie, the voice get delayed and depending on the settings used, it can be a very noticeable delay. but for music, it's fine.
at some point, if you really want to dive into EQ and tuning your headphone, you will need to get measurement gears to verify the impact of what you do. and you're likely to end up doing a mix of EQ and mod, checking the actual impact with measurements. another hobby within a hobby, a very time consuming one.

another limitation of EQ. if the area you want to boost was recessed and already measured close to 1% distortion, it very possible that you'll make the distortions audible to you depending on the boost. the consequences are unknown, you could love it, or hate it but that's something to consider and yet again having a microphone and learning how to do some measurements would help verify such situations and show the limitations of how much EQ you can apply on a given headphone.
that also helps if you're trying to compensate an area where there is strong resonance or acoustic cancellation inside the headphone. you would boost by 10dB but maybe only get 2dB boost at your ear, so you keep pushing and at some point you'll reach the amplifier's limit.

so you see while the possibilities of EQ itself are really huge, your amplifier and of course your headphone are still setting some limits you shouldn't or couldn't push. and that's mainly why it might not be possible to take any headphone and tune it to sound like any other. but there are also many situations where you will be able to copy at least the signature of another headphone. you might still have or lack some distortions specific to only on of the headphones.


that said we always have some latitude to play with and I am yet to try a headphone and think no amount of EQ could improve it for me. sometimes it's a very subtle tilt, sometimes it's a matter of less than 1db at 4khz, but with some EQ I like the headphone more. maybe one day I'll find my headphone soulmate and any change will be felt as a bad one, but I don't really hold my breath. ^_^ a little improvement is improvement.

 

[O.D]

Thanks for the thoughtful replies

 

[ProtegeManiac]

So there is EQ. Many people swear buy it. It almost seems like a no brainier. So I have a few questions here:

Why not EQ?...and good reason not to?

Withing audiophile circles, the main problem with EQ use is that audiophiles would rather do things the hard and imprecise way and EQ the sound through anything other than EQ, like:

1. Warmifying boombasticators instead of actual amplifiers
2. Warm tubes for their warmifying boombasticators
3. Cryo-treated gold cables with some kind of fancy geometry selling for more than the monthly minimum wage to warmify and boombasticate the sound even more

And sometimes the combinations just don't work out as well as just picking the precise center frequency on a peak and trimming it, so they sell gear, buy new gear, try new gear, sell some gear, try some more...all because they see it as an Unexpected Journey. They see that cycle of gears like going out for a gold horde and coming back with The One Ring. What they don't realize is that that wasn't a good thing, as evidenced by what Bilbo looked like eventually.

Note that to an extent tryng out gear and returning them is unavoidable, what I'm saying here is that people could just use EQ for minor tweaks but no, "let's try that $500 cryo cable on this $500 headphone."

What I mean is...(and I'm inexperienced) why can't you just get any high end can and EQ it to sound how you want to to. Lets say for this examples sake...a high end can that you know has what it takes to perform well from low to high. Where is the line drawn? maybe there is a pair of headphones you really really like...but you hear that they run a bit siblant. In what situation do you say "I'm not gonna get those"...or "im gonna get those and eq them to my liking". Sorry if this is coming out a bit messy. I am just trying to understand the relationship between a high end cans "native sound" and the implementation of eq'ing.

Audiophools like doing things the hard way. Like people who want to stick with a stick shift when clutch pedal-less paddle shift systems shift a lot faster and require less heel-toe work to keep the revs up because Ferrari already programmed their systems over a decade ago to basically just work on a manual gearbox, or how Porsche now has PDK - Porschedoppelkuplung - a dual clutch gearbox. It should just be a matter of whether a particular car actually has a good paddle shift system instead of a glorified interface for its auto tranny (like the old Porsche automatics with the shifter buttons likely to confuse some schmuck who just bought one because it looks like the volume control for the stereo).

Get a headphone with the smoothest response you can afford, then EQ peaks on it.

For those who are experienced in EQ'ing higher end (and lower end) headphones to their liking, when you set your eyes on a pair of headphone you like and when your reading about their sound. In the higher end range, where does the line get drawn in terms of...choosing cans with a certain native sound and eq'ing it to your liking.

Note that EQ has its limits. It can't make one headphone sound completely like another headphone since EQ correction settings can't exactly cancel out the shape of the peak perfectly to get it perfectly flat much less mimic another headphone in totality. A cheap headphone with a graph that looks more like what you'd see on a hospital's monitors, or basically following the shape of shark's teeth, isn't going to be easily EQ'd flat like the HE400i from 1000hz down.

