[ADUHF]

One other thing I should perhaps mention about the Equalizer APO Configuration Editor is that after installation, there's a filter already enabled in the editor that invokes another script file called "example.txt". Along with the Preamp and 15-Band Graphic EQ. That example.txt filter adds a low frequency boost, which is visible in the Analysis Panel. And it can simply be removed.

 

[tbger99]

One other thing I should perhaps mention about the Equalizer APO Configuration Editor is that after installation, there's a filter already enabled in the editor that invokes another script file called "example.txt". Along with the Preamp and 15-Band Graphic EQ. That example.txt filter adds a low frequency boost, which is visible in the Analysis Panel. And it can simply be removed.

Thank you, I was actually wondering what this module was (I couldn't find its name anywhere), until I eventually closed it and haven't noticed what happened. Being quite new to the world of studio gear, I'm not familiar with what every component is meant to do, and your notes about this application really helped me understand what's going on (and others too, I suppose).

 

[ADUHF]

I've decided to try an EQ program and downloaded the one mentioned here in your signature, and I'm quite happy with it so far. Among the rest, one of the things I'm yet too ignorant about, is the (audible) distortion the EQ sometimes causes. I'd really like to know what causes that, and how and when I could prevent it from happening. I guess it depends on the capabilities of the headphone itself. I'm doubfull however as to whether it also depends on the manipulated frequency - i.e., is it more likely occur on a certain area of the spectrum (in all/most headphones), or does it all go down to the headphone potential. I've purchased a pair of HD800 from someone here, and I'm planning to try boosting their bass response (which I remember is tight but also too light), as well as the known 5.5khz peak.

Re distortion... This chap recommends increasing the bit depth on the audio device that you'll be using with EQ to at least 24 bit, 44.1 kHz. He's doing this before actually installing the software btw.



This is not something I've tried before. But I'll give it a shot, and see if it helps at all.

Since the audio is being resampled to change the volume though, this seems to make sense.

 

[ADUHF]

^ Very cogent explanation

 

[ADUHF]

Not sure about the software suggestions in this. Or the idea of listening to headphones while they are sitting on a desk. But most of the info in this seems fairly ok.



I have never tried Sonarworks btw.

 

[ADUHF]

I listened to a few monitors at Guitar Center over the weekend. And I do find a few of the standard models to be a little harsh-sounding in the mids, even though they measure fairly flat. Part of the reason for that could be the lack of extension in the bass on most bookshelf monitors.

I seem to prefer a little bit of a U-shaped sound though, on both monitors and headphones. And feel like I get a little more of that sound out-of-the-box from some of the Adam monitors. Most monitors come with some basic treble and bass adjustments though. And I've grown somewhat accustomed to the sound of my DT-770's, which have alot of detail up top, like the Adams seem to have with their ribbon tweeters. So that may be biasing me a little toward them. Or maybe I just have expensive taste in loudspeakers... Not really sure.

I listened briefly to a pair of lower-cost Kalis as well. Because I saw those mentioned a few times in the Audio Science Reviews threads. The store had them on the bottom shelf though, where they were harder to hear. So it was harder to assess their sound. And the company is only a few years old. So they don't have the same track record as some of the others. And maybe some folks are just likin them cuz they're the new kid on the block.

I prefer to listen at somewhat lower volumes as well, so that may also effect my preference for a more U-shaped versus more mid-centered sound.

 

[ADUHF]

I should also add that some people feel that the some of the Adams are a little grainy sounding in the treble. The ribbon tweeters supposedly have a bit more distortion than a conventional dome tweeter. So that may be why. (My DT-770's can be a little grainy sounding as well. Some of that could be source-related though.)

I believe the ribbon tweeters on the Adams can also produce more ultrasonic frequencies. Whereas the dome tweeters will tend to be centered a little more around a given frequency range (which may be one of the reasons they sound a little harsher to me personally). So some folks with good high-frequency hearing may find the Adams too forward on the high end as a result.

And the lower-end Adams will also have some of that audible self-noise/hiss that I mentioned as well, like most of the lower-cost active monitors. The chap at the store did try turning down the gain though on the back of the speaker, which reduced the self-noise quite noticeably.

 

[jon parker]

I'm trying not to limit myself with regards to costs (as long as it doesn't get to thousands of dollars of course). After some research both here and on the net, I've narrowed my choice and now I mainly focus on the HD800 (not the S) and the LCD-X. However, I'm not completely sure I actually have to go that far to this very high end gear - maybe there's something else that would do the job just fine. Again, I don't want to compromise on sound quality, it's just that I'm not looking for any mainstream etc. stuff, but just to get the job done. It needs to be just (well, 'just') -

- as neutral as possible,
- comfortable - both physically and sound-wise (not fatiguing)
- durable, well built,
- I wouldn't say 'extremely', but yeah, very detailed.

