[TheR0v3r]

Here is the cable I use with the Nano, and I use the same cable for my Sennheiser HD 600’s

Excellent value

PS. No affiliation, just a happy customer.

 

[TheR0v3r]

If you want to enjoy the technical strengths of the Nano’s try “Planners & Thinkers” from the soundtrack for “Metropolis”

 

[martel80]

Here is the cable I use with the Nano, and I use the same cable for my Sennheiser HD 600’s

Excellent value

PS. No affiliation, just a happy customer.

Seems like a great cable.

I bought this one from Fog city in the US with a 1/4' connector .

Not disappointed.

I completely agree that the stock cable is really bad.

 

[sendler2112]

I'm trying to tame peaks here and there to make the treble a little smoother, at 8400 there's a big one. Every now and then I do like to bump that low shelf at 60 with 4db or 5 hahaha. How do you find the overall eq?

My Nanos have a huge peak at 9800 and two near zero suck outs on either side at 8300 and 13500. As identified by manual sweep tone. But I came to realize that a steady tone, especially in the high treble like that, exacerbates the resonance far beyond what is done by music which is generally more transient and lower in energy in this region. So I had tuned by ear with the test tone but then ended up dialing out probably half of the boost and cut of those. I also shelve up the bass below 60 and have a broad, couple db shelf down in the midbass between 150 and 700.

I start with the manual sweep in Math Audio Headphone EQ to level out any peaks or dips with parametric peaking filters, then have to chain in the Graphic EQ in Foobar (I wish Math Audio had included a tab for GEQ so I didn't have to stack) to get the overall EQ nice and see the general trends for music. I then have to go back into the PEQ and build filters with multiple peaks filters next to each other and shelf filters, to approximate what I have set in the GEQ program so I can close it.

Although I'm not sure if I can really hear any detriment to running them both stacked.

I stumbled back onto an amazing track that I have obviously known about for decades (came out in 1978) and realize I am just now hearing it for the first time via this modern headphone rig. Heart, Mistral Wind from the Dog And Butterfly album. Which is available for download in 24/ 192 at Qobuz. Or HiRes FLAC streaming. I subscribed since this sounds way better than the highest resolution at Spotify Premium.

Nancy Wilson's fingerpicking guitar style on this is absolutely captivating as much by the fascinating rhythms that she leaves out, as by what she leaves in. The mix is seasoned with additional sound flavors flying at you from all angles. It must have taken countless days of recording, mixing, listening, adding and taking away brief pieces, and then mixing again to find out what to add next. And of course Ann Wilson is one of the most passionate rock singers of all time and in her prime on this, their third album. It is also by far the brightest track I have come across which begs the Nanos for EQ.

 

[martel80]

I stumbled back onto an amazing track that I have obviously known about for decades (came out in 1978) and realize I am just now hearing it for the first time via this modern headphone rig. Heart, Mistral Wind from the Dog And Butterfly album. Which is available for download in 24/ 192 at Qobuz. Or HiRes FLAC streaming. I subscribed since this sounds way better than the highest resolution at Spotify Premium.

Nancy Wilson's fingerpicking guitar style on this is absolutely captivating as much by the fascinating rhythms that she leaves out, as by what she leaves in. The mix is seasoned with additional sound flavors flying at you from all angles. It must have taken countless days of recording, mixing, listening, adding and taking away brief pieces, and then mixing again to find out what to add next. And of course Ann Wilson is one of the most passionate rock singers of all time and in her prime on this, their third album. It is also by far the brightest track I have come across which begs the Nanos for EQ.

I just listened to the track. What a performance, really. In the beginning, the ''sound flying around'' are a lap steel guitar. Wonderfully mixed and played, really.

I love how they panned the rhythm guitars in the Hard section.

Huge flanger on the cymbals as well. That's very interesting.

The bass in the beginning when it first come in at 1:15 is very impressive. Felt in my toes.

I'll add that track to my reference playlist.

Thanks for that !

 

[HardstyleLoco96]

You’ve done a great job with that eq

I dropped the gain on the bass shelf to your setting of +2.5 dB. To me it’s slightly to lean but I do get your point. Adjusted it up to +3.0-3.5 dB and that may be a better compromise.

How do you work with eq? Measuring Rig? Sweeps? Tracks?

