Earbud target curve tests
Oct 13, 2020 at 2:41 PM Post #31 of 315

waynes world

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jun 21, 2012
Posts
11,814
Likes
4,700
I'm also completely removing the bass rise (for clarity's sake.) I also figure if users want more base, they can put that in via eq. The bass tuner in wavelet is excellent.

There's less distortion with this release too. If you use the peq file, the preamp value is -7dB.

Unlocking those features costs more than the Nameless lol! I might end up doing it though.
 
Oct 13, 2020 at 2:56 PM Post #32 of 315

Sam L

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Sep 24, 2014
Posts
1,602
Likes
1,855
Location
San Francisco Bay Area
Appreciate the increased clarity here. Also noticed the mids are less shouty on some tracks (not that v1.3 is, was just comparing the two at a higher volume), probably due to the less treble roll-off. Sound stage is better too.
Ah yes, forgot to mention that, the mids are less shouty. I didn't expect that and I'm not sure why that ended up happening but I'm not complaining. :)

I really like how the monk 120 responds to compensation,pretty dramatic difference in my opinion.
 
Oct 13, 2020 at 2:57 PM Post #33 of 315

Sam L

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Sep 24, 2014
Posts
1,602
Likes
1,855
Location
San Francisco Bay Area
Unlocking those features costs more than the Nameless lol! I might end up doing it though.
Lol, so true... A reminder of the crazy value prop in these budget buds.
 
Oct 14, 2020 at 2:49 AM Post #34 of 315

onedvt

Head-Fier
Joined
Aug 18, 2020
Posts
94
Likes
50
Location
Equatoria
Ah yes, forgot to mention that, the mids are less shouty. I didn't expect that and I'm not sure why that ended up happening but I'm not complaining. :)

I really like how the monk 120 responds to compensation,pretty dramatic difference in my opinion.
Not complaining either! Great work, Sam.

I might be mistaken but did you by any chance make compensation files for the ME80?
 
Oct 14, 2020 at 7:26 PM Post #36 of 315

cappuchino

Previously known as sub30
Joined
Sep 25, 2020
Posts
576
Likes
994
Location
Avalon
@Sam L do you already have the PEQ for the Nameless (v1.4)? Excited to try it out.
 
Oct 14, 2020 at 8:58 PM Post #37 of 315

Sam L

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Sep 24, 2014
Posts
1,602
Likes
1,855
Location
San Francisco Bay Area
@Sam L where did you grab the harman and oratory curves from for the comparison? Or did you create your own .mdat files?
imported the curves from autoeq github then made my own .mdat files
 
Oct 27, 2020 at 6:28 AM Post #39 of 315

sarkar1990

New Head-Fier
Joined
Aug 30, 2020
Posts
15
Likes
12
Location
India
Hi Sam!

I am using the 1.1 version for the Rambo. Would love to try out the 1.4 target curve for the Rambo!

With the 1.1, I feel that the highs are sometimes too shrill. Also the bass becomes muddy in a few songs with a heavy bass line.
 
Oct 27, 2020 at 2:58 PM Post #40 of 315

Sam L

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Sep 24, 2014
Posts
1,602
Likes
1,855
Location
San Francisco Bay Area
10/27 update

I still haven't gotten around to setting up python on my laptop to continue the work of generating compensation files. Autoeq is picky with the exact version that it works well with. I need to set aside some time for some trial and error. I'm hoping to get things going in the next week or so.

Here is the most recent version of my earbuds target curve, v1.4:
sam target 1.4 vs 1.3.jpg
 
Oct 27, 2020 at 3:01 PM Post #41 of 315

Sam L

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Sep 24, 2014
Posts
1,602
Likes
1,855
Location
San Francisco Bay Area
Hi Sam!

I am using the 1.1 version for the Rambo. Would love to try out the 1.4 target curve for the Rambo!

With the 1.1, I feel that the highs are sometimes too shrill. Also the bass becomes muddy in a few songs with a heavy bass line.
Here you go!
 

Attachments

  • isn rambo 2 sam v1.4.txt
    1.3 KB · Views: 0
Oct 27, 2020 at 3:03 PM Post #42 of 315

Sam L

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Sep 24, 2014
Posts
1,602
Likes
1,855
Location
San Francisco Bay Area

Attachments

  • k_s nameless sam v1.4.txt
    1.3 KB · Views: 0
  • k_s nameless ParametricEQ v1.4 sam.txt
    422 bytes · Views: 0
Oct 27, 2020 at 3:04 PM Post #43 of 315

Sam L

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Sep 24, 2014
Posts
1,602
Likes
1,855
Location
San Francisco Bay Area
v1.4 ME80
 

Attachments

  • nicehck me80 sam v1.4.txt
    1.3 KB · Views: 0
Oct 27, 2020 at 3:22 PM Post #44 of 315

Sam L

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Sep 24, 2014
Posts
1,602
Likes
1,855
Location
San Francisco Bay Area
Hi Sam!

I am using the 1.1 version for the Rambo. Would love to try out the 1.4 target curve for the Rambo!

With the 1.1, I feel that the highs are sometimes too shrill. Also the bass becomes muddy in a few songs with a heavy bass line.
Totally agree with your observations. 1.1 was really a stab in the dark and didn't produce what I was looking for. v1.4 might be a bit too neutral, which some will appreciate. For version v1.5 I'll probably probably bring back a low shelf from 125hz. Just a tad. And I'll also probably offer two versions of 1.5 (one version with more bass and sub bass, the other more neutral).
 
Oct 27, 2020 at 6:43 PM Post #45 of 315

tgx78

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jul 29, 2011
Posts
2,408
Likes
8,432
Location
Vancouver, Canada
I tried your Ks Naneless PEQ values on my UAPP and liking it a lot. Only thing I tweaked was 120Hz region where I wanted a little bump. Mids to upper treble transition sounds very accurate to my ears. Better than my EQed AKG N400 which I considered one of more tonally correct sounding TWS in my possession.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top