[fufula]

I'd like to run Equalizer APO with my LCD2Cs, because the right EQ can make them sound like heaven. How do you guys choose between the two? Is bit-perfect playback worth not being able to to EQ your headphones? If I make sure no other audio streams are sent to my DAC, am I still somehow decreasing the sound quality by using the default windows mixer on Windows 11? Or is bit-perfect mostly audiophile snake oil? Oh and I pretty much exclusively use Tidal nowadays, so no Foobar + fancy VSTs for me.

 

[Craft Ears]

I'd like to run Equalizer APO with my LCD2Cs, because the right EQ can make them sound like heaven. How do you guys choose between the two? Is bit-perfect playback worth not being able to to EQ your headphones? If I make sure no other audio streams are sent to my DAC, am I still somehow decreasing the sound quality by using the default windows mixer on Windows 11? Or is bit-perfect mostly audiophile snake oil? Oh and I pretty much exclusively use Tidal nowadays, so no Foobar + fancy VSTs for me.

There is no right answer. Play around with the EQ, find a setting that works for you. Then, switch to bit-perfect. See which option sounds better. Try to explain to yourself why. It's a good exercise

 

[Andrew_WOT]

Perhaps the better exercise is to see if you can hear the difference between exclusive bit perfect like ASIO or WASAPI exclusive and shared mode with sound resampled by Kerner mixer.
If not, EQ away, nothing else can hurt you.

 

[sajunky]

I'd like to run Equalizer APO with my LCD2Cs, because the right EQ can make them sound like heaven. (1)How do you guys choose between the two? (2)Is bit-perfect playback worth not being able to to EQ your headphones? (3)If I make sure no other audio streams are sent to my DAC, am I still somehow decreasing the sound quality by using the default windows mixer on Windows 11? (4)Or is bit-perfect mostly audiophile snake oil? Oh and I pretty much exclusively use Tidal nowadays, so no Foobar + fancy VSTs for me.

1. Bit-perfect transfers. When using EQ in the app, my transfers are still bit-perfect, so there is no dilemma.

2. Find yourself. Try to find the app that can do #1. It is possible to redirect/capture stream from Tidal, but I can't help, not using Tidal. Qobuz is better.

3. Yes, definitely for Win10. Don't expect miracles in Win11, it would be loud around if system architecture is changed. However system mixer is degrading very little when using other platorms (Linux or MAC).

4. Find yourself using local files, purchased from the audiophile grade label. Streamed music is heavily watermarked, sound is degraded in the process. There are are free samples available from various sources for download. If you still can't find a difference, you are listening to a junk music or EDM. In the later case comparison may bring unexpected results, as original sound doesn't exist in a nature and our brain can only give a judgement how much is pleasant. Some distortions can be pleasant, unintended during music production. In other words chose a natural music, take two weeks time to detoxify your brain before jumping to a conclusion. If you still can't find a difference, then disregard all above.

 

[Roseval]

Is bit-perfect playback worth not being able to to EQ your headphones?

No. Bit perfect is most of the time not understood.
People think it the holy grail but it isn't.
Bit perfect won't increase sound quality. No surprise as when you send a source unaltered to a DAC, quality wont improve, it remains the same!.
What you want is best possible sound quality.
This can be obtained by using EQ. When done right you improve sound quality and you are by design as bit imperfect as hell.

The correct use of bit perfect is to avoid the operating system to meddle with the sound.

Like any other OS, Win has a mixer so al audio streams are converted to float, mixed (even if only 1 steam is running), dithered and converted back to integer.
If you still have a 16 bit DAC (or are as silly to choose 16 bit in the audio panel), bit 16 is dithered. This is audible.
However as most DAC's are 24 or 32, dithering bit 24 (at -144 dBFS) is way below the noise floor of your playback chain. So max out the bit depth in the win audio panel and you are fine.

If Win resamples and it does for any audio stream having a sample rate different from what is set in the win audio panel and the signal is very close to 0 dBFS, you get distortion because the Win Limiter kicks in. The solution is very simple, use the pre-amp of Equalizer APO and lower the signal with 4 dB and the limiter will never kick in.
Observe when mixing or lowering the volume using the pre-amp, you are not bit perfect but you won't hear any degradetion.

Technically best imho is using WASAPI/Exclusive. You bypasses the Win audio completely. However, you must be able to apply the desired EQ in the application and you msut do so for each app using WASAPI/Exclusive. You do get automatic sample rate switching.

However, using WASAPI/Shared allows you to use Equalizer APO. You have the comfort of having only 1 place to apply the EQ.
The long of it can be found here: https://www.thewelltemperedcomputer.com/SW/Windows/SRC.htm
The very long: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...nding-the-windows-audio-quality-debate.19438/

 

[sajunky]

Like any other OS, Win has a mixer so al audio streams are converted to float, mixed (even if only 1 steam is running), dithered and converted back to integer.

Not. Windows mixer use 32-bit integer. Floating point 32-bit is used in Linux and MAC OS. Foobar 2000 internal format is the same.

 

[Roseval]

Windows mixer use 32-bit integer

Interesting. I always thought this to be the case with the K-mixer, not with the current one.
Any pointers to relevant documentation?