On top of that, the way some headphones are made positions the drivers differently from your more common designs - the HD800, T1, T5P, Qualia, etc - position the drivers ahead of the ear canals at an angle, like the toe-in on speakers. So even among decent headphones you can't just get an HD600 and EQ it to totally simulate the HD800 sound.

Still, the thing is, get the headphone with the smoothest response curve you can afford, and then use EQ to polish it up a little bit.

A personal scenario for me is. I've spent so much time researching cans for the past few days, looking for something I am really going to enjoy in my price range. I listen to mostly hip hop, but I listen to many other genres also. EVERY can has a major downside to SOMEONE. So at some point the leap has to be taken. Reviews just won't do it. I really like the reputation that the dt770 pro's have and they are in my price range. Everything about them sounds good except for.......plenty of people have said they can be sibiliant and fatiguing in the high end...which I don't like. If I turn in another direction and choose another pair of headphones, there will be another major downside. So I just basically spending wayy too much time reading about headphones, and I'm not an audiophile (but i appreciate quality sound). And its 5 am.

Use an EQ cut where the DT770 has a peak.

 

[ProtegeManiac]

So there is EQ. Many people swear buy it. It almost seems like a no brainier. So I have a few questions here:

Why not EQ?...and good reason not to?

Withing audiophile circles, the main problem with EQ use is that audiophiles would rather do things the hard and imprecise way and EQ the sound through anything other than EQ, like:

1. Warmifying boombasticators instead of actual amplifiers
2. Warm tubes for their warmifying boombasticators
3. Cryo-treated gold cables with some kind of fancy geometry selling for more than the monthly minimum wage to warmify and boombasticate the sound even more

And sometimes the combinations just don't work out as well as just picking the precise center frequency on a peak and trimming it, so they sell gear, buy new gear, try new gear, sell some gear, try some more...all because they see it as an Unexpected Journey. They see that cycle of gears like going out for a gold horde and coming back with The One Ring. What they don't realize is that that wasn't a good thing, as evidenced by what Bilbo looked like eventually.

Note that to an extent tryng out gear and returning them is unavoidable, what I'm saying here is that people could just use EQ for minor tweaks but no, "let's try that $500 cryo cable on this $500 headphone."

What I mean is...(and I'm inexperienced) why can't you just get any high end can and EQ it to sound how you want to to. Lets say for this examples sake...a high end can that you know has what it takes to perform well from low to high. Where is the line drawn? maybe there is a pair of headphones you really really like...but you hear that they run a bit siblant. In what situation do you say "I'm not gonna get those"...or "im gonna get those and eq them to my liking". Sorry if this is coming out a bit messy. I am just trying to understand the relationship between a high end cans "native sound" and the implementation of eq'ing.

Audiophools like doing things the hard way. Like people who want to stick with a stick shift when clutch pedal-less paddle shift systems shift a lot faster and require less heel-toe work to keep the revs up because Ferrari already programmed their systems over a decade ago to basically just work on a manual gearbox, or how Porsche now has PDK - Porschedoppelkuplung - a dual clutch gearbox. It should just be a matter of whether a particular car actually has a good paddle shift system instead of a glorified interface for its auto tranny (like the old Porsche automatics with the shifter buttons likely to confuse some schmuck who just bought one because it looks like the volume control for the stereo).

Get a headphone with the smoothest response you can afford, then EQ peaks on it.

For those who are experienced in EQ'ing higher end (and lower end) headphones to their liking, when you set your eyes on a pair of headphone you like and when your reading about their sound. In the higher end range, where does the line get drawn in terms of...choosing cans with a certain native sound and eq'ing it to your liking.

Note that EQ has its limits. It can't make one headphone sound completely like another headphone since EQ correction settings can't exactly cancel out the shape of the peak perfectly to get it perfectly flat much less mimic another headphone in totality. A cheap headphone with a graph that looks more like what you'd see on a hospital's monitors, or basically following the shape of shark's teeth, isn't going to be easily EQ'd flat like the HE400i from 1000hz down.

On top of that, the way some headphones are made positions the drivers differently from your more common designs - the HD800, T1, T5P, Qualia, etc - position the drivers ahead of the ear canals at an angle, like the toe-in on speakers. So even among decent headphones you can't just get an HD600 and EQ it to totally simulate the HD800 sound.

Still, the thing is, get the headphone with the smoothest response curve you can afford, and then use EQ to polish it up a little bit.