Best wishes everybody,
Roy

Hi Roy
I work full time with audio and also especially need a neutral and high detail retrieving headphone both for very fine editing, audio restoration and mastering
To be honest I have yet to find a headphone that is reliable enough to do this.
For Monitoring I use Sony MDR-CD900ST. The Sony 900's are designed specifically for sound engineers (unlike the V6 which I dont think the highs and mids are good enough for audio work) } and are for the Japanese Market only. The CD900's are designed / tuned to give you EXACTLY what is happening AT the microphone.
NB I use Brainwave Lambskin pads for them which are the only of many aftermarket pads I tried that actually work...sonically
Im not sure they are quite there in terms of reliability for mastering BUT
there is an IEM that Im finding more and more reliable for details, accuracy and that can be relied for mastering decisions and that is the Etymotic ER2 XR https://www.etymotic.com/consumer/earphones/er2xr-extended-response.html
Every decision I have made using these has been perfect and reliable

Im surprised that people recommend the Beyerdynamic DT880 but one thing is for sure
EDIT Im thinking of the DT770 - I havent heard the dt880 for years - whatever becomes the main headphone you use you need to learn all of its details flaws and qualities and become very familiar with it, understanding that any decisions you make mixing or mastering can be relied on and will end up as you wish when sent 'to print' !
I wouldn't [personally] recommend the HD800 for audio work. when you compare the tonailty and realism even to their 1980's HD 540 you ,ight find as I do that the sound is too far removed from a natural tonality. Its hard to explain but we are talking here about working with audio and that is something very different to listening to music

anyhoo, just a few thoughts

 

[tbger99]

ADUHF, thank you for sharing your impressions here. This shows the loudspeaker area is even more complicated than I'd thought ... Although I've figured it'll be best to have a pair (based on the helpful suggestions above), I think I'll still have to read about it some more, be it technical info and also reviews - in order to get a good decision, at a decent price range. (It may have sounded so, but I really don't have extra funds to spend where I'm not completely sure about my decision.) Someone has kindly PMed me pointing out I should also look on gearslutz, which is a great thing and something I have to do as well.

Jon, thanks for your input. That IEMs you mentioned really look like a good tool. Also, I'd really like to go for an IEM, since they are extremely cheaper (in the case of Etymotic, specifically). However I've had a bad experience with a pair of ER4-PT I've had about 10 years ago - my ears just couldn't get used to them (I used to believe that's because my ears are significantly small compared to most people).

 

[jon parker]

Jon, thanks for your input. That IEMs you mentioned really look like a good tool. Also, I'd really like to go for an IEM, since they are extremely cheaper (in the case of Etymotic, specifically). However I've had a bad experience with a pair of ER4-PT I've had about 10 years ago - my ears just couldn't get used to them (I used to believe that's because my ears are significantly small compared to most people).

I actually just use the foam tips which are very comfortable

 

[ADUHF]

Hi Roy
I work full time with audio and also especially need a neutral and high detail retrieving headphone both for very fine editing, audio restoration and mastering
To be honest I have yet to find a headphone that is reliable enough to do this.
For Monitoring I use Sony MDR-CD900ST. The Sony 900's are designed specifically for sound engineers (unlike the V6 which I dont think the highs and mids are good enough for audio work) } and are for the Japanese Market only. The CD900's are designed / tuned to give you EXACTLY what is happening AT the microphone.
NB I use Brainwave Lambskin pads for them which are the only of many aftermarket pads I tried that actually work...sonically
Im not sure they are quite there in terms of reliability for mastering BUT
there is an IEM that Im finding more and more reliable for details, accuracy and that can be relied for mastering decisions and that is the Etymotic ER2 XR https://www.etymotic.com/consumer/earphones/er2xr-extended-response.html
Every decision I have made using these has been perfect and reliable

Im surprised that people recommend the Beyerdynamic DT880 but one thing is for sure
EDIT Im thinking of the DT770 - I havent heard the dt880 for years - whatever becomes the main headphone you use you need to learn all of its details flaws and qualities and become very familiar with it, understanding that any decisions you make mixing or mastering can be relied on and will end up as you wish when sent 'to print' !
I wouldn't [personally] recommend the HD800 for audio work. when you compare the tonailty and realism even to their 1980's HD 540 you ,ight find as I do that the sound is too far removed from a natural tonality. Its hard to explain but we are talking here about working with audio and that is something very different to listening to music

anyhoo, just a few thoughts

Thoughts are good, jon.

