[Whitigir]

Guys, please join me, and help many out there for this question. There are like a forever debate on this topic....even between me and friends.

Some believe that you are cheating when you use the EQ. Others believe if you dont use it, you dont hear all the music the way you want because each and one of use is unique, and the speakers or drivers one listen to is also different from others.

I am in the second group. To me, the differences are the capable sources, devices, and speakers or headphones drivers VS the incapable one

Please, can someone jump in with more sound and music science ? Thanks

 

[castleofargh]

I take it as paint. in the hands of a 5years old, you end up having to redo your walls. in the hand of somebody who knows what he's doing, you can do almost anything.
but of course some paint can be better than others ^_^.

 

[dprimary]

I'm in the first group for listening (I was a recording engineer for 20 years production is whole other thing) I almost always listen to everything flat and bypassed. That is way it was intended. If you as listener start to drastically EQing  the song, either something is wrong with your system or you are changing the "vision" for the song ...if that makes sense.
 
For a rock-a-billy album we intended for the bass to boomy, loose, and uncontrolled kind sounding like it was coming out a jukebox - not really hi-fidelity. Even the vocals we slightly distorted letting them break-up like an old Johnny Cash album.
For Industrial, hard and punchy bass and drums likely very compressed and distorted vocals.
Handel's Messiah,  No compression, no effects, little if any eq it is all about microphone placement and selection.
 
Hopefully any mistakes are caught by the mastering engineers before it is released. Often it explained to the mastering engineer what the goal is with the song or album. 
 
Do people really EQ every song? Each song, album, artist would be different. If you have a set EQ that never changes then is a problem with the system or the room.
Graphic EQ's are absolutely horrible and useless, the only place they are ever used in production is live sound for the monitors and even then most people moved to parametric EQ 15 years ago.
For consumer playback 2-3 dB of cut is all anyone should need unless something is very wrong.

 

[Whitigir]

each speakers and or brand sound different. Isnt this one of the reason why the consumer shall adjust the eq so each of the music became more detailed, and to bring out some freq they personaly like, but the speakers was not producing enough of it ?

 

[castleofargh]

  I'm in the first group for listening (I was a recording engineer for 20 years production is whole other thing) I almost always listen to everything flat and bypassed. That is way it was intended. If you as listener start to drastically EQing  the song, either something is wrong with your system or you are changing the "vision" for the song ...if that makes sense.
 
For a rock-a-billy album we intended for the bass to boomy, loose, and uncontrolled kind sounding like it was coming out a jukebox - not really hi-fidelity. Even the vocals we slightly distorted letting them break-up like an old Johnny Cash album.
For Industrial, hard and punchy bass and drums likely very compressed and distorted vocals.
Handel's Messiah,  No compression, no effects, little if any eq it is all about microphone placement and selection.
 
Hopefully any mistakes are caught by the mastering engineers before it is released. Often it explained to the mastering engineer what the goal is with the song or album. 
 
Do people really EQ every song? Each song, album, artist would be different. If you have a set EQ that never changes then is a problem with the system or the room.
Graphic EQ's are absolutely horrible and useless, the only place they are ever used in production is live sound for the monitors and even then most people moved to parametric EQ 15 years ago.
For consumer playback 2-3 dB of cut is all anyone should need unless something is very wrong.

that's very fine if all your gears are dead flat, with a treated room for speakers. but how many consumers have well placed speakers in an ideal room?
and for headphones... well just look at the frequency response graphs of most, and you see that you will never get what the mastering engineer intended if you let it be. I've got some IEMs that have as much as 20db variations compared to another IEM. without EQ I'm screwed. even something as acclaimed as the hd800, I would need to remove between 5 and maybe up to 8db in the trebles to stop it from sounding overly bright. sure many people take your logic, still dislike the signature, and get lost into some overly warm and distorted tube amp just for the sake of saying "I don't EQ" making a lot more damage to the original track in the process.
I really concur with your philosophy, but at least in my cheapo world, without EQ it's very much impossible.

 

[Whitigir]

Well said above sir. Thank you ! That is why i only see wheather the speakers or iems are capable of handling the Eq without distortion or reduce the power on other ranges..

 

[bigshot]

It's easier to do without EQ in headphones than it is with speakers. You don't have the effect of room acoustics with headphones, so you can pick cans that sound right and leave them be. But when every set of speakers sounds different, and they sound even more different when you put them in a room, the variables start to pile up. In general you do as much as you can optimizing the response through room treatment and arranging the seating in the room. Once you've gone as far as you can with that, you EQ the rest of the way. With speakers in the home, I can't imagine not having to EQ a little at least.

 

[dprimary]

If you can use at least a parametric eq, on your system then you can improve things. I do recommend you cut bumps in response rather then boost valleys. A thing to remember is you are dealing with signals that have already been brought up to 0dBfs, so you should be clipping if you boost any thing. It is likely your EQ is shifting the level down something like 10 db for processing and then shifting back up. In consumer electronics and software it is hard to tell what exactly is going on sometimes. In professional DSP you can add a meter anywhere in the processing to look at what is happening so you have a better idea what is going on. Professional DSP does the same trick of shifting things up and down to process.
 
Graphic EQs are very course adjustment, the chances the frequency you need to adjust landing on a ISO center is very slim, without considering the bandwidth of the filter.
 
I have to admit I don't fully understand why headphones have such horrible response measurements, it would take 20 bands of filters to correct even the good ones, then would they still sound good?

 

[Pazz]

I've gone through the pain staking process of equalizing low-mid end headphones to as perfect to neutrality as I can. In my opinion it's worth it, even if you do have to reduce the overall level by sometimes many dB, and even if you have to spend around 30 or more bands to do so. 

 

[vid]

I like the argument that using eq is like cheating. I'd assume these people are also considering the policies of refusing to type on a keyboard, never operating a phone, and always having their root canals without anesthetics.

 

[Whitigir]

I like the argument that using eq is like cheating. I'd assume these people are also considering the policies of refusing to type on a keyboard, never operating a phone, and always having their root canals without anesthetics.

Agreed, even each person hearing is different than others, and also tastes. Unless everyone was born equal with everything the same...

 

[bigshot]

No two headphones sound the same. There are often audible differences between different copies of the same make and model due to manufacturing variability. Most manufacturers' tolerances are +/- 3dB.

 

[Koukol]

I bought a professional EQ from a musical equipment shop and haven't regretted it one second.
I mostly have it bypassed but there are times when I need it.
 
I find I use it more often with my AKG 601's which have a slight upper mid bump and are light on bass.
When needed I reduce the bump and boost the bass...i love it.

 

[kramer5150]

I prefer a slight 2-3 db boost at 32Hz to help compensate a little for the deep rolloff on all my cans.  Its nothing excessive really, room acoustics and venue resonance in live recordings.  Subtle at most.

 

[Spyro]

I am an IEM guy and absolutely EQ'ing is a good thing.  Players are different.  Tips play a factor.  Efficiency/amping is a factor.   Throw all three of these things together and it is quite a great thing that you can "tailor" the best sound for you.
 
Let's not kid ourselves, flat/off EQ response straight into your ears may be quite different than what was heard in the studio.  This was most apparent to me when trying out Etymotic products.