 

[sajunky]

Interesting. I always thought this to be the case with the K-mixer, not with the current one.
Any pointers to relevant documentation?

You are right, K-mixer still sticks in my memory. In fact my audio player still runs on XP. This is old laptop generating very little noise, a new one didn't sound good on USB port.

In Vista it is changed, but implementation is crappy in many aspects, so restrain from using Windows mixer still remains. A link shows measurements of Windows 10 mixer, scroll to the bottom.

 

[castleofargh]

I'd like to run Equalizer APO with my LCD2Cs, because the right EQ can make them sound like heaven. How do you guys choose between the two? Is bit-perfect playback worth not being able to to EQ your headphones? If I make sure no other audio streams are sent to my DAC, am I still somehow decreasing the sound quality by using the default windows mixer on Windows 11? Or is bit-perfect mostly audiophile snake oil? Oh and I pretty much exclusively use Tidal nowadays, so no Foobar + fancy VSTs for me.

The secret magical answer is "it depends". In most cases, I'd say that getting a FR that's a better fit for your own ears+the headphone is so much more significant than the false belief of keeping a bit perfect signal (at best it's untouched a little further, a DAC is still going to play with the signal in a number of ways and that's fine). But:
- Most people don't really know what they're doing when using EQ, so the idea of improving things (objectively and subjectively) with EQ, strongly depends on what you'll do with said EQ.
- Sometimes, some crapware DSP can still be found associated with some soundcards. Some can be disabled with minimal to moderate efforts, and in rare cases, only bypassing the all thing with bitperfect solution will work. In such a rare scenario, bitperfect pathways save souls.

If you really care about controlling resampling, mixing, and unfortunate ghost DSP encounters, you can probably reroute Tidal toward some VST host using some so-called virtual cable https://vb-audio.com/Cable/index.htm , have an EQ as a VST applied in the VST host, then send the signal to your DAC. That way, you might control the audio path in a "bit perfect" way. You might still have to compromise on resampling if tracks come in varying resolutions. I'm not entirely sure, as my own use is only for peculiar testing purposes where I want the audio path to fail if it's silently resampled somewhere.

That method(virtual cable+VST host) is perhaps annoying enough to set up and use for you to decide, like a great many audiophiles, that EqAPO is great.

 

[Andrew_WOT]

the false belief of keeping a bit perfect signal

With all due respect that "false belief" is easily measurable and audible. OS Mixer resampling and volume control degrade the signal, there is no way around it, add to this additional sounds from other apps mixed into track in shared mode and you get one mess of a data going into DAC.

And unless you are a sound engineer that needs absolute neutral reference phones matching HK or whatever other target you are using, EQ is fixing the problem that does not exist in the first place, killing diversity and uniqueness of individual headsets, altering their sound signature away from what was intended by the manufacturer.

 

[castleofargh]

With all due respect that "false belief" is easily measurable and audible. OS Mixer resampling and volume control degrade the signal, there is no way around it, add to this additional sounds from other apps mixed into track in shared mode and you get one mess of a data going into DAC.

I explain what I meant right after that quote, and give examples of what can happen or what someone might wish to control in the rest of that same post.

And unless you are a sound engineer that needs absolute neutral reference phones matching HK or whatever other target you are using, EQ is fixing the problem that does not exist in the first place, killing diversity and uniqueness of individual headsets, altering their sound signature away from what was intended by the manufacturer.

Your own sense of balanced/neutral/preferred frequency response is based on how your own head alters sounds moving toward you in your life(and to some extent, on whatever you've been using to listen to music before). The manufacturer has no idea what those changes are on your head (not in detail, at least), so he can't correct for all of the changes that won't happen with headphones but are still expected by the brain. A manufacturer also can't exactly predict how your very personal ear shape will further affect the signal coming from the headphone. At best, a manufacturer can aim for some statistical target or listen to small group testing that have little to do with you, OP, or me.

EQ is helping mitigate a very real problem that affects almost everybody to some extent. Even disregarding psychoacoustics in favor of some desire to follow the manufacturer, at the very least you must accept how seal quality affects the amount of bass. The manufacturer doesn't know if you're skinny with a super edgy jaw line that leaves a gap below your ear, or if you have long hair, or wear glasses.
I'm not saying EQ solves everything in headphones. Even some of the FR issues can't be solved with EQ. But it sure can help for what I discussed above.

 

[Andrew_WOT]

How many EQ for anatomical ear/head shape, 99.9999% just grab Oratory one size fits all settings that align whatever FQ is measured on Test Fixture to Harman target.

 

[castleofargh]

The Harman papers suggest it's a good idea to start there for statistical reasons. It's an even better idea to look beyond it, just in case, as the target is supposed to satisfy "only" about 6 out of 10 listeners. Within those 6, several would probably enjoy a little fine-tuning and bass adjustment even more. And the 4 unlucky guys remaining, well they should also try and spend a week or 2 with it(in case of previous habituation to some weird headphone), if only to make sure once and for all that they want something else for themselves. It's still useful information on what to avoid ^_^.
Personally, I have a weird obsession for what goes on around 4kHz(relatively to lower freqs). It's a do-or-die area for me. I used to bitch about high treble energy a lot and horrible sounding 10 to 14kHz area in particular, but getting older has started to help solve that issue for me.