Focal Elegia - what do you think?
Jul 27, 2020 at 6:53 AM Post #1,966 of 4,827
Given that Harman curve is literally based on an average of what people like, rather than some fundamental thing, I don’t care if oratory1990 designs headphones for a living, it doesn’t mean my ears will like his EQ adjustments to fit to a target curve which is an average of other people’s ears. 😅
 
Jul 27, 2020 at 7:09 AM Post #1,967 of 4,827
I don’t care if oratory1990 designs headphones for a living

I wrote that in answer to @passernger10000 's point that oratory1990's settings are weird, to point out that oratory1990 is not just some random guy who came up with an EQ setting, but rather an industry insider with lots of experience on the subject matter.

As for the Harman curve, "an average of what people like" is a bit of an oversimplification. Here's a interesting passage oratory1990 wrote on the topic:

Enter a scientist named Sean Olive currently employed at Harman. His hypothesis was that neither the Free Field nor the Diffuse Field curve were "correct" (read: Neither were ideal), since both the concept of FF and DF are very abstract and don't happen when listneing to music. He proposed another way of creating a target curve:
Placing a pair of good speakers in a "regular" listening room similar to the control rooms of recording and mixing studios, and measuring the frequency response with an artificial head. Harman's reference room is neither fully reverberant nor fully anechoic, it features a reverberation time of about 0.4 seconds, very similar to what professional recording and mixing studios use (the rule of thumb is 0.3 seconds).
Now if we measure a headphone on that same artificial head and the headphone were to have the same frequency response that we measured in the room, then this frequency response would be ideal, or so Sean Olive proposed. And further research proved that he was right, the majority of both trained and untrained listeners prefer this target curve over any other target curve.

So the Harman curve stems from an objective target measurement meant to replicate the frequency response of a good loudspeaker in an acoustically good room, and research confirmed that this is what the majority prefer. Granted, the target curve itself has indeed been adjusted for the average preference of a large number of listeners, but it doesn't stray far from the original hypothesis.

That being said, of course everybody has different tastes and the Harman curve won't necessarily be universally liked by everyone. The point of our shared hobby is to have fun and EQ is just a means to that end. The Harman curve sounds the best to my ears, so I use it—and I trust oratory1990's settings to achieve it. YMMV and that's totally OK. :)
 
Jul 27, 2020 at 7:43 AM Post #1,968 of 4,827
I do have some headphones already tuned to the Harman curve (AKG N700NC MK2) and I do enjoy those - but almost all of my other headphones (Elegia included) aren’t and I enjoy those, too - for me, I neither expect nor desire all headphones to have the same FR nor do I find needing EQ to be desirable, particularly given that on some platforms it’s just not convenient; I’m more than happy to tune my ears into a headphone’s unique FR; if that FR is way too “off” for my own ears, I probably will sell or give away the offending headphones. 😅
 
Jul 27, 2020 at 8:55 AM Post #1,969 of 4,827
Absolutely. FR is always a deliberate, purposeful choice on the headphone manufacturer's part, and the reason why we don't have just one headphone with the Harman FR but several headphones with all kinds of different curves is because different people enjoy different things. I also agree that EQ isn't always readily available and, when it is, it commands a negative preamp gain; all else being equal, no EQ is preferable to EQ. However, when available EQ can be a powerful tool to maximize our enjoyment, as is the case with me and my Elegia :wink:
 
Jul 27, 2020 at 3:16 PM Post #1,970 of 4,827
I wrote that in answer to @passernger10000 's point that oratory1990's settings are weird, to point out that oratory1990 is not just some random guy who came up with an EQ setting, but rather an industry insider with lots of experience on the subject matter.

As for the Harman curve, "an average of what people like" is a bit of an oversimplification. Here's a interesting passage oratory1990 wrote on the topic:

So the Harman curve stems from an objective target measurement meant to replicate the frequency response of a good loudspeaker in an acoustically good room, and research confirmed that this is what the majority prefer. Granted, the target curve itself has indeed been adjusted for the average preference of a large number of listeners, but it doesn't stray far from the original hypothesis.

That being said, of course everybody has different tastes and the Harman curve won't necessarily be universally liked by everyone. The point of our shared hobby is to have fun and EQ is just a means to that end. The Harman curve sounds the best to my ears, so I use it—and I trust oratory1990's settings to achieve it. YMMV and that's totally OK. :)

I mostly agree with everything you said, but it, too, can lead to oversimplified understanding.

It helps to recognize that Harman is looking for a "target response" to design a headphone around that suits a large percentage of people. Among that majority of people that like that curve, individuals will likely need to make some minor adjustments to perfect the response to suit them. In other words, Harman doesn't claim that the response is perfect for that majority. It's a curve that a lot of people like, which is saying something different.

