[TheR0v3r]

You cannot fight what’s already recorded. What we can do is neutralize as much as possible what we have in hand.

The goal is not to get a song to sound flat, the goal is to get our devices to sound as flat as possible.

Maybe the word ”flat” is misleading?

I liked “neutralized” and it leading to neutral. My aim is actually to remove the headphones own “sound” and with it it’s impact on whatever music I’m listening to.

 

[martel80]

Maybe the word ”flat” is misleading?

I liked “neutralized” and it leading to neutral. My aim is actually to remove the headphones own “sound” and with it it’s impact on whatever music I’m listening to.

Yeah, flat is definitely misleading . Neutralized or flatter would definitely make more sense if the interpretation of what I’m trying to put across is on point.

 

[TheR0v3r]

Yeah, flat is definitely misleading . Neutralized or flatter would definitely make more sense if the interpretation of what I’m trying to put across is on point.

Agree on the point(s) your making. As I see it the word “flat” is causing confusion. And not just in this thread

 

[TheR0v3r]

Agreed. The Ananda Nano is excellent, and not just for the price. The comfort...could use a little work since the headphones sit on my neck in the smallest setting for some reason. But the sound is great.

Yup, comfort is an issue. At this point that would be the key reason for an upgrade to Arya or HE1000.

I actually wear the headphone with slight “tilt”, feels more comfortable that way.

 

[HiFiWar]

Yup, comfort is an issue. At this point that would be the key reason for an upgrade to Arya or HE1000.

I actually wear the headphone with slight “tilt”, feels more comfortable that way.

I keep trying to shorten the headband, but it's as short as it goes - I don't think my HE-1000v2 had that issue - I really can't understand the design choice there as I don't have a small head. You'd think Hifiman would have figured out headbands by now, so yeah, it's an odd choice.

 

[sendler2112]

I keep trying to shorten the headband, but it's as short as it goes -

I added a 15mm piece of foam under the headband

 

[ahmonge]

I keep trying to shorten the headband, but it's as short as it goes - I don't think my HE-1000v2 had that issue - I really can't understand the design choice there as I don't have a small head. You'd think Hifiman would have figured out headbands by now, so yeah, it's an odd choice.

Last summer i had to replace the head strap of my Anandas (2020 version). The replacement, shipped from Hifiman China, is slightly longer than the original, so that before I had the cups two positions down, and now I have them adjusted fully retracted. And my head is rather large.

 

[HiFiWar]

I added a 15mm piece of foam under the headband

That's a great idea! @TeamHiFiMAN Hifiman, you may want to look into shortening the headband or adding foam like @sendler2112 did - apparently it's not just a me problem.

 

[sendler2112]

I don’t have the numbers in hand but the curve I rely on is based out of a company that conducted a far deeper research for target then Harman. I can pull out the numbers and info for you if you want.

Did you ever post any information on this other curve or I would be interested in seeing it. I find that the Harmon curve is too little in treble.

 

[martel80]

Did you ever post any information on this other curve or I would be interested in seeing it. I find that the Harmon curve is too little in treble.

Im sorry I dont think I understand your question.
Which target curve would you like to see ?
If youre talking about the one we used to create our corrective EQing, it has a lot less treble then the Harman curve. Matter of fact, of all the target curve I know, the Harman curve is the only serious research target with the most prominent treble boost and by far. I think we’re talking about a 8 db difference at 5khz vs the Bruel and Kjaer research target that we often hear in professional studios. Keep in mind that the later one was created for speaker setup and I think Harman goal was to bridge the gap between real world frequency response of consumer electronics and headphones. I think I’m mistaken here or flipping the script. But do your research and you’ll understand that both curve had different goals.

Anyhow, here’s the B&k target , the Harman target with a few fan modifications and the Sonarwork target area. That should give you an idea of what’s going on here.

And here’s an iPhone 7 speaker frequency response just for fun and giggles. Which curve do you find it to look more alike?

Edit: some extra target curves.

Here’s the cinema X-curve:

And the Dolby atmos target (see white line) ;

Pretty cool, isn’t it ?

 

[dd051]

The curve I created for you is based out of a calibration file I got for my specific nanos that I sent to Latvia back in August to get it measured. It was created by a company that use a curve to bridge the gap between multiple devices and studio monitoring solution used in over 160,000 music studio around the world. From professional to amateur . Their target is definitely close to ruler flat frequency response but still has a bit of treble and bass boost. It is not as steeply corrected in the treble as the B&K curve from the 80’s and doesn’t boost as much bass as that said curve but is subtentialy more flat then the Harman curve that used a pool of under 100 person to create their research and curve.