Again, excellent work.

I think 3.5 db is perfect . And honestly, I just been following graphs and then testing the eq out to hear if I like it or not. I do feel it still could be further improved slightly, that's why I left 2 more eq slots so I can fine tune. But overall I feel this is the best I can do. I know once Oratory gets his hands on these, he'll do a nicer job, but for me, this eq sounds great. It doesn't change too much about the Nano. Mainly dropping a few peaks, taming treble slightly and adding more low end. Overall, a warmer and nicer tuning . I'm glad you enjoy it

 

[Silence33]

Good evening, greetings from Costa Rica

I have been looking with great interest at the equalizations that you are using ... and they are close to what I use. It's very interesting.

But what I want to say is that these Nano are a real gem .... I have had many headphones (AKG, many other Hifiman, Focal, many great high end IEMs too) .... and they do not come close to the level of enjoyment that give me the Nano.

I wanted to change them for the Fiio FT5 (planar), and that move only helped me understand that the Nano are the headphones I'm looking for ... the Fiio were with me for only 48 hours ... the Nano are vastly better.

The Nano are surprising headphones .... with or without equalizer.... but with a little bit of equalization it makes you touch the sky with your hands.

Greetings

 

[TheR0v3r]

I think 3.5 db is perfect . And honestly, I just been following graphs and then testing the eq out to hear if I like it or not. I do feel it still could be further improved slightly, that's why I left 2 more eq slots so I can fine tune. But overall I feel this is the best I can do. I know once Oratory gets his hands on these, he'll do a nicer job, but for me, this eq sounds great. It doesn't change too much about the Nano. Mainly dropping a few peaks, taming treble slightly and adding more low end. Overall, a warmer and nicer tuning . I'm glad you enjoy it

You’re doing a mighty fine job

I’ve moved the shelf down to 50 Hz, so as to move the boost down to the lower bass and sub bass. Right now also experimenting with moving the cut at 163 Hz down from that upper bass region to the mid bass region at 50-100 Hz. To me that’s an improvement, because it cleans up the bass!

Props to @martel80 for pointing out the possibilities with the Nano when moving away from the Harman curve

 

[Phidel]

You’re doing a mighty fine job

I’ve moved the shelf down to 50 Hz, so as to move the boost down to the lower bass and sub bass. Right now also experimenting with moving the cut at 163 Hz down from that upper bass region to the mid bass region at 50-100 Hz. To me that’s an improvement, because it cleans up the bass!

Props to @martel80 for pointing out the possibilities with the Nano when moving away from the Harman curve

Could yoy share your final EQ? Please.

 

[HardstyleLoco96]

You’re doing a mighty fine job

I’ve moved the shelf down to 50 Hz, so as to move the boost down to the lower bass and sub bass. Right now also experimenting with moving the cut at 163 Hz down from that upper bass region to the mid bass region at 50-100 Hz. To me that’s an improvement, because it cleans up the bass!

Props to @martel80 for pointing out the possibilities with the Nano when moving away from the Harman curve

I'll give it a try. This is a eq everyone can try and use. I'm beyond happy for everyone to experiment and try to further improve it. If we all can try it, and give our impressions untill we all feel we finally hit gold. It'd make me really happy. Like I said, I know Oratory1990 could bring something even nice sounding. But for now. This is as close thatbI could get haha

 

[TheR0v3r]

Could yoy share your final EQ? Please.

Sure!

These are the updated settings I’m using now and enjoying:

• At 22 Hz, +3 dB with Q=1.41 (Bell)
• At 50 Hz, +3 dB with a slope of 12 dB per octave (Low Shelf)
• At 70-80 Hz, -2 dB with Q=0.7-1.41 (Bell)*
• At 163 Hz, +1.0-2.0 dB with Q=1.41 (Bell)*
• At 2190 Hz, +4.0-5.0 dB with Q=2.6 (Bell)*
• At 3850 Hz, -2 dB with ”slow” slope of 6 dB per octave (High Shelf)
• At 5750 Hz, +1.3 dB with Q=4.3 (Bell)
• At 6500 Hz, -2.5 dB with Q=4.0 (Bell)
• At 8400 Hz, -2.0 dB with Q=5.0
• At 10800 Hz, -4.0 dB with a slope of 12 dB per octave (High Shelf)*

These settings are based on the work of @HardstyleLoco96 and input from @martel80

*= under review

 

[TheR0v3r]

Sure!

