[Scrith]

Has anyone tried playing around with Foobar2000's Equalizer (in the DSP section) to optimize their headphone setup? I was just reading a thread in another sub-forum about a digital equalizer component (Behringer's DEQ2496) and realized those of us using a computer as our source have a similar option available via Foobar's Equalizer DSP plug-in (right?).

Anyway, I tried tweaking the settings a bit based on the frequency response chart I saw for the HD650 over at headroom just as an experiment and was able to achieve some interesting results. Do any experienced users out there have any thoughts on doing this type of thing for a newbie such as myself?

 

[Mr.Radar]

Most people here don't like to use EQ's for a fair number of reasons discussed in this thread.

 

[ooheadsoo]

Proper EQ as described in gerG's thread is a different issue. It's clearly a high quality one. I couldn't say the same for the foobar eq. Also, it's only a graphic eq and the steps are in 1db increments. The control isn't very fine.

 

[kyrie]

I've done it, and it helps. Don't let anyone dissuade you.

Those that talk of EQ being bad because they want to hear the music "as it was originally recorded/intended" just don't know what they're talking about. The only way to do that is to use the exact same headphones that the recording engineer used. Every headphone has a different frequency response, so by using a different headphone you are already listening to something different from what was intended. Adding an EQ won't make things any worse, it'd just make things different: same as switching between different headphones. A good digital EQ doesn't detract from the detail level at all, and allows you to manipulate the sound to your liking. I think too many people here have some kind of "sound manipulation paranoia"...
But nonetheless, the EQ on foobar isn't very high quality. I wish someone would write up a good EQ plugin on foobar. I'd do it myself if I could, but alas...

 

[lan]

You can also use the convolver plugin and impluse to do a parametric style EQ.

 

[Smurf]

I have a very light bowl (only +3 db max), and it seems to work well.

 

[ooheadsoo]

kyrie, the engineers aim for a transportable mix that should sound good on most systems.

Too bad I don't have the equipment to generate my room's impulse

 

[Scrith]

Hmm, I just took a look at the equalizer code for Foobar2000 and it looks very simple. I am certain that I can improve it (provide, say, 31 bands and increase the resolution of the settings to 0.5 or 0.25 increments), but I am about to go on vacation! Maybe when I get back...

By the way, given that the equalizer is merely manipulating the data in its native digital form (and, given what I just saw in the code, this looks rather trivial, difficulty-wise), why would manipulating here at the source be any worse than using some external digital device?!?

The idea of a digital equalizer is yet another strong argument, in my humble opinion, that nothing is as powerful as a computer for your musical source!

Also, doesn't doing some discretionary tweaks with a digital equalizer make a lot more sense than buying, say, a dozen different components (such as interconnects) and hoping that one combination provides the sound you are looking for?

Again...be nice to the newbie! I'm just coming into this hobby with an open mind seeing what of my computer programming/building experience I can leverage.

 

[kalzone]

using an equalizer is much like added additional spice to fine dish. a lot of people will argue that you shouldn't spice up your food and instead eat it as the chef meant for it to eaten.

bah! that's why we all have our own taste and a lot of people like to add some salt or pepper.
me, i'm a HUGE fan of hot sauce! Dave's Insanity Sauce kicks butt!

to that end, i don't use an equalizer all that much but i'm using one in my current to boost the low end since the bass response on my Grado SR325's is a little weak.
in the end, its all a matter of preference/taste.

 

[commando]

Do whatever makes the music most enjoyable for you. I enjoy my CD3Ks much more when I jack up the bass a bit, but if you go overboard it hides detail at the top end, so be a little careful with that.

 

[StevieDvd]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scrith Anyway, I tried tweaking the settings a bit based on the frequency response chart I saw for the HD650 over at headroom just as an experiment and was able to achieve some interesting results.

Do you have a link for these Foobar2000/HD650 settings?

Steve

 

[MuFu]

I use convolver for room equalisation with speakers (makes a MASSIVE difference for the better) and sometimes fb2k's EQ for certain tracks with these HD600s. Usually just a mild "loudness" curve to bring them to life, as it were.

 

[cosmopragma]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scrith Hmm, I just took a look at the equalizer code for Foobar2000 and it looks very simple. I am certain that I can improve it (provide, say, 31 bands and increase the resolution of the settings to 0.5 or 0.25 increments), but I am about to go on vacation! Maybe when I get back... By the way, given that the equalizer is merely manipulating the data in its native digital form (and, given what I just saw in the code, this looks rather trivial, difficulty-wise), why would manipulating here at the source be any worse than using some external digital device?!? The idea of a digital equalizer is yet another strong argument, in my humble opinion, that nothing is as powerful as a computer for your musical source! Also, doesn't doing some discretionary tweaks with a digital equalizer make a lot more sense than buying, say, a dozen different components (such as interconnects) and hoping that one combination provides the sound you are looking for? Again...be nice to the newbie! I'm just coming into this hobby with an open mind seeing what of my computer programming/building experience I can leverage.

I agree with most of what you've said.
I want to encourage you in your fresh approach.There are many rigid traditionalists in the audio scene, even on head-fi.
Be a pioneer.
In case you are coming along in a few months with an accurate EQ, separate fine control for both channels, I'll call you Sir Scrith.
Lots of fame at the horizon.

 

[cosmopragma]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kalzone using an equalizer is much like added additional spice to fine dish. a lot of people will argue that you shouldn't spice up your food and instead eat it as the chef meant for it to eaten. bah! that's why we all have our own taste and a lot of people like to add some salt or pepper. me, i'm a HUGE fan of hot sauce! Dave's Insanity Sauce kicks butt! to that end, i don't use an equalizer all that much but i'm using one in my current to boost the low end since the bass response on my Grado SR325's is a little weak. in the end, its all a matter of preference/taste.

To my ears lowering the treble of the SR 325 (a tiny bit) for specific songs sounds better than boosting the bass.
Thats the point.We have different ears and by EQing we are able to get a better personal fit.

 

[ooheadsoo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MuFu I use convolver for room equalisation with speakers (makes a MASSIVE difference for the better) and sometimes fb2k's EQ for certain tracks with these HD600s. Usually just a mild "loudness" curve to bring them to life, as it were.

I haven't found an impulse I liked yet. They all sound bad to me after a little while.