I don’t have the numbers in hand but the curve I rely on is based out of a company that conducted a far deeper research for target then Harman. I can pull out the numbers and info for you if you want.

So cool! I'm curious, what is it about the nanos that made you want to spend the money having them professionally EQ'd and, I guess, use them as your professional environment working headphones?


I've been swapping and swapping between your EQ settings and my 24 other ;_; nano testing presets. Oh my, I am tired from trying to adjust this stuff. Is this what you do everyday? I guess, since you know what you are doing, you are much more process driven and you...well, you know what you're doing haha.

The reference one you had listed sounds almost...like an old radio? to me. Almost kind of hollow. I feel like there's much detail that's not there.

I've tried it with so many different kinds of music - operatic solo + strings makes it the most apparent, where the details just don't come through.

As you are an audio engineering professional, I'm just wondering what you think?

Is that part of the goal of the EQ curve you posted - nothing too forward?

 

[dd051]

Thanks

Just want to clarify that I consider them my ”best headphones” because of the consistent enjoyment. In comparison, the Audeze LCD-4 was technically very good (better) but in the end just too heavy. I just wasn’t looking forward to using them ’cause of that. The Focal Utopia OG is also technically amazing but also very demanding. It’s like a person always clamoring for attention - look at ME! The combination of technical chops, tuning and precise imaging made it hard for me to relax. In contrast the Ananda Nano somehow hits a personal sweet spot of sorts between technical capabilty, tuning and presentation (plus price!) that I just really, really like

When it comes to the more technical-side of audio I find it very interesting and will continue to study that. Or maybe practice is the right word, I really enjoy experimenting and tweaking. In audio engineering I just love interacting with pros like @martel80 because the things they do make practical sense and they get results. (That’s probably what defines being a pro!). Then I try to figure out why it works

I’m much more comfortable with the digital side of audio having spent over a decade working in information and IT security. And I continue to be amazed by people stating that ”bits are bits” when I spent a lot of time working in organisations that implemented countermeasures on the analog side of digital.

It's definitely cool to have professionals like @martel80 willing to help us! I think it's good to approach it with a sense of humility - we can learn a lot.
I'm wondering about those (I don't know if they use them anymore?) sound boards, where you could tweak frequencies on them with dials, I think?
I feel like that tactile sense of adjust frequencies would have been really cool to play with. Obviously, the digital engine and system is superior in terms of technical ability, but I think it would have been cool to physically play with dials and hear the changes in the music.

I am tired from trying to EQ these headphones though, hahaha. I keep going back and forth between martel's settings and others. I keep finding different things I like in each style. So tiring haha

I've been trying to use these to tweak things
https://producelikeapro.com/blog/eq-cheat-sheet/
https://hyperbits.com/eq-cheat-sheet/

Probably seems silly to martel

 

[martel80]

So cool! I'm curious, what is it about the nanos that made you want to spend the money having them professionally EQ'd and, I guess, use them as your professional environment working headphones?

And also, with what you said, I wonder if the difference between what you are using as a reference and what I am leaning towards is because of the relative lack of treble energy?

I've been swapping and swapping between your EQ settings and one I had made previously, and I just feel like there is so much information missing. The reference one you had listed sounds almost...like an old radio? to me. Almost kind of hollow. I feel like there's so much detail that's not there.

I've tried it with so many different kinds of music - operatic solo + strings makes it the most apparent.

As you are an audio engineering professional, I'm just wondering what you think?

That's the curve I've been using. I do think yours is maybe easier to listen for a longer time though? Perhaps it's a lack of skill in critical listening on my part?

