[Jose Hidalgo]

Would you be so kind and share your EQ settings please?

I haven't seen any Nighthawk Carbon EQ settings yet (I'm actively looking for them), but there are several EQ settings for the regular Nighthawk which has pretty much the same sound signature, so "good enough". Here are the InnerFidelity's EQ settings for the regular Nighthawk, as displayed on their website :

Parametric EQs

In case of using parametric equalizer, apply preamp of -7.2dB and build filters manually with these parameters. The first 5 filters can be used independently. When using independent subset of filters, apply preamp of -7.2dB.

Type Fc Q Gain
Peaking 22 Hz 0.85 -2.1 dB
Peaking 204 Hz 0.51 -6.2 dB
Peaking 959 Hz 1.46 4.2 dB
Peaking 2780 Hz 2.19 5.2 dB
Peaking 4424 Hz 2.78 5.6 dB
Peaking 5017 Hz 5.46 1.3 dB
Peaking 7884 Hz 1.2 -1.8 dB
Peaking 9037 Hz 5.48 2.6 dB
Peaking 11553 Hz 1.11 3.0 dB
Peaking 19777 Hz 0.46 -9.5 dB


Fixed Band EQs

In case of using fixed band (also called graphic) equalizer, apply preamp of -6.9dB (if available) and set gains manually with these parameters.

Type Fc Q Gain
Peaking 31 Hz 1.41 -2.3 dB
Peaking 62 Hz 1.41 -0.7 dB
Peaking 125 Hz 1.41 -4.4 dB
Peaking 250 Hz 1.41 -5.5 dB
Peaking 500 Hz 1.41 -1.7 dB
Peaking 1000 Hz 1.41 3.3 dB
Peaking 2000 Hz 1.41 1.3 dB
Peaking 4000 Hz 1.41 6.1 dB
Peaking 8000 Hz 1.41 0.0 dB
Peaking 16000 Hz 1.41 -4.7 dB

If you want to preserve the original bass level of the Nighthawk, just discard the 2 first filters (Parametric EQ) or the 5 first filters (Fixed Band EQ). And don't forget to apply preamp !

EDIT - here's an even more precise PEQ for preserving the original bass level of the Nighthawk :

Type Fc Q Gain
Peaking 740 Hz 1.10 -1.7 dB
Peaking 959 Hz 1.46 4.45 dB
Peaking 2780 Hz 2.19 5.15 dB
Peaking 4424 Hz 2.78 5.6 dB
Peaking 5017 Hz 5.46 1.3 dB
Peaking 7884 Hz 1.2 -1.8 dB
Peaking 9037 Hz 5.48 2.6 dB
Peaking 11553 Hz 1.11 3.0 dB
Peaking 19777 Hz 0.46 -9.5 dB

 

[HipHopScribe]

I haven't seen any Nighthawk Carbon EQ settings yet (I'm actively looking for them), but there are several EQ settings for the regular Nighthawk which has pretty much the same sound signature, so "good enough". Here are the InnerFidelity's EQ settings for the regular Nighthawk, as displayed on their website :


If you want to preserve the original bass level of the Nighthawk, just discard the 2 first filters (Parametric EQ) or the 5 first filters (Fixed Band EQ). And don't forget to apply preamp !

EDIT - here's an even more precise PEQ for preserving the original bass level of the Nighthawk :

The only difference between the original Nighthawks and the Carbons is the color and the earpads, so EQ settings for the original should be a good place to start. Might just need slight adjustment to compensate for the sound changes caused by different pads

 

[jaco61]

These are my adjustments in Apo Eq with shure 1540 pads, if you use stockpads you probably would like to reduce 150 and 300 hz a little bit more to -5 / -4 db depending on taste.

 

[Jose Hidalgo]

The only difference between the original Nighthawks and the Carbons is the color and the earpads

Are you sure about that ? Because Audioquest seems to say otherwise : http://personal.audioquest.com/nighthawk-carbon

" A more sophisticated, more mature version of the award-winning NightHawk, NightHawk Carbon boasts several **acoustic**, ergonomic, and cosmetic refinements, adds a second pair of earpads, and includes a more versatile, durable cable—all while retaining its predecessor’s exceedingly low distortion, unsurpassed comfort, and naturally beautiful sound. "

 

[HipHopScribe]

Are you sure about that ? Because Audioquest seems to say otherwise : http://personal.audioquest.com/nighthawk-carbon

" A more sophisticated, more mature version of the award-winning NightHawk, NightHawk Carbon boasts several **acoustic**, ergonomic, and cosmetic refinements, adds a second pair of earpads, and includes a more versatile, durable cable—all while retaining its predecessor’s exceedingly low distortion, unsurpassed comfort, and naturally beautiful sound. "

Yes, I'm sure. You can probably find an old post by Skylar Gray somewhere here to confirm. The only acoustic refinement (or ergonomic refinement for that matter) were the two new earpads designs, which were also released for sale separately for owners of the original Nighthawk colorway either before or at the same time the Carbon came out. These did measurably change the sound, at least subtly. There was also a new cable, since the original cables were crap (although the new cable was crap too), and I'm sure some people think that made a difference in sound too. Anything else is just marketing speak.

 

[HipHopScribe]

Here:

The sound signature is exactly the same. Based on some small refinements that we've made to a handful of the parts, we have noticed tighter manufacturing tolerances and consistency of the new NightHawk Carbon. All things being equal (A/B NightHawk Wood vs NightHawk Carbon with same earpads and cable and same amount of break-in), I don't expect anyone to hear a difference, but I may be surprised by forthcoming press and user reviews.

