[329161]

Just wanted to get an idea on how much folks use EQ for headphones.
Feel free to say which headphone (s) you use and ,if so, how you EQ them, or not as the case may be.

 

[329161]

One can , which comes to mind, that I leave untouched is the lcdx. With other famous ones...pm3, hd6xx illI give a little treble air at 16k.
Hd700, 800 illI cut at 6-10 K by a couple db. Otherwise I like to boost bass to Harmon levels generally.

 

[Geezer Rock 001]

I started with a Loki and now use a Jolida FOZ SS-X to fine tune each CD or music file. That allows me to get the right balance of bass and treble for my choice of headphones and the music.

imo the FOZ has really enhanced my listening sessions.

 

[Laurenesi]

I don’t, but I’m thinking about purchasing the Schiit Loki (or something similar) for some analogue fine tuning.

If someone has a recommendation for any good budget EQ other than the Loki, available in NL/EU, please let me know!

 

[megabigeye]

Does bass boost count? I added +6dB from 50Hz down on my old qJAYS. Made the bass really pretty nice.

Other than bass boost, the only cans I've ever felt the need to EQ are my PM-3: +2.5dB at 250-500Hz and +6dB at from 8kHz up. I stopped doing that, though, when I realized that bit perfect mode in UAPP makes a noticeable difference that outweighs the benefit of EQ. I've considered getting a Loki, but I kind of doubt it'd be precise enough for my needs.

 

[Bern2]

Yes..I use Sonarworks for the HD800. I find it unlistenable without EQ.
Also manually EQ the Sony Z1R to remove some of the mid/upper bass, and have added a Loki...but usually only bump 20hz...depending on the recording.

Bern

 

[329161]

Yes..I use Sonarworks for the HD800. I find it unlistenable without EQ.
Also manually EQ the Sony Z1R to remove some of the mid/upper bass, and have added a Loki...but usually only bump 20hz...depending on the recording.

Bern

Sonarworks is pretty good, but curious. The eq curves seem to make most headphones sound very similar as if this is the most preferred signature for most people. Is this the Harmon Response?

 

[Bern2]

Sonarworks is pretty good, but curious. The eq curves seem to make most headphones sound very similar as if this is the most preferred signature for most people. Is this the Harmon Response?

IIRC it's not Harman...but SW own curve they've come up with. But the premise is the same. I really like how they incorporate bass and tilt controls to allow adjusting for various recordings. I would not have kept the HD800 otherwise.

 

[329161]

IIRC it's not Harman...but SW own curve they've come up with. But the premise is the same. I really like how they incorporate bass and tilt controls to allow adjusting for various recordings. I would not have kept the HD800 otherwise.

I think the 800s version is a great improvement if you don't want to eq, but the bass is a bit looser than the original 800, so I'm not sure which one to get. I'm thinking the original 800 should respond to eq with much better results....cheaper too.

 

[SonyFan121]

I hate EQ, lol. There is allot of misunderstanding regarding EQ, many people think that applying EQ changes the sound signature of their headphones but don't realise that it's just software. They are not changing the actual sound signature of the headphones, they are just altering certain output frequencies of DSP(digital sound program) software. I just don't get it, if people feel then need to EQ their headphones, then they should sell them and/or buy another headphone that they will like the sound of and not want to EQ.

 

[Bern2]

I hate EQ, lol. There is allot of misunderstanding regarding EQ, many people think that applying EQ changes the sound signature of their headphones but don't realise that it's just software. They are not changing the actual sound signature of the headphones, they are just altering certain output frequencies of DSP(digital sound program) software. I just don't get it, if people feel then need to EQ their headphones, then they should sell them and/or buy another headphone that they will like the sound of and not want to EQ.

Agree with your premise...but for me the (inability) to audition before purchase makes it tough.

 

[Miru]

I rarely EQ, if anything I try it to fix something in a headphone that I don't like. Usually that doesn't work and I end up selling/returning them. I feel like EQ is pretty limited although I never tried something like Audeze's line up which I heard takes EQ well. Like if really try to make a headphone bassier and to have some impact while at stock they barely have any, it just starts to feel unnatural after a 3-4 db to me and doesn't end up working.

 

[catscratch]

Always EQ. Haven't heard anything that didn't need it yet. All full size headphones to me have a resonance around 7-7.5khz and need a dip there, and most headphones are nowhere near linear enough in FR and need a bit of correction on top of that. However I try to use headphones that are as linear as headphones get so I need to EQ less. With the HD650, I just fix the outer ear resonance and everything else is fine. With the L700, there are a couple more small peaks in the mids and highs but overall they're fairly linear too. With the Clear, there's a lot more to be fixed as the highs are full of peaks, though none of them are especially egregious. I would say that if you need more than 10db worth of EQ somewhere, get better headphones.

A good tool for EQing is using a test tone generator to listen to the frequency response directly. You can do that with a sine sweep too (or white/pink noise, etc) but a test tone generator with a frequency slider like the one found here is a much more controlled way to do listening. This way, not only do you hear how the headphones perform on your head and not just some measurement rig, you also learn to correlate how measurement rigs compare to your own hearing, and realize which sites post measurements which align with you, and which don't.

Also you get to test the limits of your hearing and detect any hearing problems you might have, which is very useful.

 

[Bern2]

I think the 800s version is a great improvement if you don't want to eq, but the bass is a bit looser than the original 800, so I'm not sure which one to get. I'm thinking the original 800 should respond to eq with much better results....cheaper too.

The 800 does handle EQ well...one item I forgot to mention about SW...you can "mix in" the amount of correction you wish to use. From 100% correction down to 0. I'm actually going to send in my Sony Z1R's one of these days/months and have them calibrated. (I keep telling myself that..just haven't done it yet)

 

[329161]

I hate EQ, lol. There is allot of misunderstanding regarding EQ, many people think that applying EQ changes the sound signature of their headphones but don't realise that it's just software. They are not changing the actual sound signature of the headphones, they are just altering certain output frequencies of DSP(digital sound program) software. I just don't get it, if people feel then need to EQ their headphones, then they should sell them and/or buy another headphone that they will like the sound of and not want to EQ.

In a perfect world, true, but how many headphones out there match your taste absolutely perfectly? For me for eg the resolution of something like the hd800 and it's driver are class leading. Just a shame it was tuned with a treble for 80 year old people.
Also re: digital eq, what difference does it make if it's only changing the sound with dsp if at the end of the day the sound is more pleasing to you? YMMV natch.