A personal scenario for me is. I've spent so much time researching cans for the past few days, looking for something I am really going to enjoy in my price range. I listen to mostly hip hop, but I listen to many other genres also. EVERY can has a major downside to SOMEONE. So at some point the leap has to be taken. Reviews just won't do it. I really like the reputation that the dt770 pro's have and they are in my price range. Everything about them sounds good except for.......plenty of people have said they can be sibiliant and fatiguing in the high end...which I don't like. If I turn in another direction and choose another pair of headphones, there will be another major downside. So I just basically spending wayy too much time reading about headphones, and I'm not an audiophile (but i appreciate quality sound). And its 5 am.

Use an EQ cut where the DT770 has a peak.

 

[ProtegeManiac]

So there is EQ. Many people swear buy it. It almost seems like a no brainier. So I have a few questions here:

Why not EQ?...and good reason not to?

Withing audiophile circles, the main problem with EQ use is that audiophiles would rather do things the hard and imprecise way and EQ the sound through anything other than EQ, like:

1. Warmifying boombasticators instead of actual amplifiers
2. Warm tubes for their warmifying boombasticators
3. Cryo-treated gold cables with some kind of fancy geometry selling for more than the monthly minimum wage to warmify and boombasticate the sound even more

And sometimes the combinations just don't work out as well as just picking the precise center frequency on a peak and trimming it, so they sell gear, buy new gear, try new gear, sell some gear, try some more...all because they see it as an Unexpected Journey. They see that cycle of gears like going out for a gold horde and coming back with The One Ring. What they don't realize is that that wasn't a good thing, as evidenced by what Bilbo looked like eventually.

Note that to an extent tryng out gear and returning them is unavoidable, what I'm saying here is that people could just use EQ for minor tweaks but no, "let's try that $500 cryo cable on this $500 headphone."

What I mean is...(and I'm inexperienced) why can't you just get any high end can and EQ it to sound how you want to to. Lets say for this examples sake...a high end can that you know has what it takes to perform well from low to high. Where is the line drawn? maybe there is a pair of headphones you really really like...but you hear that they run a bit siblant. In what situation do you say "I'm not gonna get those"...or "im gonna get those and eq them to my liking". Sorry if this is coming out a bit messy. I am just trying to understand the relationship between a high end cans "native sound" and the implementation of eq'ing.

Audiophools like doing things the hard way. Like people who want to stick with a stick shift when clutch pedal-less paddle shift systems shift a lot faster and require less heel-toe work to keep the revs up because Ferrari already programmed their systems over a decade ago to basically just work on a manual gearbox, or how Porsche now has PDK - Porschedoppelkuplung - a dual clutch gearbox. It should just be a matter of whether a particular car actually has a good paddle shift system instead of a glorified interface for its auto tranny (like the old Porsche automatics with the shifter buttons likely to confuse some schmuck who just bought one because it looks like the volume control for the stereo).

Get a headphone with the smoothest response you can afford, then EQ peaks on it.

For those who are experienced in EQ'ing higher end (and lower end) headphones to their liking, when you set your eyes on a pair of headphone you like and when your reading about their sound. In the higher end range, where does the line get drawn in terms of...choosing cans with a certain native sound and eq'ing it to your liking.

Note that EQ has its limits. It can't make one headphone sound completely like another headphone since EQ correction settings can't exactly cancel out the shape of the peak perfectly to get it perfectly flat much less mimic another headphone in totality. A cheap headphone with a graph that looks more like what you'd see on a hospital's monitors, or basically following the shape of shark's teeth, isn't going to be easily EQ'd flat like the HE400i from 1000hz down.

On top of that, the way some headphones are made positions the drivers differently from your more common designs - the HD800, T1, T5P, Qualia, etc - position the drivers ahead of the ear canals at an angle, like the toe-in on speakers. So even among decent headphones you can't just get an HD600 and EQ it to totally simulate the HD800 sound.

Still, the thing is, get the headphone with the smoothest response curve you can afford, and then use EQ to polish it up a little bit.

A personal scenario for me is. I've spent so much time researching cans for the past few days, looking for something I am really going to enjoy in my price range. I listen to mostly hip hop, but I listen to many other genres also. EVERY can has a major downside to SOMEONE. So at some point the leap has to be taken. Reviews just won't do it. I really like the reputation that the dt770 pro's have and they are in my price range. Everything about them sounds good except for.......plenty of people have said they can be sibiliant and fatiguing in the high end...which I don't like. If I turn in another direction and choose another pair of headphones, there will be another major downside. So I just basically spending wayy too much time reading about headphones, and I'm not an audiophile (but i appreciate quality sound). And its 5 am.

Use an EQ cut where the DT770 has a peak.