What really stood out from other “reference” cans I have is their ability to transmit transient and decay like I’ve never heard of in any other headphones in my life. I started sparely using cans in 2008 or about. First it was the Sony MDR7506 (for their availability in the studio I was working at and wanted to do some personal project while my session were over) then a few years later I got the Q701. Both had huge flaws but you grow to learn them and work with them until you reach their limit of reliability. Then I got the HD650 and it was a revelation in the high mids as it was almost just like working on my near fields and it was almost spot on when I check for translations on other devices. The issue was mid lows and bass translations. It was always on and off. Some good, some bad. I’d never know if I had enough instrument separation or if I should work more to create space in the mid lows or if my mix were anemic. So I started using a correction EQ to boost my lows but all it did is bring up the noise floor and the distortion with lows and it barely change anything in my capacity to judge the mid lows and the bass region. At that point in time, cans were only a second order tool. Cool to have but unreliable. Fast forward to last year , I got a few contracts offered to me while I was in my yearly trip in Colombia by some artist/manager/ label I’ve worked with In the past. I told them about my situation and that I only had very bad monitoring solution in hand (mpow x3 Bluetooth earphones) but they insisted so I started composing and they sent a few tracks to get mix. I then flew down to a neighbouring country and brought some stuff I composed and mixed so we could talk and readjust and when they heard my new stuff, they were all blown away….. and so was I. I was not expecting that sort of quality in my mixes but it all worked out very well. Fast forward to this past April, I got back to Montreal and decided it was time to give earphones a fair shot so I bought the 64 audio U12t. Boy was I disappointed. The ear insertion was unmanageable which in return gave me good to bad frequency translations. Decided to sell them and went on a serious hunt. So I got the Slate VSX, a headphone and room software package that suposedly replicate high quality studio environment and their respective monitors. The room sounded reverberated and even a set of PMC IBS sounded bloated. Put them aside. Started reading on gearslutz about how the NDH30 was a game changer . Bought them. Was very disappointed by their detail retrieval. Put them aside. My goal was to get something that would be transient friendly with an half decent frequency response and some details in the mid lows and bass. I was chatting with another user in a different forum and he told me about that Turkish electronic music mastering engineer that sweared about the new Ananda Nanos. Started listening to his last records and thought they sounded great but a bit too bright. So I took a plunge and got them. When I received them, everything I was looking for was there. At first, I was like you . I wanted more of that treble but then figured something was off with the mids and the vocals always sounded a bit in the back. I thought to myself , well, let’s have them measured and be off with it. So 400$ later and about 10 days of patiently waiting, I received them. When I first got them, I had the impression that some treble details were missing but I then started to pay attention and really, everything was there. Not only was it there but it was also very prominent and what should have sounded harsch in my mastering monitors still sounded harsch on my nanos.

That’s when the whole quest and inside pressure of finding a decent set of cans to work this winter went off .

Your impression of the curve I created for you is not really a surprise. See, there’s a difference between listening for enjoyment and listening critically. As such, a Marvel movie will definitely not be translating the same way as ( to bring our friend in this conversation) a bjork movie would sound.

There’s thousands of example that I could bring to your attention so you understand the worth of a balanced frequency response. In reality, all that will ultimately matter is your ability to make the difference between an old radio and a flatter frequency response.

A smiley curve is absolutely nothing bad if that is what you love but as I understood your post, you seem to be a classical music lover which lead me to believe that you are missing so much of the natural experience of the instrumentation by favouriting trebles and bass over the strings , brass and pianos fundamental area .

I know I said it before but I would try to make a reset in my approach of listening to music if I was you. It will not only benefit your ears health but also get you to discover a lot more subtleties. Especially in classical music as it really all lives in the mids. If you cannot ear it, train yourself and find resources to help you understand what to listen for.

Air, space, sparkle and big bang boom are cool but music harmonies and charming swinging waves of frequencies live in the mids. I’d say, try to rediscover music in a different way.

You have a wonderful detailed and resolute set of cans in the nanos in hand. You can afford to cut back on the cocaine frequencies and go get the good stuff in the mids.

Hope that help.

 

[martel80]

It's definitely cool to have professionals like @martel80 willing to help us! I think it's good to approach it with a sense of humility - we can learn a lot.
I'm wondering about those (I don't know if they use them anymore?) sound boards, where you could tweak frequencies on them with dials, I think?
I feel like that tactile sense of adjust frequencies would have been really cool to play with. Obviously, the digital engine and system is superior in terms of technical ability, but I think it would have been cool to physically play with dials and hear the changes in the music.

I am tired from trying to EQ these headphones though, hahaha. I keep going back and forth between martel's settings and others. I keep finding different things I like in each style. So tiring haha

I've been trying to use these to tweak things
https://producelikeapro.com/blog/eq-cheat-sheet/
https://hyperbits.com/eq-cheat-sheet/

Probably seems silly to martel

I’m learning just as much as you guys do as it challenges me to bring back the basics and vulgarize it. So
I’m also very humbled by this experience as it challenges the fundamental of all of this which in my opinion is the experience. So the way I approach my experience is always with the idea that you have to be responsible of taking my ways of using them with a pinch of salt as we don’t use them for the same reason first but also because we most probably have different taste.

The only thing I can provide here is my honest educated opinion and knowledge . The rest is only your journey through all of this very engaging passion that is music and all of its theory.