But the new cable is an improvement, and the extra, alternative set of ultra-suede earpads makes it possible to tailor the new NightHawk Carbon to personal preference.

Both the new cable and earpads will be available separately so existing NightHawk owners can get in on the fun.

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/int...adphones-from-audioquest.824543/post-12977187

He did claim "tighter manufacturing tolerances" which probably just means less unit to unit variation in practice. Also a headband change, which I forgot

 

[Jose Hidalgo]

Great ! That settles it once and for all.
Now we just have to hope for Oratory1990 to measure them, because so far he hasn't been able to get his hands on them (if anybody is willing to lend a pair for measuring purposes, he's in Austria).
That would presumably give us a better EQ than the existing ones.

 

[Tano]

Great ! That settles it once and for all.
Now we just have to hope for Oratory1990 to measure them, because so far he hasn't been able to get his hands on them (if anybody is willing to lend a pair for measuring purposes, he's in Austria).
That would presumably give us a better EQ than the existing ones.

I think that the Autoeq preset for the Nighthawk is by crinacle and it works really good, better mids and much more clarity in the highs. The only bad thing is that the bass is way too low with this eq, taking out the punch that the Nighthawks got, but you can leave it on default.

 

[Jose Hidalgo]

I think that the Autoeq preset for the Nighthawk is by crinacle and it works really good, better mids and much more clarity in the highs.

Jaako from AutoEQ is himself saying that Oratory1990's EQ presets are to be preferred whenever possible, because his measurements are more accurate :

oratory1990 measurements have been done on Gras 43AG and 43AC couplers, the same which were used to develop Harman target responses by Olive et al. and therefore use Harman target responses for the equalization targets. These results are recommended over all other measurements because of this reason.

Hence, it's important that Oratory1990 can finally measure a pair of Nighthawks, like he has already done on hundreds of other headphones. Why not the Nighthawks after all this time ?

The only bad thing is that the bass is way too low with this eq, taking out the punch that the Nighthawks got, but you can leave it on default.

Hence the modified EQ that I just suggested on this page. It's basically the AutoEQ preset, slightly tweaked to restore the Nighthawk's original bass level. I have used DDMF IIEQPro's graphical interface to make sure that the new curve remained identical to the AutoEQ curve on the rest of the frequency range (1 KHz and above).

 

[petitpierre]

i just received mine that i put in break in.out of the box,i didn't find them bassy at all.i just hope they will open cause i find the soundstage narrow.but for 249 euros i'm happy with my purchase

 

[xRaptorxPunisher]

i just received mine that i put in break in.out of the box,i didn't find them bassy at all.i just hope they will open cause i find the soundstage narrow.but for 249 euros i'm happy with my purchase

The Nighthawks are extremely mid bassy, they're very narrow sounding headphones if you wanted more open sounding buying more sealed type headphones isn't the way too go, they're not going open up because they're closed headphones with only a small bit of opening in the grill for reflections and "controlled air flow" for the bass.

 

[vodkadebugger]

The Nighthawks are extremely mid bassy, they're very narrow sounding headphones if you wanted more open sounding buying more sealed type headphones isn't the way too go, they're not going open up because they're closed headphones with only a small bit of opening in the grill for reflections and "controlled air flow" for the bass.

I wouldn't call the NHs very narrow. I'd call the HE1000SEs that. Nighthawks are considerably wider than those and they're also wider than HD600s (which I would also not consider "very narrow").

 

[xRaptorxPunisher]

I wouldn't call the NHs very narrow. I'd call the HE1000SEs that. Nighthawks are considerably wider than those and they're also wider than HD600s (which I would also not consider "very narrow").

The HE1000se shares the same super wide sound as the HE-5XX, Ananda, Arya, massive sounding, ethereal. I disagree the HD600 is considerably wider, open sounding. The Nighthawk sounds like you can't breath, escape, create distance, some like that but it gets too much for me personally/ That said I don't find the HD600 open sounding in terms of distance from your ear, the 3-5k peaks make it forward. NH dips this area so technically should give you a stage perception, the mid bass and closed n housing makes the NH have it closed sound though. The Hifiman line rely on being incredibly open and large surface area.

 

[kman1211]

The HE1000se shares the same super wide sound as the HE-5XX, Ananda, Arya, massive sounding, ethereal.

Not everyone perceives soundstage and imaging the same. I always found the Nighthawks decently wide, especially with the microsuede pads. Soundstage and imaging were never a complaint I had with them. They are more closed than open but that never altered my perception of width on them.

 

[xRaptorxPunisher]

Not everyone perceives soundstage and imaging the same. I always found the Nighthawks decently wide, in fact mid-bassy headphones often sound wider to me personally than more linear headphones.

Soundstage isn't really a technical term because these are headphones. It more correct to suggest things like open housings, more surface area lack of dampening. People find Audeze headphones closed in, why/ because it's semi open, it has completely sealed front volume, uses materials for the back opening. Lets take the HE-5XX as an example, the driver has on dampening, you are just listening to the driver no heavy materials, this is why many perceive a speaker, open like presentation, massive drivers = more surface area for sounds to not crash.

You do get many people confusing upper mid recessions for soundstage, i.e DT990, HD800, I can understand why, less surface area, smaller drivers, more dampening but then you lose out on vocal depth, presence.