And I agree that the DT-770 is not an accurate tool for mastering out of the box. And needs some equalization to make that more workable.

This is still a problem I'm working on for my own pair of 250 ohm headphones. But I've posted what info I've been able to find on the subject so far in the 250-ohm DT-770 topic in my sig. And also some general tips on using the Equalizer APO's Configuration Editor in the other link in my sig.

I also recently posted a quick and dirty tutorial (and some other tips) on how to use the above program to better conform a headphone's frequency response to the general (or specific) shape of a room curve in the General Headphone Measurements topic here fwiw...

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/gen...ment-related-discussions.932495/post-16192343

At the moment, this only works with diffuse field measurements from Oratory1990's headphone Graphing Tool.

 

[jon parker]

Thoughts are good, jon.

And I agree that the DT-770 is not an accurate tool for mastering out of the box. And needs some equalization to make that more workable.

This is still a problem I'm working on for my own pair of 250 ohm headphones. But I've posted what info I've been able to find on the subject so far in the 250-ohm DT-770 topic in my sig. And also some general tips on using the Equalizer APO's Configuration Editor in the other link in my sig.

I also recently posted a quick and dirty tutorial (and some other tips) on how to use the above program to better conform a headphone's frequency response to the general (or specific) shape of a room curve here, fwiw...

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/gen...ment-related-discussions.932495/post-16192343

At the moment, this only works with the diffuse field measurements from Oratory's headphone graphing tool.

Interesting stuff
Ive done a fair bit of headphone modding over the years usually to a great success. There is a lot more that can be done than may seem apparent!
Im lucky in that most of my work is with vocals so audio work is in general a bit easier for me!
I do think the 1980 original versions of the DT 770 and DT 880 are actually much 'better' that there modern day versions...or at least more neutral and flat

thanks for the link - Ive watched it and will read carefully

 

[ADUHF]

Ive done a fair bit of headphone modding over the years usually to a great success. There is a lot more that can be done than may seem apparent!

I'm aware of a few of the more popular DT-770 mods, such as the tissue paper trick. Buy haven't tried any of them yet. Correcting them with a digital EQ is already quite difficult. And I'm afraid that applying physical mods would only make that process harder, since the sound would probably not match up as well with the graphs.

It may be something I'll experiment with in the future though. I did quite a bit of tinkering with the earpads and other parts of my old AKG K553's for example.

thanks for the link - Ive watched it and will read carefully

I hope you weren't referring this...



Because that was posted mostly in gest. Might be kind of a fun thing to try though if you have the equipment handy.

It probably wouldn't work that well with an IEM though. And most headphones are tuned to produce the correct (more or less) response at the eardrum, rather than at pillow depth. So some additional adjustment or correction may be needed to get the above microphone approach to work correctly.

I've seen some much stranger ideas suggested than this one though.

 

[ADUHF]

^ Post fixed.

ADUHF, thank you for sharing your impressions here. This shows the loudspeaker area is even more complicated than I'd thought ... Although I've figured it'll be best to have a pair (based on the helpful suggestions above), I think I'll still have to read about it some more, be it technical info and also reviews - in order to get a good decision, at a decent price range. (It may have sounded so, but I really don't have extra funds to spend where I'm not completely sure about my decision.) Someone has kindly PMed me pointing out I should also look on gearslutz, which is a great thing and something I have to do as well.

Gearslutz is one of my go to resources for pro audio as well. Their "Best of" equipment lists probably need to be updated though. So much new stuff has come out in recent years. Reading some of the comments in those and other topics can be educational though.

There is another popular website for pro audio as well, which is slipping my mind at the moment. And there may be some better resources for home studios (on a tighter budget) as well. But I'm not sure what those would be, since GS (and the other site I can't remember) are titled a bit more towards professional audio production.

I think there are probably a fair number of folks knowledgeable in home production who hang on GS and similar sites as well though.

 

[ADUHF]

The Sound on Sound (SOS) forum may be the other one I was trying to thinking of. Not sure though.

I think that site is also tilted more towards music producers and pro audio. Though there may also be some folks there who are knowledgeable on home production as well.

Also, I did increase the bit depth on my audio output to 24-bit. And also uninstalled and then re-installed the Equalizer APO software, to try to better ensure that it's updated with the new settings. And I think it may be helping to smooth out some of the roughness in the sound, as Nghia Nguyen suggested in the video. I've only listened to a few tracks since making those tweaks though. So not entirely sure about the improvements yet... It seems to make sense though.

I also don't know what, if any, effect the higher bit depth might have on latency. That is one of the items which can be checked though in the Analysis Panel of the Configuration Editor, along with the Peak Gain, and whatnot.