We have another saying in the audio engineering world and it goes like this; there’s only one rule in music and it’s that’s there is no rules.

Music is just mathematic on an emotional level.

And no, it doesn’t sound silly. What is silly to me is believing that money can buy understanding. Other then that, everything is up for discussion.

 

[dd051]

What really stood out from other “reference” cans I have is their ability to transmit transient and decay like I’ve never heard of in any other headphones in my life. I started sparely using cans in 2008 or about. First it was the Sony MDR7506 (for their availability in the studio I was working at and wanted to do some personal project while my session were over) then a few years later I got the Q701. Both had huge flaws but you grow to learn them and work with them until you reach their limit of reliability. Then I got the HD650 and it was a revelation in the high mids as it was almost just like working on my near fields and it was almost spot on when I check for translations on other devices. The issue was mid lows and bass translations. It was always on and off. Some good, some bad. I’d never know if I had enough instrument separation or if I should work more to create space in the mid lows or if my mix were anemic. So I started using a correction EQ to boost my lows but all it did is bring up the noise floor and the distortion with lows and it barely change anything in my capacity to judge the mid lows and the bass region. At that point in time, cans were only a second order tool. Cool to have but unreliable. Fast forward to last year , I got a few contracts offered to me while I was in my yearly trip in Colombia by some artist/manager/ label I’ve worked with In the past. I told them about my situation and that I only had very bad monitoring solution in hand (mpow x3 Bluetooth earphones) but they insisted so I started composing and they sent a few tracks to get mix. I then flew down to a neighbouring country and brought some stuff I composed and mixed so we could talk and readjust and when they heard my new stuff, they were all blown away….. and so was I. I was not expecting that sort of quality in my mixes but it all worked out very well. Fast forward to this past April, I got back to Montreal and decided it was time to give earphones a fair shot so I bought the 64 audio U12t. Boy was I disappointed. The ear insertion was unmanageable which in return gave me good to bad frequency translations. Decided to sell them and went on a serious hunt. So I got the Slate VSX, a headphone and room software package that suposedly replicate high quality studio environment and their respective monitors. The room sounded reverberated and even a set of PMC IBS sounded bloated. Put them aside. Started reading on gearslutz about how the NDH30 was a game changer . Bought them. Was very disappointed by their detail retrieval. Put them aside. My goal was to get something that would be transient friendly with an half decent frequency response and some details in the mid lows and bass. I was chatting with another user in a different forum and he told me about that Turkish electronic music mastering engineer that sweared about the new Ananda Nanos. Started listening to his last records and thought they sounded great but a bit too bright. So I took a plunge and got them. When I received them, everything I was looking for was there. At first, I was like you . I wanted more of that treble but then figured something was off with the mids and the vocals always sounded a bit in the back. I thought to myself , well, let’s have them measured and be off with it. So 400$ later and about 10 days of patiently waiting, I received them. When I first got them, I had the impression that some treble details were missing but I then started to pay attention and really, everything was there. Not only was it there but it was also very prominent and what should have sounded harsch in my mastering monitors still sounded harsch on my nanos.

That’s when the whole quest and inside pressure of finding a decent set of cans to work this winter went off .

Your impression of the curve I created for you is not really a surprise. See, there’s a difference between listening for enjoyment and listening critically. As such, a Marvel movie will definitely not be translating the same way as ( to bring our friend in this conversation) a bjork movie would sound.

There’s thousands of example that I could bring to your attention so you understand the worth of a balanced frequency response. In reality, all that will ultimately matter is your ability to make the difference between an old radio and a flatter frequency response.

A smiley curve is absolutely nothing bad if that is what you love but as I understood your post, you seem to be a classical music lover which lead me to believe that you are missing so much of the natural experience of the instrumentation by favouriting trebles and bass over the strings , brass and pianos fundamental area .

I know I said it before but I would try to make a reset in my approach of listening to music if I was you. It will not only benefit your ears health but also get you to discover a lot more subtleties. Especially in classical music as it really all lives in the mids. If you cannot ear it, train yourself and find resources to help you understand what to listen for.

Air, space, sparkle and big bang boom are cool but music harmonies and charming swinging waves of frequencies live in the mids. I’d say, try to rediscover music in a different way.

You have a wonderful detailed and resolute set of cans in the nanos in hand. You can afford to cut back on the cocaine frequencies and go get the good stuff in the mids.

Hope that help.

Cut back on the cocaine frequencies hahahhaha Love it.

I will definitely try what you said. I'll try to listen more carefully and cut back on my cocaine intake.