And it also depends on one's average listening volume. If one listens louder or softer than the reference volume used in the target response tests, one will need to adjust the EQ due to the Fletcher-Munson Curve. NOTE: this also explains why we get disagreement on some headphones as to how bright they are. It's not just personal sound signature preference, but our preferred listening volume.

And then, of course, there is the minority who would like something a good bit different from the Harman curve.

So at best, the Harman target response is a good starting place for adjusting EQ. But a lot of people are likely to want to change it somewhat to achieve the perfect response for their ears and listening habits.
 
Last edited:
Jul 28, 2020 at 12:14 PM Post #1,971 of 4,827
I know it’s been said before but I want to reiterate that if you’re swapping from stock pads to Dekoni Sheepskin I would recommend purchasing from somewhere you have the option to return (Amazon). I tried them for a few days and did not like what they did to the mids, which are what make these headphones special to me. I ended up returning them and am happy as a clam with the stock pads.
 
Jul 28, 2020 at 6:51 PM Post #1,972 of 4,827
I know it’s been said before but I want to reiterate that if you’re swapping from stock pads to Dekoni Sheepskin I would recommend purchasing from somewhere you have the option to return (Amazon). I tried them for a few days and did not like what they did to the mids, which are what make these headphones special to me. I ended up returning them and am happy as a clam with the stock pads.
In my opinion, I'm not sure they do a whole lot to the mids. To me, the stock Elegia is mostly flat except for a wide hump in the mids.
What I hear with the Dekoni is a significant increase in mid bass and sub bass that bring them to a more even level to the mids. Consequently, the mids are no longer forward as they are with stock pads.
That initially also deprived me of some perception of detail retrieval, but after adjusting to the Dekoni I'm not sure any detail is lost, maybe it's just less apparent.

But yeah, the basic character of the Elegia is changed because of that, and everybody has a different set of ears, so I could't agree more with your recommendation to get them where you have the option to return them.

Worth a try for sure for those wanting more bass, or just for those looking for a more relaxed listen (I find myself listening to lower volume with the Dekoni because of the higher bass)
 
Last edited:
Jul 28, 2020 at 9:16 PM Post #1,973 of 4,827
In my opinion, I'm not sure they do a whole lot to the mids. To me, the stock Elegia is mostly flat except for a wide hump in the mids.
What I hear with the Dekoni is a significant increase in mid bass and sub bass that bring them to a more even level to the mids. Consequently, the mids are no longer forward as they are with stock pads.
That initially also deprived me of some perception of detail retrieval, but after adjusting to the Dekoni I'm not sure any detail is lost, maybe it's just less apparent.

But yeah, the basic character of the Elegia is changed because of that, and everybody has a different set of ears, so I could't agree more with your recommendation to get them where you have the option to return them.

Worth a try for sure for those wanting more bass, or just for those looking for a more relaxed listen (I find myself listening to lower volume with the Dekoni because of the higher bass)

I'm with you on that.

I did end up using my graphical EQ to reduce 63hz -2db, and 32hz -1db, and then they became extremely balanced sounding to me across the base, mids, treble with just a little bit of warmth. And better than simply boosting the bass with the stock pads.
 
Jul 29, 2020 at 2:12 AM Post #1,974 of 4,827
I don't think I have it set up right? Everything sounds a bit muted and I'm not sure why. Also whats the difference between the shelfs he'll have listed where one has and underscore and the other doesn't?
1596003104478.png
 
Jul 29, 2020 at 3:00 AM Post #1,975 of 4,827
I’ll compare to my settings when I get home, but off the top of my head:

- You don’t seem to have changed the Quality parameter to what is indicated in oratory1990’s settings. That will make the EQ curve different from his (I think Equalizer APO has a way of showing you what your EQ curve looks like; you can compare it to oratory1990’s to see if you’re in the ballpark.)
- These settings have a negative preamp, so you’ll need to turn up your amp’s volume accordingly to achieve the same sound pressure as before.

These settings shouldn’t sound muted at all. To me the Elegia sound more muted with no EQ owing to the 3-4Khz dip, which makes its treble rather muffled.
 
Jul 29, 2020 at 3:01 AM Post #1,976 of 4,827
I don't think I have it set up right? Everything sounds a bit muted and I'm not sure why. Also whats the difference between the shelfs he'll have listed where one has and underscore and the other doesn't?
1596003104478.png

You haven't changed the Q values, assuming you're following Oratory's settings
 
Jul 29, 2020 at 2:40 PM Post #1,980 of 4,827
Surprised it wasn't 100%, though sound is greatly influenced by the shape of our ears so the same setting will actually sound different to different people (to varying extents.)

oratory1990's setting indicates three bands to adjust to taste for bass, mid, and treble respectively; you may try playing around with those to see if you get to 100%.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top