[bzippy]

I have a Schiit Loki on my desktop system and it's so easy for me to get great results with just 4 knobs: 20Hz, 400Hz, 2kHz, 8kHz. My HD600 needs just a little boost on the 20Hz knob and I'm happy. Hifiman Ananda, a little trim of the 8kHz knob and I get the smooth, clear top end that i love. I should add that I only keep the headphones that are near enough to my ideal that I never need to do any major tone sculpting. And I don't always need to make these tweaks either, but some recordings and some moods demand it. I really love this little box!

But I always struggle to get similarly satisfying results from the 10 band digital EQ's in my FiiO X5ii and Poweramp on my phone. I don't know if it's just that I don't know what to do with so many more bands, or what. For example, if I just want to reduce the treble with my new Ananda's, I can't tell if it's best to be bring down just the 8kHz band a few dB, or maybe a little off the 4kHz and 16kHz too (mimicking some Q), or even treating it like a high shelf or low pass. Ugh. Maybe I should write to Schiit and just ask how the Loki is designed.

So what's you all's approach when doing this?

 

[assassin10000]

I typically will go up & down on each band to figure out what sounds best on a known track. It is a lot more time consuming than having just 4 adjustments, thats for sure.

In any case, you could treat 2-3 bands on the 10 band as your general 4 band adjustment.

31, 62, 125 bass.
250, 500, 1k mids.
2k & 4k upper mids/lower treble.
8k & 16k treble/air.

You could just lower or raise those grouped bands and see if it gets you where you want. If it's a hair bright & shouty maybe the 4k & 8k need to be brought a touch down.

 

[flailure]

A lot of times you can search (google or whatever) eq settings for a particular headphone and get a ball park on some of the settings that other people enjoy for your particular headphones. It can help you get close sometimes and you can go back and forth and see what each change accomplished.

Another method you can use is finding a frequency response graph of your headphones and using it to interpolate what changes you think would be beneficial. There are problems with this method though, a lot of people assume that the frequency response curve should be relatively smooth, but that is not always the case to making the best sound. A lot of times due to room issues or headphone cup limitations, certain bands should have a certain amount of suppression to keep stray resonances down, or to shape sound a particular way. An example is reducing some of the upper frequencies of the lows (150- 300) to make the mids cleaner and the bass less muddy sounding or increase if your mids are too thin sounding. You can reduce mids to increase sound stage. And of course you can boost treble to increase air and sparkle.

It can be a little harder determining certain frequencies that may be causing poor sound in your headphones. Everyone knows about certain headphones having a harsh resonance usually between 4k to 8k (notice this is the junction between mids and highs). Sometimes it is well known and sometimes you have to hunt for them, but these you would usually use subtractive eq to reduce. Note that if excessive eq adjustment is necessary to control a certain frequency then you may look at modding or just move on from a particular headphone to something closer to what you are looking for.

Feel free to experiment though, sometimes you can do some surprising stuff, one trick we would use was we would sometimes digitally reduce a frequency and then use an analog eq to boost it, as a way of tightening up that particular band. No wrong way to do it if the end results sound good.

Also, feel free to shake it up. Because sound is subjective, no one else can tell you what you enjoy. If you find someone who likes the same headphones as you, then often you can get some info, but even that is not a guaranteed thing. And also, your brain can fool you. If it hears the same sound over and over, it can get used to it and tune it out, basically something that you might once have enjoyed because subtle and boring. Sometimes you just need to cleanse your audio palette by going crazy different. Variety not only can keep you happy, but you may discover new things you like along the way.

 

[gimmeheadroom]

I don't like graphic EQ. I don't like fiddling with knobs.

 

[bland125]

Yeah, I was an EQ addict until I got sick and tired of it trying to compensate for gear weeknesses never successfully. The only one I appreciate and still use on specific headphones is iFi xbass. Don't know what they did but they figured out a remedy to anemic bass for sure.

So I stopped kidding myself and bought gear I don't need to EQ even if they don't sport an "audiophile" sticker on them. Been loving it since then.

 

[bzippy]

Yeah, I was an EQ addict until I got sick and tired of it trying to compensate for gear weeknesses never successfully. The only one I appreciate and still use on specific headphones is iFi xbass. Don't know what they did but they figured out a remedy to anemic bass for sure.

So I stopped kidding myself and bought gear I don't need to EQ even if they don't sport an "audiophile" sticker on them. Been loving it since then.

I wish, but that's just not possible for me. I guess if I could get the following 3 versions of my Focal Clear, I'd be all set:
1. Stock
2. Closed, for indoor isolation
3. Closed and smaller for portable

Actually that wouldn't even do it because sometimes I feel like the slightly smoother, warmer sound of my HD 600. And sometimes the even warmer sound of my Meze 99C (say, late at night). Then there are times I want max detail with super wide soundstsge & separation for ultra deep immersion, so it's the HFM Ananda.

Anyway, these are all here for specific purposes, all having beat out others and deemed close enough to my ideal tonality to fill their slot. But none are so perfect that I never need any eq at all, except the Clears.

 

[PointyFox]

I've never been able to find an EQ setting I like better than stock.