These are the updated settings I’m using now and enjoying:

• At 22 Hz, +3 dB with Q=1.41 (Bell)
• At 50 Hz, +3 dB with a slope of 12 dB per octave (Low Shelf)
• At 70-80 Hz, -2 dB with Q=0.7-1.41 (Bell)*
• At 163 Hz, +1.0-2.0 dB with Q=1.41 (Bell)*
• At 2190 Hz, +4.0-5.0 dB with Q=2.6 (Bell)*
• At 3850 Hz, -2 dB with ”slow” slope of 6 dB per octave (High Shelf)
• At 5750 Hz, +1.3 dB with Q=4.3 (Bell)
• At 6500 Hz, -2.5 dB with Q=4.0 (Bell)
• At 8400 Hz, -2.0 dB with Q=5.0
• At 10800 Hz, -4.0 dB with a slope of 12 dB per octave (High Shelf)*

These settings are based on the work of @HardstyleLoco96 and input from @martel80

*= under review

The main issue I’m having right now is an excessive buildup in the upper mids, especially some female voices get a harshness to their voices that can be slightly irritating. As a result I’m experimenting and adjusting the gain in the range 2.5-3.5 dB at 2190 Hz - a small adjustment goes a long way when it comes to tonality!

The main track I use to check voices is Natalie Merchant’s ”Peppery Man” but for harshness or brightness I also use Musica Nuda’s ”I Will Survive”, Myrtille’s ”Terre Mère” and Joss Stone’s ”The Chokin’ Kind”. Fairly time-consuming but soo very rewarding to get it right

 

[martel80]

The main issue I’m having right now is an excessive buildup in the upper mids, especially some female voices get a harshness to their voices that can be slightly irritating. As a result I’m experimenting and adjusting the gain in the range 2.5-3.5 dB at 2190 Hz - a small adjustment goes a long way when it comes to tonality!

The main track I use to check voices is Natalie Merchant’s ”Peppery Man” but for harshness or brightness I also use Musica Nuda’s ”I Will Survive”, Myrtille’s ”Terre Mère” and Joss Stone’s ”The Chokin’ Kind”. Fairly time-consuming but soo very rewarding to get it right

The harshness you are experiencing comes from the 3 to 7khz. Try a sharper slope on your high shelf, that should fix it.

Extra 2khz would sound nasal, not harsh.

 

[Lightspeed12]

How many on here would recomend the ananda nano without equalizer instead of the ananda stealth ?

 

[dd051]

Sure!

These are the updated settings I’m using now and enjoying:

• At 22 Hz, +3 dB with Q=1.41 (Bell)
• At 50 Hz, +3 dB with a slope of 12 dB per octave (Low Shelf)
• At 70-80 Hz, -2 dB with Q=0.7-1.41 (Bell)*
• At 163 Hz, +1.0-2.0 dB with Q=1.41 (Bell)*
• At 2190 Hz, +4.0-5.0 dB with Q=2.6 (Bell)*
• At 3850 Hz, -2 dB with ”slow” slope of 6 dB per octave (High Shelf)
• At 5750 Hz, +1.3 dB with Q=4.3 (Bell)
• At 6500 Hz, -2.5 dB with Q=4.0 (Bell)
• At 8400 Hz, -2.0 dB with Q=5.0
• At 10800 Hz, -4.0 dB with a slope of 12 dB per octave (High Shelf)*

These settings are based on the work of @HardstyleLoco96 and input from @martel80

*= under review

This seems to absolutely kill violins and orchestral music. Completely hollows them out. I guess it technically sounds more reference? But oh my, the trade off is not even close to worth it in terms of musicality, I think. I like your previous ones much more - this one feels like you combined Martel's and yours. I liked yours a lot more than his....this one seems like the worst of both worlds, at least for me.

Anyway, thanks for sharing!

I'm running one of your other ones, I think. And, while the treble is more forward, the gain in musicality is fantastic, I think.
22 3 1.41
55 3 12LSQslope
163 -1 1.41
1890 4 2.6
5750 1.3 4.3
8400 -2 5

Perhaps I should also say that I like the way Amir from ASR EQs his headphones and dislike how oratory does his